How Videos Are Faked On You Tube, (Excellent Job !)

[PegLeg45]

Some time back, Mythbusters was doing a "Shooting fish in a barrel" episode.  Regardless of what they were trying to prove, they had set a wooden staved barrel filled with water and Jamie was shooting straight down into the barrel with a 9mm handgun.

When he shot into the barrel, the slo-mo camera showed the water erupting up out of the barrel, the barrel jumping off of the floor and I think you could see the circumferential expansion of the barrel against the stave and rings of the barrel.

on a side note.....not once did the 9mm round penetrate the bottom of the barrel nor would I expect it too.

All a product of mass, speed, and displacement.....like a ship or sub in the water.
Slower = less turbulence while faster = more turbulence or wake. The confinement of the barrel creates the violence. Shoot the same 9mm into a pond and nothing spectacular really happens.

Mythbusters also did a show where they tested bullet penetration in water. They were testing the Hollywood myth of bullets doing great damage if they hit you under water. A .50 BMG round didn't do much below the surface either.

[tombogan03884]

Some time back, Mythbusters was doing a "Shooting fish in a barrel" episode.  Regardless of what they were trying to prove, they had set a wooden staved barrel filled with water and Jamie was shooting straight down into the barrel with a 9mm handgun.

When he shot into the barrel, the slo-mo camera showed the water erupting up out of the barrel, the barrel jumping off of the floor and I think you could see the circumferential expansion of the barrel against the stave and rings of the barrel.

on a side note.....not once did the 9mm round penetrate the bottom of the barrel nor would I expect it too.

All a product of mass, speed, and displacement.....like a ship or sub in the water.
Slower = less turbulence while faster = more turbulence or wake. The confinement of the barrel creates the violence. Shoot the same 9mm into a pond and nothing spectacular really happens.

Mythbusters also did a show where they tested bullet penetration in water. They were testing the Hollywood myth of bullets doing great damage if they hit you under water. A .50 BMG round didn't do much below the surface either.

Worked pretty good when the used the mini gun though 

[PegLeg45]

Worked pretty good when the used the mini gun though  

Everything goes better with a mini-gun......    

Also thought this was pretty cool:

Why bullets do damage

When things move, they have momentum. The faster they move and the heavier they are, the more momentum they have. A truck trundling along slowly has a lot of momentum because it weighs so much. Even though bullets are tiny, they have lots of momentum because they go so fast. They also have huge amounts of kinetic energy, which they get from the chemical energy of the burning propellant. Bullets do damage when they transfer their energy to the things they hit. The faster something loses its momentum, the more force it produces. (One way to define force is as the rate at which an object's momentum changes.) A rifle bullet coming to a stop in a tenth of a second produces as much force as a heavy, slow moving truck coming to rest in 10 seconds. Imagine being hit by a truck—and you'll have some idea why bullets do so much damage.

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/bullets.html

[Solus]

Everything goes better with a mini-gun......    

Also thought this was pretty cool:

I've always figured that because of Equal and Opposite, that you absorb more energy when you fire a gun than the object  hit by the bullet. 

I know that the force is distributed over a greater area of your body and the design of the gun and the longer time it takes to deliver the force at your end  all means it does less damage to you than the bullet, which is designed to maximize damage, does at the other end.

However, I have trouble with the truck analogy....no matter how good the recoil pad on the bumper of the truck, you are gonna be hurting.

[PegLeg45]

I've always figured that because of Equal and Opposite, that you absorb more energy when you fire a gun than the object  hit by the bullet. 

I know that the force is distributed over a greater area of your body and the design of the gun and the longer time it takes to deliver the force at your end  all means it does less damage to you than the bullet, which is designed to maximize damage, does at the other end.

However, I have trouble with the truck analogy....no matter how good the recoil pad on the bumper of the truck, you are gonna be hurting.

I do too, kinda.....I would have used a baseball or brick for a comparison when talking mass, velocity and impact.




And referring to being hit by a vehicle, Yes (speaking from experience) you will.

 

[Sponsor]