These coefficients can be found in Chapter 10 of Quantitative Ammunition Selection. With the US Army’s BRL P model’s coefficients, ‘a’ and ‘b’ being dependent upon the tactical situation with respect to an “assault” of “defense” combatant response mode being modeled. The US Army BRL P model takes the form of, ![]() In 1961, the US Army Ballistic Research Laboratory at Aberdeen Proving Grounds (BRL) produced a mathematically predictive personnel incapacitation model, correlated against Wound Data Munitions Effectiveness Team (WDMET) wound data collected during the Vietnam War, which relies upon the incremental kinetic energy expenditure of a projectile over a penetration depth of 1 to 15 centimeters, or ΔE15, to predict the probability of incapacitation for a random munition strike to the COM (center of mass) of a combatant or an assailant. It means that we must look to the US Army BRL P model for perspective. ΔE15 = Amount of kinetic energy, in fpe, expended by the bullet from a penetration depth of 1 – 15 centimeters So, what does all this mean? P = probability of incapacitation per hit: Assault, within 30-seconds (US Army BRL P model) Wound Mass = total weight of tissue damaged/destroyed within the entire wound channel Predictive Terminal Performance Analysis:Ĭumulative Probability of Incapacitation, P, for consecutive strikes to a combatant’s torso/abdomen within a 30-second time frame:ĭoP = maximum equivalent depth of penetration in calibrated ordnance gelatin (or soft tissue) ![]() Input data for the 9mm NATO 124-grain FMJRN (M882): STANAG 4090 also specifies acceptable limits of muzzle energy for the 9mm NATO cartridge with a minimum of 400 foot-pounds (542 joules) and a maximum 600 foot-pounds (814 joules) of kinetic energy with cartridges required to have an average operating chamber pressure of 37,000 psi never to exceed 42,700 psi. Currently, under STANAG 4090, the 9mm Parabellum is a standard cartridge for NATO forces as well as many non-NATO countries with acceptable projectile weights ranging from 108 to 128 grains, inclusive. 45ACP have been around for well over a century now the 9mm Parabellum (NATO) coming into existence in 1902 and, shortly thereafter, the. 45ACP 230-grain FMJRN 885 ± 25 fps and 2.) the 9mm NATO 124-grain FMJRN 1,251 ± 25 fps both of which satisfy Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899 which restricts service ammunition to non-expanding designs (that is, full metal jacket) for lawful use by its signatories in military theatres of operation. The two cartridges being evaluated in this first article are 1.) the. What better choice than to compare those designs that have been used by our military and through their respective histories gained their respective reputations? 45ACP using JHPs, again eliminating as many variables as possible to level the comparison of the two. 45ACP in terms of similar projectile design (both in their full metal jacket round nose configuration) and utility.Ī second article will address the comparison of the 9mm and the. That is to say, this article will provide a comparison of the 9mm and the. Such debate also occurs in local gun shops across the nation, albeit within much more civil environs.Īn “apples-to-apples” comparison can be made however, and that is the point of this article and a later, follow-up article to this: to compare the 9mm and the. Internet forums see the debate of these calibers-among others-as “caliber wars” where the merits of these cartridges, both ‘real’ and ‘imagined’, is debated often until the point of discussions being shut down by forum moderators. Even clearly factual material is hotly debated. ![]() the 9mm: Which one is best?”Įnough paper to consume our planet’s remaining forests has likely been expended on the topic and it is probable that there will never be a consensus on the topic. ![]() One of the perpetual debates regarding caliber selection and superiority is “.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |