Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → This just in: Modern urban structures are weak.
This just in: Modern urban structures are weak.
2008-05-21, 2:01 PM #1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6760530260633420235

Marines shoot/blow up buildings to test round penetration.
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-21, 2:02 PM #2
Google Video is actually used? Wow.
Star Wars: TODOA | DXN - Deus Ex: Nihilum
2008-05-21, 2:05 PM #3
their gun inventory is straight outta COD4
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-05-21, 2:14 PM #4
Lesson : Hide behind cover that has a 45 degree angle to the marines.

I'd like to see data for sand bags and reinforced block. All those walls were hollow block.
2008-05-21, 2:31 PM #5
I think it's a well known fact that enough sandbags will stop anything.
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-21, 3:33 PM #6
Indeed
Pissed Off?
2008-05-21, 3:35 PM #7
This kind of research would be important in minimizing collateral damage and building structures that are impervious to enemy small arms fire.
:master::master::master:
2008-05-21, 4:11 PM #8
In today's architecture, buildings have to consider terrorist attacks, especially with small explosives and vehicular assaults.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2008-05-21, 4:13 PM #9
That's a good point. When I start looking for a new apartment next month, I'll be sure to ask if the building can withstand an IED of moderate capability. :rolleyes:
2008-05-21, 4:20 PM #10
If its a significant apartment complex placed within a busy city, sure.

I should have said new "high-populated, valuable" structures. Such an embassies, government institutions, schools, places of commerce.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2008-05-21, 4:24 PM #11
What you should have said was

Quote:
2008-05-21, 8:32 PM #12
We should really start issuing 7.62 caliber weapons to Infantry. 5.56 doesn't do nearly as good a job at penetration.
2008-05-21, 8:46 PM #13
Really though. Just pouring cement down those cinder block walls makes them a hell of a lot stronger. Maybe fill them with sand. D:
2008-05-21, 9:08 PM #14
Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
We should really start issuing 7.62 caliber weapons to Infantry. 5.56 doesn't do nearly as good a job at penetration.

What? 5.56 is narrower and thus penetrates better, which is actually the problem, because it doesn't have as much stopping power as 7.62. At least, it's a problem when not shooting through walls or at targets with body armor.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2008-05-21, 9:09 PM #15
Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
We should really start issuing 7.62 caliber weapons to Infantry. 5.56 doesn't do nearly as good a job at penetration.


Actually it does.
Pissed Off?
2008-05-22, 4:29 AM #16
That was a good watch. The walls of the test building looked kind of flimsy, though. Or perhaps I'm just used to heavier walls over here where we have a ruthless winter.

The .50 HMG does pack a nice amount of power, though. You can really feel it when you shoot with one. Thus I'm not surprised it went so smoothly through the whole thing.
Frozen in the past by ICARUS
2008-05-22, 4:55 AM #17
Originally posted by ECHOMAN:
In today's architecture, buildings have to consider terrorist attacks, especially with small explosives and vehicular assaults.


In engineering terms, yes. You either engineer in enough redundancy in the structure that when columns / beam / other elements are removed you don't get total or disproportionate collapse, OR you engineer the columns themselves to withstand a hefty blast load.

What you don't do is make the walls bullet-proof, because no bugger would pay for it.
2008-05-23, 1:09 AM #18
Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
We should really start issuing 7.62 caliber weapons to Infantry. 5.56 doesn't do nearly as good a job at penetration.
Utter nonsense.
Dreams of a dreamer from afar to a fardreamer.
2008-05-23, 3:11 AM #19
Originally posted by Fardreamer:
Utter nonsense.

I was going to say this.
omnia mea mecum porto
2008-05-23, 5:55 AM #20
didnt read thread

didnt read op

read thread title

found out this info on 9/11
2008-05-23, 7:56 AM #21
I was surprised the AK did much better than the M16.
Sneaky sneaks. I'm actually a werewolf. Woof.
2008-05-23, 8:02 AM #22
AK unleashes and damages, M16 has better accuracy.

Speaking in COD4 terms.
2008-05-23, 9:19 AM #23
Oh, and bullet proof walls would **** your structure in the event of a blast. You want the facade to give so that the blast doesn't use it as a 'sail' and put load into your main frame.
2008-05-23, 12:17 PM #24
Originally posted by Fardreamer:
Utter nonsense.


That's not what the brick wall said.
2008-05-23, 12:36 PM #25
Lucky for us, the military doesn't choose a round based on "what the brick wall said."

I'll give you a hint: ballistics are a lot more complicated than "does it go through this here wall?"

[Edit - Also, "Start issuing?" We do issue 7.62, and have for longer than 5.56.]
omnia mea mecum porto
2008-05-23, 1:23 PM #26
Yeah, well, I bet you won't be so smug when America's enemies start wearing brick armour.
COUCHMAN IS BACK BABY
2008-05-23, 1:51 PM #27
Terrists don't use brick armor!

They use children armor. They are the enemenenemeny God told me so. Are you going to argue with god?
2008-05-23, 3:03 PM #28
Originally posted by Roach:
Lucky for us, the military doesn't choose a round based on "what the brick wall said."

I'll give you a hint: ballistics are a lot more complicated than "does it go through this here wall?"

[Edit - Also, "Start issuing?" We do issue 7.62, and have for longer than 5.56.]


That's why they did a bunch of tests. None of the 5.56 round penetrated as well as the 7.62.

As by start I mean as a standard infantry weapon.

Of course there's a bunch of other factors to be considered, besides penetration of buildings. But from those tests, 7.62 rounds penetrate buildings more effectively. Saying it's very complected doesn't really change that.

↑ Up to the top!