50 Cal Dead on reverse riccochet

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

http://carlnet.no-ip.org/50_cal_riccochet.wmv
It could have been worse.

However, one wonders why they chose to present the steel target as flat to the shooter.

[Greg Cole]

I saw that earlier today via e-mail & I passed it on with a title of "Audition for the Darwin Awards".
Not sure why you'd do that in the first place, nevermind film it and share your stupidity with the WWW?:confused::eek::rolleyes:

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

What are the odds that they would set the steel plate so perfectly flat to the shooter that he'd get it in the head?

I mean that had to be within a lousy inch or two of the muzzle.

Clearly no one was using their noggins for much more than targets.

Will myth busters try to get a ricochet to re enter a gun?

[John Ricci]

This one impacts a few of the senses...you can hear the bullet coming back, see it hit the ground and bounce before it hits his hearing protection and you can almost smell the pantload he must have had from the experience!

J.R.

[Brad Wood]

doesn't make sense.

[Bruce Page]

We’re not doing that no more

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Cliff....myth busters had enough problems debunking the shoot the other sniper through the scope lens rumor.

[C Scott McDonald]

Sorry, but a laughed so hard at the video my sides hurt now!

[Brent Leonard]

Strange. A ricochet coming straight back??

Almost seems against the laws of physics (not being a physicist or ballistic expert). All the energy of the bullet is moving straight ahead, then it strikes a target, reverses the energy, and sends the projectile directly backwards?

What kind of target would not deflect from the energy of being struck by the 50 cal bullet, sending the projectile off in a deflected tangent?

A very interesting video.

[Tom Veatch]

It can certainly happen, but the odds are very long.

I vividly remember getting my first BB gun as a kid and firing it at the door of the barn. The ricochet got me dead center of my forehead. I'm reminded of that every time I see the movie "A Christmas Story" where the kid gets a "You'll shoot your eye out" whenever he mentions wanting a BB gun.

[Ben West]

Strange. A ricochet coming straight back??

What kind of target would not deflect from the energy of being struck by the 50 cal bullet, sending the projectile off in a deflected tangent?



A dished or cupped target can and often does this. High power rifle silhouette shooters know the danger of shooting steel that has been cratered by previous shots. Ricochets are a big danger when shooting cratered steel. That's almost certainly what happened in this case.

[Belinda Barfield]

I don't understand why the cut the part where the shooter said, "Hey, hold my beer and watch this . . ."

[Al Willits]

Having shot a steel match or three in my life, I can tell ya ricochets seem to go in all angles, the targets tend to cup and pit after a bit, all making for erratic angles of deflection.

There's a reason most every steel match I can remember has required protective eye on the range and not just for the people shooting.

Al

[Kevin Arceneaux]

One of the idiots at work did the about same thing. They were shooting a 22 at a tree and it came back and grazed him on the shoulder.

[Brent Leonard]

A dished or cupped target can and often does this. High power rifle silhouette shooters know the danger of shooting steel that has been cratered by previous shots. Ricochets are a big danger when shooting cratered steel. That's almost certainly what happened in this case.

OK, that makes sense.

[Don Abele]

We shoot steel reactionary targets all the time - they are the best for combat, on the move shooting training.

Oh course we use the right equipment - we fire frangible bullets. They are designed to break up into small pieces on impact. The targets are "reactionary" which means they swing and are not fixed in place. And lastly, we DON'T fire our 50 cals at steel.

The video appears legit...but I still find it hard to believe.

Be well,

Doc

[Wayne Olsen]

Firearms are inherently dangerous. If you don't understand this BEFORE using them . . . you have no business using them.

This was a double ricochet, deflecting off the target and off the ground in front of him. Quite a long shot (pun intended). :)

[keith ouellette]

I watched it a few times and noticed the bullet (or do you call that a shell) hit the ground first before it hit they guys ear muffs.

So it actually riccochet twice before it hit the guy.

[Jason Roehl]

A close friend of mine had a close call with a ricochet when he was much younger. He shot at a steel rim with a .44 Magnum rifle. Right after the shot, he felt a little tug at his pants near the ankle. When he looked down, there was a hole clean through his pants where they were hanging free beside his leg. He told me, "Lesson learned, " very thankful it wasn't a harder lesson.

