The dude claims to be DVM, which means enough education to not be asking such mundane questions.
I think that is a bit unfair. There's any number of highly educated people who have no grounding in mechanics, and no real need to know it. FWIW my sister is a vet, and teaches it at university. Her husband is a professor in veterinary medicine, specialising in equine virology. I doubt they'd ever have any need to consider the difference between elastic and inelastic collisions, and I doubt they've even thought about anything to do with them since high school.
Unfortunately for those of us with an engineering background or interest in physics, there are many people who really have very little knowledge of this stuff, nor any practical reason to know it.
Originally Posted by Angus1895
Why does the above definition use the words " some Kinetic energy is lost" not all?
Where does it go?
Is there a way to predict how much is converted, and how much is conserved?
If it gets converted to what?
There's a range of ways the kinetic energy is "lost". Energy is used to do work, pushing bits of animal out of the way of the bullet, tearing through skin, muscle and organs and breaking bones (or, at a finer scale, breaking molecular bonds). Some gets turned into sound and some into heat. It doesn't really matter much in a practical sense though, because ultimately what kills the animal is damage to structures vital to sustaining life, and that depends on a number of factors. Crudely, a bullet whose path transects something important, and which has the construction and momentum to drive through and cause enough damage along the way.
Originally Posted by Jordan Smith
The fact remains that using the kinetic energy of a bullet as a primary means to quantify its killing effectiveness, is extremely ineffective.
He dam sure should known the difference between shooting a tank made of steel and amor plating and an animal made with skin flesh, blood and bones.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
In armor training. They explained for a sabot round to work correctly it had to leave the Or exit the turret. Thus sucking the crewmembers out with it. The web sight terminal ballistics research also discusses trauma based on velocity. I think smokepoles point is also valid in that the lungfield will be in a varying degree of susceptibility depending on its state of inflation upon impact. The other thing to consider in ruminants is the rumen which predominantly occupies the left abdomen and is basically inert sack of ingesta, this makes almost impervious to shock in that area.
"Sabot
Sabot rounds work like a basic arrow. They don't have any explosive power; they penetrate armor with shear momentum. The heart of the sabot round is the penetrator -- a narrow metal rod (typically depleted uranium) with a pointed nose on one end and stabilizing fins on the other. Before the round is fired, the rear part of the penetrator is attached to a propellant case, and the front part is attached to the sabot structure. The sabot's purpose is to keep the narrow penetrator centered in the wide gun barrel.
On firing, the propellant casing remains in the chamber, and the expanding gas pushes the sabot and attached penetrator down the barrel. The sabot is attached to the penetrator with relatively flimsy plastic, so it falls away as soon as the round leaves the cannon. The heavy penetrator flies through the air at high speed toward its target tank. Because of its narrow shape, the penetrator focuses its full force into a very small area, plowing straight through heavy armor. As the penetrator enters the tank, heated fragments of metal fly off in all directions, hitting anybody and anything inside.
HEAT
HEAT rounds use explosive firepower, rather than momentum, to penetrate armor. At its nose, the round has an extended impact sensor. When the impact sensor collides with a target, it ignites an explosive, which melts surrounding copper. A shape charge liner concentrates the molten metal and hot gases into a narrow blast that cuts through the armor.
The M1 also has three machine guns. It has a Browning .50-caliber M2 and a 7.62-mm M240 mounted to cupolas on the top of the turret, and another M240 mounted next to the main gun."
How any of the above relates to "stopping" or "killing" an animal with a rifle or handgun conventional bullet, I'm waiting with baited breath to find out.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
I do not like canned peas ............ should I become a troll if some one says they like them or eats them?
Just like I have a license to practice medicine.....they call it practice for a reason......it ain't rocket science.
............................
It all boils down to
" What is your intent?"
Originally Posted by Angus1895
Kinda like do I give the cow 30 cc of oxytetracyline 300 mg per ml. Or 60 cc? ( an antibiotic for bacterial infection) this antibiotics effectiveness is bacteria stactic and dosage dependent. Now of course I should consider the mass of the animal to determine how much I should administer. I want to have it work and stop the bacterial infection. But I don't want to compromise the event by overdosage.
