Would a 9mm pistol round bounce?

[Clone155]

   We had an interesting debate today, and I thought I would bring it here.

   So the question is, if a plane was loaded with 9mm pistol rounds, and fired at another plane, would the bullets bounce off of the plane?

[PFactorDave]

More importantly, would they lose their energy so quickly that the pilot who fired them would have to fly through them?  I just don't think a 9mm round would have enough power to even consider using in an aircraft.

I'm sure someone will come along soon and give you a nice muzzle velocity/energy comparison between a 9mm pistol round and a US .50 Caliber round.  There is a huge difference in mass and power.

[Gabriel]

More importantly, would they lose their energy so quickly that the pilot who fired them would have to fly through them? 

That made me smile.

 

[Strip]

Representative muzzle energy....

BB gun....     12 ft.lbs  
9mm...         400 ft.lbs  
50 Cal....      11,000 ft.lbs

Obviously these are just average ratings, some individual loadings/gun combinations could be higher or lower.

Strip

[Krusty]

Why do you ask?

Even standing still on the ground, pistols have extremely short ranges.

[mtnman]

Why do you ask?

Even standing still on the ground, pistols have extremely short ranges.

If you ran really fast, and fired straight ahead, would the 9mm have an increased range?

[stroker71]

  Mtnman

9mm just don't have what it takes

[Flench]

If you ran really fast, and fired straight ahead, would the 9mm have an increased range?

LOL !!!!

[thorsim]

9mm is no doubt a poor choice for an air to air gun ...

however i doubt many laughing here would like to sit in a 172 or even a hurricane down range a couple of hundred yards from 6 or 8 or 15 of these ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFL8saQRox8&feature=related

mounted as if on an aircraft for them to test their BBS bravado ...

i am thinking a bullet that is considered powerful enough to be effective for personal defense will probably do more than bounce off most parts of a plane within realistic WW-2 air to air gun ranges ...

BTW this is something pretty easy to test ...

for once



     

[ZZee]

 , this is a awesome use of server space. but for some real applications of different bullet penetrations take a look at this sight.

i think it'll shed some light on how weak the 9mm really is in the broad spectrum of ballistics.




http://www.theboxotruth.com/


 not shooting aircraft but I think you could correlate the damage and apply it to metal aircraft.

i am thinking a bullet that is considered powerful enough to be effective for personal defense will probably do more than bounce off most parts of a plane within realistic WW-2 air to air gun ranges ...

 ......um, no

[thorsim]

, this is a awesome use of server space. but for some real applications of different bullet penetrations take a look at this sight.

i think it'll shed some light on how weak the 9mm really is in the broad spectrum of ballistics.




http://www.theboxotruth.com/


 not shooting aircraft but I think you could correlate the damage and apply it to metal aircraft.

 ......um, no

umm aircraft skins are not usually made out of steel ...

even so i do not see where any 9mm "bounced off" of your car ...

max range of the mp5 is listed as 150 yards ...

i think a bunch of securely mounted longer barreled guns would probably make a mess of most aircraft skins at a couple of hundred yards ...

but hey go out and get a sheet of aircraft aluminum and a lawn chair and let us see what you get ...

 


 

[Die Hard]

A pistol round like a 9mm P or .45 ACP could do serious damage to an aircraft similar to a rifle round like the British .303 used in the early Spits and Hurris. The rifle round's primary advantage would be in ballistics: Range and time on target. Secondary the rifle round will have a better chance of penetrating cockpit armor. At pistol range (50-100 yards max) the pistol rounds would easily pierce the thin aluminum skin of WWII aircraft and damage the relatively flimsy structure, fuel/oil/coolant lines, radiators, unarmored parts of the cockpit and unprotected fuel tanks. A typical large caliber pistol round is also similar in volume to a rifle round, so it could carry the same amount of incendiary and/or other chemicals. It would still be very, very silly though.

[Chalenge]

The biggest problem with 9mm in aircraft is the relatively short time available to hit a target in WII. The whole reason 50 cals and cannons were brought into play were the short periods in which aircraft had to put hits on an adversary. A 9mm simply doesnt have the ability to damage a target enough in the short times available which is why the guns on the Hurr1 were changed from .303s to 20mm and why the faster movers like the 262 always had 30mm.

No one was afk in WWII.

[Angus]

Not AFK?
Some 85% (Estimated) actually never knew what hit them.
Obviously a better ranging weapon will allow that...better.
However, you'd need to really be a beliver to sit behind a cessna door and have somebody go at you from 100 yards with a 9 mm.....

[Chalenge]

That still doesnt meet the definition of AFK angus. A plane outfitted with 9mm isnt going to do enough damage unless the plane NEVER moves or cannot get out of the way at all. Its not about range at all its about destroying the target at firing time... period.