I've had birdshot from a shotgun (and .22 shotshells) ricochet, but they were indirect--a BB or two of birdshot hit me in the top of the head several seconds after a 25-yard shot at a target, so it obviously went ballistic after hitting the target.

Hollow points are an interesting ricochet, too. From a high-power rifle, if they ricochet off the ground without too much damage, they will make a whirring sound as they travel into the distance tumbling.

Sometimes people concentrate too much on what's beyond their target, when they should also remember to "know their target".

[Jack Dickey]

Being around fifties all my adult life , I find this one a hard pill to swallow , it is a "long shot" , no doubt ..

The fifty will plow through steel plate out to quite a few hundred yards ..

[Karl Brogger]

Depending on the round, I think a .50 can punch through up to an inch of steel. A buddy and I have been looking for a man hole cover to use for target practice just for this reason.



Hollow points are an interesting ricochet, too. From a high-power rifle, if they ricochet off the ground without too much damage, they will make a whirring sound as they travel into the distance tumbling.


Shooting a few inches in front of prairie dogs and letting the ricochet bounce up into them makes for some good entertainment. :D

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

Cliff....myth busters had enough problems debunking the shoot the other sniper through the scope lens rumor.

HA HA HA

Well just like what the burglar said when the cop opened the closet door and finding him in there and asked "What are you doing in here?"
The burglar said: "Every one has to be somewhere."

Well every bullet fired and every ricochet has to head off somewhere. Odds are that if there are enough bullets fired that at least one of them will be a line drive down the optics of a sniper.

These guys should have gone and bought lottery tickets 'cause they really hit the odd number with that one.

[Tom Veatch]

Cliff....myth busters had enough problems debunking the shoot the other sniper through the scope lens rumor.

Ken, I don't think they debunked the rumor. They showed that ball ammo wouldn't penetrate the scope and reach the shooter, but that AP would.

Every round through my rifle was AP except for an occasional tracer to mark a target or some such. The only ball ammo I recall seeing was one 20 round box on a recreational range. AP was the standard basic load.

[Jack Dickey]

Ken, I don't think they debunked the rumor. They showed that ball ammo wouldn't penetrate the scope and reach the shooter, but that AP would.

Every round through my rifle was AP except for an occasional tracer to mark a target or some such. The only ball ammo I recall seeing was one 20 round box on a recreational range. AP was the standard basic load.


HHMM Carlos Hathcock took some liberties in his book ?? Wonder if her was using AP or ball ??

[Wayne Olsen]

If I remember correctly, the through the scope shot was supposed to have taken place in Stalingrad in the sniper/countersniper duel between Vasily Zaitsev (spelling HAS to be wrong) and a German sniper. I don't know for sure, but I don't think that AP rounds were in general usage in WW II. I'm not even sure that they had been developed for small arms at that time. Further, I think Mythbusters point about ball ammunition is that it always deforms when striking the front of the scope, even when striking it dead center, and then the balistics go all to hell and the bullet can't keep to the 3/4 to 1 inch path it needs to in order to strike straight back through the eyepiece.

It does make a good story, though!

[Karl Brogger]

That was in Whitefeather's book, but I believe it was written by someone else after he was dead.

Wasn't it more or less a pot shot? He knew he was running out of time, and took the risk of giving up his position to shoot at something shiny? Turned out to be the scope...

War of the Rat's was a good book too. Far better than movie abomination with Jude Law in it.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

It can certainly happen, but the odds are very long.

Way far long. The guy is lucky the bullet was going so slow and only clipped his earmufs.

Imagine the obit?

"Man shoots self with remarkable trick shot."

[AL Ursich]

HA HA HA

Well just like what the burglar said when the cop opened the closet door and finding him in there and asked "What are you doing in here?"
The burglar said: "Every one has to be somewhere."

There was a episode of COPS in San Diego, North County filmed about 1994 that had cops searching a house and a cop jumps when he finds a guy hiding in a Closet.....:eek:. They still had the Green and White Cop Cars then... Was too expensive to repaint every car so they went to black and white...:rolleyes:

That was my Neighbor a cop in his 15 seconds of fame.

