Discuss.

>>31059453
discuss what? Shrapnel hurts yo

>>31059453
No.

Now you get why the Minié ball was a cunt.

>>31059496
because it was both?

more big
more hurt

ez physics, yo.

What r we discussing u stupit asswhole

Effective range of shrapnel is a few times less than one of a bullet

>>31059613
Doesn't it initially fly at a much higher velocity though? Assuming something like a 155mm shell.

File: 1362892349849.jpg (51KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 604x453px

>>31059453
large, sharp objects flying at high velocity will rip your leg off

smaller objects flying at lower velocities will rip your leg off less

>>31059453
Can we discuss how retarded OP is? I'd say Down's-level.

>>31059633
Air resistance slows it down faster.

>>31059453
Salmon needs to be properly cut to put on nigiri style sushi. As the right diagram indicates, it is evenly sliced and laid down while the left shows a poor cut and salmon falling apart when bitten.

>>31059453
An xm193 or mk262 will achieve the same effect as on the right.

>>31059695
Yes I know, but I was asking about initial velocity.

>>31059506
Musket balls tended to deviate or bounce off of bone and even flexed tendon/muscle. Minie ball didn't give a shit. It shattered bone when it hit. That's why amputations were so fucking common in the US Civil War as opposed to earlier conflicts.

>>31059708
I like you

>>31059746
Helps that Minnie balls were more aerodynamic and fired from rifled bores so you could hit reliably.

>>31059668
Up on the Down's-level

>>31059453
Were you at the Canadian War Museum, OP?

>>31059453
Stoppin Powah my man. Bigga boolits, bigga hole, a much mo broken bone

File: 794.png (285KB, 444x440px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 444x440px

>>31059650
saw the thumbnail and got worried for a moment

>>31059453
A bigger, multi edged sharp object will do more damage than a tapered bullet. That's why we have hand grenades to clear MG nests and houses. Easier than shooting everyone.

>>31059650
More tacticat

>>31060021

Same here

>>31059695
Obviously, but shrapnel still has a much higher velocity in the immediate vicinity of the explosion than most bullets. Also much more mass.

>>31060062
third

>>31059453
This is why we need guns that fire shrapnel.

>>31059509
This seems logical but it doesn't always hold up. Gotta remember, force is mass times velocity SQUARED meaning you get exponential returns by increasing speed. Mass definitely has an effect, but not as much as velocity.

That being said, I imagine this infographic (if it can even be called that) only applies within a certain range. As stated, shrapnel loses velocity much quicker than a bullet and I'm guessing the damage potential drops off rapidly after a little while in the air. Either way I would prefer to be hit with neither.

>>31061335
Shrapnel also has uncommon ballistics. It tumbles, it's jagged, it has all sorts of nasty stuff on top of travelling at a high speed. A bullet is designed to penetrate above all else. Shrapnel maims, even at slower speeds.

>>31059668
Can we discuss how edgy Anon is? I'd say Down-with-the-sickness level.

>>31059453
Guess why arty is called the king?

>>31060021
post more /k waifus plz

>>31059453
>i wunt 2 start a thread with "discuss" like i want to control ppl but rly im going to prretend every person is taking to me and i have friends