AmMerc: Considerations For Irregular Warfare Against A Mounted Threat

Posted on May 29, 2011 | 8 Comments


Read it all.

Sale!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to AmMerc: Considerations For Irregular Warfare Against A Mounted Threat

  1. Michael | May 29, 2011 at 23:51 |

    My son just asked me a few days ago about some exploding material he could apply to a target; I had no idea what he was talking about, but I found Tannerite at the sale. Thanks! (I think).

  2. 0321 | May 30, 2011 at 00:24 |

    I shoot some big bore hunting rifles, .375 H&H and .416. There are lots of good quality solids made today, especially some of the sharp, pointy lathe turned ones in bronze. Well worth the cost when you consider the alternative.
    Not only do they make a good can opener, you can also close things with them, like fuzing a hinge or lock to where it won’t open easily. Then apply the gas!

  3. Pat Hines | May 30, 2011 at 03:11 |

    Barnes Bullets make a .50 BMG bullet with a ballistic coefficient greater than 1.0, it’s a copper alloy solid which has “very good” penetration abilities.

    Scroll down to the bottom of this page for info.
    Barnes Solids

    Run the data through the JBM Ballistics Calculator to see what it can do, so take my word for it. It maintains over 2.5 tons of energy at 1000 yards, down from 11,000+ ft. lbs. at the muzzle.

    It will go through a lot of things.

  4. Mark Matis | May 30, 2011 at 19:58 |

    Wonder how well Marx’s friend Molotov would work against this? Especially if they didn’t have a convenient avenue of retreat…

  5. 0321 | May 30, 2011 at 21:50 |

    If you google most of these LEO vehicles you’ll find they are only armored(1/2″ or less) for small arms fire, 7.62 NATO AP and smaller. So with a .338 Lapua and up, you shouldn’t have any trouble poking holes in them. However, some may have upgrade kits and and or heavier armor, but a .50 BMG AP will usually go through. Hell, the M113 APC and the USMC Amtracs aren’t that well armored either.
    As a former M60A1 tank crewman, I know for a fact they lied about our armor thickness, it wasn’t anywhere near what they said, even if you include the deflection angle. Study well and you’ll find a weakness in them all. I think most of the crews would bail out just over getting hit with a Molotov, fear of fire will really uncork some people.

  6. Mark Matis | May 30, 2011 at 23:02 |

    And once they’re out, how well are THEY armored against 7.62 NATO? Although it might be more fun to just barbecue them inside. Couple of unlit bottles at the base of the windscreen – might they drain into the cabin air intake? Then a lit one…

  7. Mark Matis | May 30, 2011 at 23:39 |

    By the way, do they make black paintballs? A good coating on the windscreen might make things interesting. Or just a bottle of black paint…

  8. Turd | June 10, 2011 at 21:44 |

    They don’t have reactive armor, yet. But they do have thick Kevlar panels so an RPG is your best bet unless you can manage to drop a large tree on one.