chenj@cmcl2.NYU.EDU (James Chen) (06/08/89)
From: chenj@cmcl2.NYU.EDU (James Chen) I saw on Nightline and the network that the 27th Army is using exploding bullets on the people in Beijing. I was curious. How are they constructed and how do they work? Why were they invented? Are they like little grenades? If there's no direct hit, can the fragments do much damage? (I assume the intent is to kill soldiers rather than says damage things or scare people.) The wound must to sizable. Can people survive? The papers report many doctors removing bullets from patients. Can they be removing fragments of exploding bullets? Or, are they ordinary bullets the papers are referring to? -Jimmy Chen (chenj@cmcl2.nyu.edu)
eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya) (06/09/89)
From: eos!eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya)
I would tend to doubt that the bullets specifically explode.
There are lots of problems with these types of small munitions
(See Day of the Jackel for one example). Likely some of the rounds
shattered.
However, you did bring up chills. There were a fair number of
wounded casualities during the Vietnam war who had live grenades
and mortar rounds in them: M-79 rounds, 60mm, B-40, and RPG-7
which various medical teams had to remove. You had to have
a UXB expert as well as a surgeon in the room. Not to mention
burning phosphorus wounds.
Another gross generalization from
--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
"You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?"
"If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
{ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene
Live free or die.pokey@lll-crg.llnl.gov (Jef Poskanzer) (06/10/89)
From: well!pokey@lll-crg.llnl.gov (Jef Poskanzer) In the referenced message, eos!eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya) wrote: }I would tend to doubt that the bullets specifically explode. }There are lots of problems with these types of small munitions }(See Day of the Jackel for one example). Note that in the *book* _Day_of_the_Jackal_, the bullets were not explosive. They were merely partially filled with mercury. An early version of the Glaser Safety Slug. By the way, in case anyone thinks that a real exploding bullet wouldn't add enough energy to be useful: even a single gram of TNT-class explosive in a typical 12-gram rifle bullet would double the energy delivered. --- Jef Jef Poskanzer pokey@well.sf.ca.us {ucbvax, apple, hplabs}!well!pokey "To indulge in personal attacks, pick quarrels, vent personal spite or seek revenge instead of entering into an argument and struggling against incorrect views for the sake of unity or progress or getting the work done properly... this is the fifth type of liberalism." -- Mao
mjt@super.org (Michael J. Tighe) (06/12/89)
From: Michael J. Tighe <mjt@super.org> [ Discussion on exploding bullets] I am not familiar with the bullets used by the Chinese Army, but I am familiar with exploding bullets in the US. The brand I know best is called Devastator, and they come in a variety of calibers. The bullet itself is similar to a hollow point bullet except that it is filled in with a gelatin like substance and then the top is tapered off to prevent it from falling out. Although they are designed to detonate on impact, supposedly they are very safe. If you drop one it should not go off. In fact, they don't go off a lot, even when they should. They are not like hand grenades. If you are not hit you will not be hurt, unless of course a small fragment gets in your eye or something like that. I do not know why they were invented. As far as I know they are not very useful. I do not know of anybody who uses them (police, SF, etc). They are just a novelty. If my memory serves me correctly, John Hinckley (sp?) used .22 caliber exploding bullets in the assassination attempt. And I do not think the bullet(s) that hit Reagan detonated. One more thing. Don't the accords from the Geneva Convention ban the use of any bullet that is not a full metal jacket? This doesn't mean you can't use them against your own people, but it makes one wonder why the Chinese Army has them...
gudeman@arizona.edu (David Gudeman) (06/14/89)
From: gudeman@arizona.edu (David Gudeman)
In article <7364@cbnews.ATT.COM> mjt@super.org (Michael J. Tighe) writes:
]From: Michael J. Tighe <mjt@super.org>
][ Discussion on exploding bullets]
]
]I am not familiar with the bullets used by the Chinese Army, but I am
]
]They are not like hand grenades. If you are not hit you will not be
]hurt, unless of course a small fragment gets in your eye or something
]like that.
]
]I do not know why they were invented. As far as I know they are not
]very useful. I do not know of anybody who uses them (police, SF, etc).
]They are just a novelty.
