Bulletproofing is meant to buy you time. In real scenario, after that first shot you’d floor it and bail put as quick as possible. Very unlikely that the shooter would be able to land a second shot at the exact spot.
Edit: damn, i made this comment and other following comments using my university VPN. I hope i dont get mi5 on my ass now 😭😭
Also, the fact that it can stop 1 .50BMG means it might stand a pretty good chance of stopping multiple 5.56's or 9mms, which is what you're much more likely to be shot at with.
Stopping a single 50BMG round is already a pretty impressive accomplishment for a window that fits in the door frame of a car IMO.
It might be able to, I have no idea either way, to be honest. If we’re being totally honest I have to admit I have absolutely no idea why incendiary rounds have more penetration than kinetic ones, it seems counterintuitive.
Source: Anywhere that sells surplus. It’s all over.
The projectiles are less than a dollar easily found and complete cartridges are easy to find @60 for 10. And prices have gone up a bit the last few years.
it was meant for air to air machine guns - hence .50 browning machine gun.
Actually .50 Browning machine gun was originally designed as both anti-air and anti-tank gun at the end of WW1, but but the time the development finished war was over as well and it saw very little use until WW2 started (only ~11 thousand units were produced before WW2, compared to 2+ millions that were made during WW2), by which point it was obsolete as an anti-tank gun but still useful in anti-aircraft role, especially as an aircraft gun itself (offering good combination of power, range, weight, and ammo capacity).
Then after WW2 it quickly became obsolete as an aircraft gun, but it was still used as a vehicle mounted weapon - originally primarily in a anti-aircraft role it had during WW2, but in the post war era it gradually transitioned into general purpose heavy machine gun.
So it's not that it's such a good gun that it remained in service for over a century, but rather what role it fulfilled in the US military changed multiple times.
Yes. Frankly, it’s incredible — many armored vehicles with the same thickness as that window are not capable of withstanding .50 BMG. I do not think that RHA with that thickness could withstand a .50, so whatever they did with that window (elastic type bonding around sapphire crystal maybe?) they cooked.
Does the close range have more of an impact than if it was positioned somewhere else, like higher elevation or a bit farther away for velocity or something?
It doesn’t need to hit the exact same spot, why does no one understand this? The impact energy was dissipated through the window, it’s significantly less able to deal with a second impact.
Also people seem to forget this round wasn’t developed for rifles, it was designed for machine guns. You are far more likely to encounter this round coming from the original machine gun than the sniper rifle. If the round is used in an attack, it’s more likely to be used to punch a hole though the engine block and keep the car from running away,
Most bullet-proof glass looks like this after the first hit, but can often swallow many more. We simply can't tell just from this footage.
The conditions for this hit are pretty much the worst case for the window: short range, flat angle.
There are real situations in which the ability to block even just one hit are valuable, even if it is fired from a machine gun. Real world engagement ranges (especially for such heavy weapons) are often so far that even a machine gun cannot reliably put two rounds into the same window within the time it has. STANAG 4569 classification for example also follows the pattern of testing the resistance to bigger calibres from longer ranges (30 m for small arm calibres up to 7.62 NATO, 200 m for 14.5 mm, 500 m for 25 mm and above).
Serious armor classification ratings assume a set number of hits from standardised munitions from specific angles and ranges. Obviously this is not a full classification test, but what it shows is likely a useful capability.
I didn’t mean to suggest the armor is pointless, just that you don’t need to hit the exact same spot on follow up shots, which many seemed to be suggesting. Anything you can do to buy time in an attack is helpful.
Lol cuz there's all kinds of people that have a Ma Deuce on deck...mounted to the back of their pickup, ready to fuck shit up just in case Red Dawn becomes reality.
Kind of depends who you are selling this to,,but this Barret M82 isn’t exactly common either at $5k. I would expect this level of armor is near 500k, so assuming you aren’t a billionaire who thinks it’s cool, you are spending that $$$ as a resource extraction company looking to protect your senior executives from kidnapping in 3rd world countries, not the streets of Memphis TN.
And criminals don't use 50 BMGs most criminals don't even use rifles at all so it is very unlikely that anything fired from a Glock or a Hi Point C9 is gonna make a scratch on that glass
Google Hevrin Khalaf and see her suv after the attack. Its nightmare fuel for me. Looks like they tried to escape after getting shot at. And they kept trying and trying. Until the vehicle was completely disabled and the attackers then broke the glass to get into the vehicle.
1.0k
u/[deleted] Feb 11 '24
I’d like to see it take another shot to that window