Now wether or not I go I.V. Or P.O. Or I.M. ( intravenous, per oral, or Intramuscular) or the carrier base etc, etc.will also be very crucial to treatment success, but certainley the amount of the antibiotic administered will also make or break the deal.
Just my observation.
Originally Posted by smokepole
His patients all think he's brilliant.
I take that back. The horses are still on board, but the cows are starting to think you're a little "off."
I do not like canned peas ............ should I become a troll if some one says they like them or eats them?
Just like I have a license to practice medicine.....they call it practice for a reason......it ain't rocket science.
............................
It all boils down to
" What is your intent?"
Originally Posted by Angus1895
Kinda like do I give the cow 30 cc of oxytetracyline 300 mg per ml. Or 60 cc? ( an antibiotic for bacterial infection) this antibiotics effectiveness is bacteria stactic and dosage dependent. Now of course I should consider the mass of the animal to determine how much I should administer. I want to have it work and stop the bacterial infection. But I don't want to compromise the event by overdosage.
Now wether or not I go I.V. Or P.O. Or I.M. ( intravenous, per oral, or Intramuscular) or the carrier base etc, etc.will also be very crucial to treatment success, but certainley the amount of the antibiotic administered will also make or break the deal.
Just my observation.
Originally Posted by smokepole
His patients all think he's brilliant.
I take that back. The horses are still on board, but the cows are starting to think you're a little "off."
Horses definitely not on board, horse require an equine vet.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
The troll like tendencies demonstrated here way overshadow your powers of observation, reading comprehension,and attention to detail.
A. M60 A3 main battle Tank B. Fin stabilized Sabot ( not a standard sabot) C. Penetration a cavity to cause harvest or Stop something.........huh? D. There is no animal species limitation in veterinary practice licensure E. Your skills in editing posts, to take things out of context will give you a bright future at CNN.
# Trolls suck
Last edited by Angus1895; 08/17/17.
"Shoot low sheriff, I think he's riding a shetland!" B. Wills
The troll like tendencies demonstrated here way overshadow your powers of observation, reading comprehension,and attention to detail.
D. There is no animal species limitation in veterinary practice licensure
# Trolls suck
I am well aware to D there are plenty of vets that will take your money to treat your horse when they don't know didlley about a horse. Many vets do not even go through the equine portion of vet school. Ones money is much better spent with an equine vet if one has horses.
The only troll is you.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
The troll like tendencies demonstrated here way overshadow your powers of observation, reading comprehension,and attention to detail.
A. M60 A3 main battle Tank
# Trolls suck
Just retired from 20 years as a tank mechanic in the Army, only time I saw a M60 outside of a museum or static display on post, was to tow them during recovery school, or tow them on to a range so the M1 Abrams crews could shoot them. The tanks I worked on my first 7 years were some of the oldest M1A1's in the Army, and they were the 3rd model of M1's used by the Army. Might be a little outdated on the info there.....
Since what you see here represented about the entire armored defense of West Berlin, we referred to them as "Speed bumps for the Russians".
One thing I never realized is that tanks can skid on icy pavement just like cars. I remember being stopped at the bottom of a slight hill and having an M60 sliding sideways at our vehicle, that was entertaining....
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
Since what you see here represented about the entire armored defense of West Berlin, we referred to them as "Speed bumps for the Russians".
One thing I never realized is that tanks can skid on icy pavement just like cars. I remember being stopped at the bottom of a slight hill and having an M60 sliding sideways at our vehicle, that was entertaining....
During a block leave period for Christmas I didn't take leave. We were on a half day schedule, and my task for the week as a young Sergeant, was to try and tow a M1 into one of our bays for repairs. Took me all week because of the ice. Our motorpool was solid ice and it took very careful planning of the route, lots of reverse and a metric crap ton of cuss words to finally work it into the bay. Any time that M! would catch the slightest slope while towing it, it would slide. Quite the rodeo. Of course, half of each day was spent getting the M88 with its air cooled twin turbo charged 1790ci V12 diesel warmed up enough to move the damn thing.
.....my task for the week as a young Sergeant, was to try and tow a M1 into one of our bays for repairs. Took me all week because of the ice. Our motorpool was solid ice and it took very careful planning of the route, lots of reverse and a metric crap ton of cuss words to finally work it into the bay. Any time that M! would catch the slightest slope while towing it, it would slide. Quite the rodeo. Of course, half of each day was spent getting the M88 with its air cooled twin turbo charged 1790ci V12 diesel warmed up enough to move the damn thing.