The intent of "exploding" bullets is not to destroy things by the
force of the explosion, which isn't that powerful. The explosion is
only meant to cause cause bullet expansion and perhaps fragmentation.
The expanded or fragmented bullet is less likely to over-penetrate, so
all the bullet's kinetic energy is used to destroy tissue. Although
the theory is reasonable, as far as I know there aren't any exploding
bullets that really work well. Hollow points expand more reliably and
Glassar safety slugs fragment more reliably.
--
David Gudeman
Department of Computer Science
The University of Arizona gudeman@arizona.edu
Tucson, AZ 85721 {allegra,cmcl2,ihnp4,noao}!arizona!gudemanhenry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (06/14/89)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >How are they constructed and how do they work? Why were they >invented? Are they like little grenades? ... Exploding bullets are not explosive bullets, despite the confusing terminology. The latter would have explosive charges in them; nobody has bothered with such, as the charge wouldn't be big enough to have any useful effect. The former are a more drastic form of expanding bullets. There are several varieties, but one version has a small cavity containing a drop of mercury inside a soft-nosed bullet. When the bullet hits something, the mercury slams forward in the cavity and the nose of the bullet bursts outward under the impact. Lots of of fragments and a big messy wound. They are illegal for civilian hunting use in most places, and I think one of the Geneva conventions theoretically outlaws them for use in warfare. Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
cyrius@cs.utexas.edu (Juan Chen) (06/15/89)
From: ut-emx!walt.cc.utexas.edu!cyrius@cs.utexas.edu (Juan Chen) In article <7452@cbnews.ATT.COM> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > > >From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >>How are they constructed and how do they work? Why were they >>invented? Are they like little grenades? ... > >Exploding bullets are not explosive bullets, despite the confusing >terminology. The latter would have explosive charges in them; nobody >has bothered with such, as the charge wouldn't be big enough to have >any useful effect. The former are a more drastic form of expanding >bullets. There are several varieties, but one version has a small >cavity containing a drop of mercury inside a soft-nosed bullet. When >the bullet hits something, the mercury slams forward in the cavity >and the nose of the bullet bursts outward under the impact. Lots of >of fragments and a big messy wound. They are illegal for civilian >hunting use in most places, and I think one of the Geneva conventions >theoretically outlaws them for use in warfare. > > Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology > uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu I just found part of the Hague Treaties and also some war "lwas" from the Internationsl Red Cross. They ban the use of weapons that will cause unnecessary suffering (I'd like to see that defined), also found that all ammunition under 400grams (Haven't figured out how many grains that would be) cannot be hollow point and have to be fully coverd by a metal jacket. There's also mention about how bullets should not be able to expand to a flat disk while penetrating. Overall the "rules of war" seem a lot more complicated than I ever imagined. As someone posted you'll use whatever is effective, but then again you'd be a war criminal (then again a lot of people have been just slapped in the hand). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Juan G. Chen cyrius@dopey.cc.utexas.edu University of Texas@Austin (or grumpy, or doc, or happy...) P.O. Box 8362 Austin, TX 78713 =======================================================================
vestal@klemmer.src.honeywell.com (Steve Vestal) (06/16/89)
From: vestal@klemmer.src.honeywell.com (Steve Vestal) In article <7473@cbnews.ATT.COM> ut-emx!walt.cc.utexas.edu!cyrius@cs.utexas.edu (Juan Chen) writes: > ...all ammunition under 400grams (Haven't figured out > how many grains that would be) cannot be hollow point and have to be > fully coverd by a metal jacket. > As someone posted you'll use whatever is effective, > but then again you'd be a war criminal ... I was once told this is one of the few rules of war likely to be obeyed, precisely because it is effective. The figure I was given was that 1 wounded required 10 additional personnel to evacuate, treat, etc. Given an enemy with certain social views, the goal in combat is to wound, not to kill, and a full jacket helps improve this ratio.
hwt@watmath.waterloo.edu (Henry Troup) (06/17/89)
From: bnr-fos!bnr-public!hwt@watmath.waterloo.edu (Henry Troup) Devastator(tm) bullets were developed for U.S. Sky Marshalls to use in fighting hijackers on airplanes. The theory was that .22 caliber exploders would give more punch with fewer/smaller holes in the aircraft. Doesn't sound too reasonable to me, either. This gross generalization by utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!hwt%bnr-public | BNR is not | All that evil requires hwt@bnr (BITNET/NETNORTH) | responsible for | is that good men do (613) 765-2337 (Voice) | my opinions | nothing.