AL

[AL Ursich]

If I remember correctly, the through the scope shot was supposed to have taken place in Stalingrad in the sniper/countersniper duel between Vasily Zaitsev (spelling HAS to be wrong) and a German sniper. I don't know for sure, but I don't think that AP rounds were in general usage in WW II. I'm not even sure that they had been developed for small arms at that time. Further, I think Mythbusters point about ball ammunition is that it always deforms when striking the front of the scope, even when striking it dead center, and then the balistics go all to hell and the bullet can't keep to the 3/4 to 1 inch path it needs to in order to strike straight back through the eyepiece.

It does make a good story, though!

Job Security for Myth Busters.... I love the 22 bullet in the Fuse Holder Myth Buster story..... :D

AL

[Rory Talkington]

Even after all these years of war and testing and ballistics study....small arms bullets still do not have the ability to identify targets.:eek:

[Steve Garrison]

A land surveyors prism has three planes intersecting at 90° forming an interior corner of a cube. This will reflect the infrared beam back to the gun along a parallel path no matter what angle the beam hits the prism at. The same could be done using steel plates to form a "prism" and a bullet would probably do the same thing. Only a complete idiot (or an enemy) would shoot at such a target. Might be useful as vehicle armor though? A cratered surface could do this too.

[Scott T Smith]

Normally, shooting at steel would not result in an entire bullet ricochet back to the shooter. I say this having shot litterally tens of thousands of rounds at steel plates during competitive matches and practice.

Typically when you're shooting steel plates the bullet deforms into a pancake, expending all of it's energy on the plate. Additionally, the plate deflects when hit.

Although it is not uncommon for fragments to richocet back to the firing line, it is extremely unusual for an entire bullet to deflect back.

A .50 cal has so much energy and knockdown force it should have punched the plate right off of the stand. A typical AP .50 round has the ability to penetrate 1" of armor plate steel at 219 yards.

[Don Abele]

I showed this video to my weapons guys today at work...every last one of them said the same thing - "BS". Not that a richochett is not possible, they happen all the time. Just that in this scenario it seems impossible.

After that they all went searching online. This video is discussed A LOT. And there's a lot of conflicting information. Here's what they found:

There are reports of the target as far away as 1000 yards (impossible, because time from muzzle report to target contact is WAY too fast). And others that say 100 yards (more likely - but just stupid to shoot at something that close).

Another report comments on why the camera is not showing the target and why they all react so calmly. They chalked this one off as a group of guys who wanted to make a "hit" on YouTube.

Then there's a report from a guy who says Willie (the shooter) is his friend and he was there when this happened. Says the steel target was set back at 45* and angled 45* to the side. Just based on that statement I'd discount it - there's no way it's coming straight back after hitting something so angled.

BTW - that's a 50 cal next to me in my avatar. I've run 10's of thousands of rounds through it and my teams...well, A LOT more than that. So A LOT of experience on the weapon (and the ammo). We don't know what the target he was shooting at was made of - but it must've been something amazing. Our non-AP rounds (used for training) easily cut through 1" plate steel. The rounds we use operationally...well, there's not much that'll stop them. So much so that we have explicit firing zones to keep from aiming at the submarines and ships we are protecting because the rounds would easily pierce the hull (it was tested). And submarine hulls are...well...they are VERY strong.

Oh, and just some more food for thought...our weapons have a max effective range of 1 mile (which we do shoot at targets at that distance) and a max range of 5 miles!

Here's me rattlin' 'em off - the tree line is just over a mile and there are targets just in front of it! The black and white squares are not targets - they are the range lane markers. The targets are between them behind the berms.

115947

Again, the video looks real - but I'm just having a hard time believing it.

Be well,

Doc

[Brent Leonard]

Yep, I just can't accept it as real. Put the second ricochet from the dirt into it andf it seems even more unlikely. Not to mention the length of time the sound of the ricochet takes to "come back" to the shooter.
Add the energy of the 50 cal against any target.

All adds up to BS to me. Maybe a BB gun could do that, without the sound effects and damage to the hearing protectors.