Which is oddly very similar to shooting an ungulate through the ribs.
Growing up in Minnesota I I could never not let up on the gas when they started to slide, just like slamming on the brakes with wheeled vehicle. In North America they got to turn every third or fourth track guide upside down for traction. Us Russian speed bumps stationed in Germany had to deal with it.
Those recovery 88 s were the Taj mahal. So much room in them. The 88 I got to ride in had the tape deck patched into the radio I will never forget a road march listening to ol Hank Jr.
Last edited by Angus1895; 08/17/17.
"Shoot low sheriff, I think he's riding a shetland!" B. Wills
About all I know is that Shot placement trumps Bore size and bullet performance trumps power . But when things start getting interesting it's nice to have all four.
When all discussion is winnowed out,Phil said it best.Note he left out the word if.
Sabot rounds work like a basic arrow. They don't have any explosive power; they penetrate armor with shear momentum. The heart of the sabot round is the penetrator -- a narrow metal rod (typically depleted uranium) with a pointed nose on one end and stabilizing fins on the other. Before the round is fired, the rear part of the penetrator is attached to a propellant case, and the front part is attached to the sabot structure. The sabot's purpose is to keep the narrow penetrator centered in the wide gun barrel.
On firing, the propellant casing remains in the chamber, and the expanding gas pushes the sabot and attached penetrator down the barrel. The sabot is attached to the penetrator with relatively flimsy plastic, so it falls away as soon as the round leaves the cannon. The heavy penetrator flies through the air at high speed toward its target tank. Because of its narrow shape, the penetrator focuses its full force into a very small area, plowing straight through heavy armor. As the penetrator enters the tank, heated fragments of metal fly off in all directions, hitting anybody and anything inside."
I think you're wasting your time JWP. I posted a retard simple readers digest condensed version of that way back, and it got passed by. The only thing similar between a penetrator going through a tank, and a bullet going through a critter, is that it's an object going through another object. How a presumed educated man, can see parallels between the two, is beyond me.
I think you're wasting your time JWP. I posted a retard simple readers digest condensed version of that way back, and it got passed by. The only thing similar between a penetrator going through a tank, and a bullet going through a critter, is that it's an object going through another object. How a presumed educated man, can see parallels between the two, is beyond me.
Jeff
Agreed.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
The elephant in the room is Jeff Bird clearly demonstrated full mastery of the concept of a DRT shot.
Why are you trolls not acknowledging such an educational video display and question him further on whether or not your own tactics will bring you success " when push comes to shove"?
As for me I am not going to discuss Armor tactics Training with hapless pukes like you any further, because there are young men in those Tanks defending u sorry ass trolls as we speak. I am so ashamed for your behavior. It is truly reprehensible.IMO
I should have never brought it up to such swine. I am ashamed of my self but I assumed I was amongst men and patriots. And I answered a question. I am an idiot.
U know what happens when one assumes.
Please refer to Jeff Bird for knowledge ...as Steel head says if u ain't got video....it never happened. He truly brings the goods to this thread. Thank you Jeff Bird!
.......but troll on troller dudes........just remember who is defending your ass as we speak.
Hope this helps.
Last edited by Angus1895; 08/18/17.
"Shoot low sheriff, I think he's riding a shetland!" B. Wills
The elephant in the room is Jeff Bird clearly demonstrated full mastery of the concept of a DRT shot.
Why are you trolls not acknowledging such an educational video display and question him further on whether or not your own tactics will bring you success " when push comes to shove"
As for me I am not going to discuss Armor tactics Training with hapless pukes like you any further, because there are young men in those Tanks defending u sorry ass trolls as we speak. I am so ashamed for your behavior. It is truly reprehensible. I should have never brought it up to such swine. I am ashamed of my self but I assumed I was amongst men and patriots. U know what happens when one assumes.
Please refer to Jeff Bird for knowledge ..........but troll on troller dudes on me...........just remember who is defending your ass as we speak.
Hope this helps.
It certainly helps to peg you for the goof ball that you are. Thanks!
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/medium/50268.jpg)