jcallen@cs.utah.edu (John Callen, x3933) (06/17/89)
From: esunix!sim.dnet!jcallen@cs.utah.edu (John Callen, x3933) re. Article 1162 of sci.military: >From: Michael J. Tighe <mjt@super.org> [ Discussion on exploding bullets] my reply re-orders Tighe's original posting ... > One more thing. Don't the accords from the Geneva Convention ban the > use of any bullet that is not a full metal jacket? This doesn't mean > you can't use them against your own people, but it makes one wonder > why the Chinese Army has them... It was my understanding that exploding bullets were listed in the Geneva Convention as outlawed war implements. Of course, this is along with chemical weapons, too. Even though it is illegal, most (and I'm not claiming all, here) countries seem to be doing their own R&D in both chemical and biological weapons. I believe the justification here is along the lines of "preventative study, just in case the troops come up against it" rather than "building up the national arsennal". Still in all, exploding bullets are kind of hard to justify under that clause. If my memory serves me right the first "exploding" bullets were called Dumdums, named after the Dumdum armory, run by the British in India. Dumdums were particularly vicious leaving gapping holes in people when they exploded. The resulting wounds were extremely difficult, if not impossible to repair, and so deemed particularly unhumanitarian by the Geneva Convention. Early experiments in constructing exploding bullets inserted a standard shell primer in a hollowed out tip of a bullet (or just used a hollow point bullet). It was intended that when the bullet struck something hard (like bone) it would go off. This often wasn't the case. There was some research where an impact sensitive compound (like mercury fulminate) was formed directly into the tip of the bullet. It was hard to regulate just exactly would set it off, though. > I am not familiar with the bullets used by the Chinese Army, but I am > familiar with exploding bullets in the US. The brand I know best is > called Devastator, and they come in a variety of calibers. > [description ...] I was totally unaware that there was such a thing called the Devastator. Thanks for the update. Are Devastators available to the general public or are they "services only" ammunition? And here all I thought I had to worry about was the Teflon-coated bullets! One explanation why exploding bullets were even designed might be that when they work, exploding bullets do a heck of alot of damage to the target. You could argue that a good mushrooming slug is all you need, but it is depending on the energy remaining in the bullet at point of impact. An exploding bullet only needs enough energy to set itself off and the charge provides the energy for mushrooming. Also, an exploding bullet shouldn't go beyond the first contact, so secondary targets aren't likely. This would be crucial in crowds, where a bullet might pass through the first target and strike one or more additional (and unintended?) targets. Still in all, these are pretty nasty rounds ... --John
mjt@super.org (Michael J. Tighe) (06/20/89)
From: Michael J. Tighe <mjt@super.org> From: esunix!sim.dnet!jcallen@cs.utah.edu (John Callen, x3933) > Even though it is illegal, most (and I'm not claiming all, here) countries > seem to be doing their own R&D in both chemical and biological weapons. Yes I understand the need for R&D. I guess what I wasn't clear in saying is why does the Chinese soldier have them apparently as standard issue? I know US soldiers certainly don't. > I was totally unaware that there was such a thing called the Devastator. > Thanks for the update. Are Devastators available to the general public or > are they "services only" ammunition? And here all I thought I had to worry > about was the Teflon-coated bullets! Like most gun laws, whether they are for sale or not varies from state to state. I know the Devastator was for sale in Florida (along with tracer ammo) a few years back. I haven't been in Florida for a while so I am not sure if it is still available. Since there is very little demand for them from the public, not many gun shops stock them, even if they are legal in that state. I know that the Teflon coated bullet, which was made by KTW, was never available for sale to the public. If some ever did make it to the shelves, it was against the wishes of KTW. I also know it was developed specifically for Special Services for use against terrorists wearing body armor. It is no longer made. > One explanation why exploding bullets were even designed might be... A recent posting by Henry Troup states that they originated with the US Sky Marshall program.
military@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker) (06/20/89)
From: Michael J. Tighe <super.org!mjt> In article <7548@cbnews.ATT.COM> you write: > >Devastator(tm) bullets were developed for U.S. Sky Marshalls to use in >fighting hijackers on airplanes. Thanks for the origin of Devastator bullets. Although I had used them, I didn't know why they were invented, but now I do. -- ------------- Michael Tighe internet: mjt@super.org uunet: ...!uunet!super!mjt
khai%amara.uucp@mailgw.cc.umich.edu (S. Khai Mong) (06/20/89)
From: khai%amara.uucp@mailgw.cc.umich.edu (S. Khai Mong)
Here is a quote from an AP article carried by our local paper:
In Houston, officers are armed with a variety of pistols.
"They buy their own weapon and can carry practically anything they
want," said fireamrs instructor J.W. Walston. "As a result our
officers carry a multitude of calibers, everything from 9mm to .44
Magnums to .45s. However we do encourage them to not carry .38s and
we suggest that they use hollow point rounds."
Many urban police departments have begun using hollow point
bullets, a soft-nosed round that has greater stopping power. It tends
to spread out and produce more wallop from increased tissue damage.
--
Sao Khai Mong: Applied Dynamics, 3800 Stone School Road, Ann Arbor, Mi48108
(313)973-1300 (uunet|sharkey)!amara!khai khai%amara.uucp@mailgw.cc.umich.eduzcnj01@uunet.UU.NET (Cecil N. Jones) (06/21/89)
From: apctrc!gpb6!zcnj01@uunet.UU.NET (Cecil N. Jones) >> (Juan Chen) writes: >> ... all ammunition under 400grams has to be full metal jacket ... >> ... you'll use whatever is effective, ... > > (Steve Vestal) writes: >I was once told this is one of the few rules of war likely to be obeyed, >precisely because it is effective. The figure I was given was that >1 wounded required 10 additional personnel to evacuate, treat, etc. >Given an enemy with certain social views, the goal in combat is to >wound, not to kill, and a full jacket helps improve this ratio. This is precisely the intended effect of the .223 used in the M16. The fact that it began to tumble as soon as it began to penetrate resulted in a large, usually debilitating, wound. Of course, no one really thought we would end up using it in a guerilla war with the viet cong. Cecil N. Jones Amoco Production Co. Tulsa, OK @apctrc.uucp The opinions expressed are solely my own.
daveme%tekirl.labs.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET (Dave Mead) (06/24/89)
From: Dave Mead <daveme%tekirl.labs.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET> People tend to think FMJs just poke holes in things and go on there merry way. I just finished testing a 1942 M1 with M2 ball. The bullets make a clean straight hole for a while but then veer off course.....many escaped the capture box......and tore holy hell out of the wet lap medium. The depth where this took place was beyond the thickness of a human but an elk would have been hamburger. The damage was almost that of expanding bullets. The recovered slugs were hammered flat. I have yet to test the .223..........I'm told it too tumbles in flesh.....not real humane eh!
ars@PacBell.COM (Andy Soravilla) (06/26/89)
From: ars@PacBell.COM (Andy Soravilla) In article <7549@cbnews.ATT.COM> esunix!sim.dnet!jcallen@cs.utah.edu (John Callen, x3933) writes: >[ Discussion on exploding bullets] >If my memory serves me right the first "exploding" bullets were called Dumdums, >named after the Dumdum armory, run by the British in India. Dumdums were >particularly vicious leaving gapping holes in people when they exploded. The >resulting wounds were extremely difficult, if not impossible to repair, and so >deemed particularly unhumanitarian by the Geneva Convention. > >Early experiments in constructing exploding bullets inserted a standard shell >primer in a hollowed out tip of a bullet (or just used a hollow point bullet). >It was intended that when the bullet struck something hard (like bone) it would >go off. This often wasn't the case. There was some research where an impact >sensitive compound (like mercury fulminate) was formed directly into the tip of >the bullet. It was hard to regulate just exactly would set it off, though. I read somewhere about constructing "exploding" ammo. The procedure was to drill a hole in the slug itself and insert a small amount of mercury. When the round hits and slows the mercury causes the front of the slug to explode doing extensive damage to whatever it has contacted. I seem to remember that this was used by snipers to assure a very serious and/or fatal wound with one shot as that was usually all that time allowed. However, I cannot substantiate it. andy (pacbell!pbhyf!ars)