Shooting into the sky: Dropping bullets DO kill

Status
Not open for further replies.
"do not fire into the sky thinking it’s harmless."

I think all of us, at least the ones who have been here awhile, know this. We have had the discussion many times before. The rule I was taught 50+ years ago was: Know your backstop/know what's downrange behind your target.

As always, we get sidetracked by a discussion of stray shots vs. aimed shots vs. shooting into the sky at 45 or 85 degress from the horizontal vs. "If I could shoot exactly straight up in the air, what would happen?"

As you can see from my previous post, the straight up in the air question has been frequently asked.

John
 
I'm with you FerFAL. There is no reason to shoot up in the air and the tragedy is senseless and as deep as it gets. Know your BACKSTOP.
 
A bullet fired perfectly straight up from the earth's surface(a difficult thing to do), will come down base first exactly as fast as a bullet dropped from the height of the apogee of the fired bullet. That speed will be limited by aerodynamics to (a relatively sedate) terminal velocity.
Click to expand...

the bullet will be slowed by gravity to a point where it can no longer travel upward, at which point it will start to fall and will approach terminal velocity... since a bullet is not super aerodynamic as it falls (rather than as it is thrust out of a barrel and spin stabilized) it will tend to tumble... tumbling will increase wind resistance and make the fall slower...

almost every case that you read about in the papers is one where someone aimed up into the air, probably at an angle between 25 and 75 degrees, and fired... said bullet would travel on a ballistic arc, and not ever reach the point where it was slowed by gravity and forced to fall backwards... if it exceeds a distance of 1000 feet, it also starts to be affected by the curvature of the earth... also such a shot would remain spin stabilized as it reached its apogee and started on its downward trajectory... all of these things would make it potentially lethal...

almost every incident of someone getting hit by a stray shot into the air happens within a mile or so of the shooter... making it most likely that the shot was fired at an acute angle relative to the ground, rather than at a right angle...

in the above case of the child in the pool, it sounds like the shot was taken at somewhere near a 70 degree angle... well within the likely angle of a shot into the air... making it much more likely that the bullet was on a ballistic trajectory rather than just falling... also you have to consider that the skull of a child is much softer on the top, and potentially not even completely covering the brain because the skull plates grow together over the childhood years... so a falling object could much more easily damage the head of a child than and adult...

all of that aside, shooting into the air is stupid, a violation of the "rules" and definitely not the "high road"
 
People who don’t speak English are people too, and their death matters as much as any other life.
Click to expand...

FerFAL, I couldn't agree with you more on this.

Perhaps a little more controversial than my average post, but since this is #100 for me - why not?
 
I surprised no one got shot in Milwaukee the other night. It sounded like ww III on the north side
 
FerFAL wrote;

The day before yesterday a child died because of this.
He was in the pool with his mother and she suddenly heard a bump sound and blood started pouring from the child’s head.(9mm projectile)

They took him to the hospital but he didn’t survive. This couple lost their only child.

This happens every year, so please, in spite of what “experts”, and specially, in spite of what some people consider expert opinions when they are truly just TV shows ( I’m talking about “Myth Busters” explanation on how falling projectiles are not lethal) do not fire into the sky thinking it’s harmless. It’s not. There might be an unfortunate person on the other end of that bullet’s trajectory.

The only real expert’s advice you should follow is the one given by every single gun instructor.
1) All guns are loaded . Always.
2) Keep your finger off the trigger guard until ready to shoot
3) Never point the muzzle at anything you are not willing to destroy.

And finally, the one these fools choose to ignore when they feel like shooting clouds.

4) Be sure of your back stop

I’ll take the liberty of adding a new one:

5) If you want to make noise in New Year’s eve, buy f&%!ng firecrackers.
Click to expand...

AMEN to that. Some people should not own guns due to their ignorance.
 
They proved that a bullet fired EXACTLY STRAIGHT into the air will not fall with lethal velocity. They used a special rig to do this. However, they concluded that for a regular person, this is pretty much impossible, and if you're shooting even slightly off, the bullet will fall with lethal velocity. Bottom line: Shooting solid projectiles into the air in a populated area is stupid, wrong and kills people every year. Don't do it.
Click to expand...

exactly !!! Bottom line !
 
The question involves whether a bullet fired straight up came back down and killed this kid in a pool with the force of TV.

I remain highly skeptical given the known forces involved and the propensity for people to lie when there are bullet holes in dead bodies. This has nothing to do with the question of whether it's safe or a good idea to cap off rounds in the air in celebration. I think we can all agree it isn't safe.
 
Here in Puerto Rico

From 1998 to 2004, 148 persons were wounded here on the island and 5 sustained death due to shooting up in the air during new years(stray bullets):what:. I find it quite an irresponsible practice but thats just me.
 
Before anyone else dumps on that Mythbusters program (though they do more than their fair share of perpetuating firearms myths in their own right), they said that this particular "myth" was all THREE possibilities; busted (for a bullet which is fired straight up, and which falls in an unstable position straight back down), confirmed (they talked to a doctor who sees a fair number of these cases, and had x-rays to prove it, including at least one fatality), and plausible (since how many drunks on New Year's bother to make sure they're firing straight up in the first place?). It's a pointless, ignorant thing to do, and it places other people at a needless risk, so don't do it.
 
Several months ago I parked at work. As I stepped past my bumper I saw a lump...looked like a lump I'd seen before. A nicely deformed .45 cal. 230 gr HP bullet. The exposed lead had the look of "pavement" deformation. The little gravely looking pits... so I don't think it hit a vehicle. I thought to my self..."yep, that would have punched right into your skull."

Don't shoot up...just not a good idea.

Mark.
 
Just to clarify, I believe MythBusters qualified their statements saying that bullets falling at TV could still be dangerous to small children. The mentioned that several times during the show.

That being said, anyone firing into the air is almost certainly firing at an angle of some kind. That makes it much more dangerous.
 
"I saw that Mythbuster’s show, and they chose to ignore a doctor that explained a well recorded case of a man that was killed because of a dropping bullet."

That is not true they did not ignore it the showed that a bullet fired not straight up maintains a velocity and can be lethal. But a bullet (or anything else for that matter) fired straight up will slow to zero velocity and fall at its terminal velocity (assuming it has time to reach it before hitting the ground)
 
For spheres, the square of the terminal velocity is proportional to the radius times the mean density: multiplying either by 4 with the other constant doubles the terminal velocity. A 5.125 ounce baseball with a 9.125 inch circumference has a mean density of 691 kg per cubic meter (it floats), and a terminal velocity of 34.7 m/s. A ball the same size made of steel, density 7900 kg per cubic meter, will have a terminal velocity of 117 m/s. At the other extreme, a table-tennis ball has a terminal velocity of 9.38 m/s. We can use these terminal velocities to predict what will happen when we drop the three objects from a common height
Click to expand...
Now to me a simple layman that says a 115 grain 9mm bullet is/should not be lethal at terminal velocity but I would be leery of a one ounce plus shotgun slug for the obvious reason of the amount of energy transfered by the heavier weight.
Like pebbles compared to large rocks falling off a cliff face.
I doubt #8 birdshot would leave a red mark at terminal falling speeds.
117 Meters per second is just over 380 FPS, a 115gr. bullet doesn't sound very lethal to me.
If a one Oz. slug I want a hard hat on.
Being the layman I am my numbers could easily be wrong.
I am not advising shooting firearms into the air and don't do it.
 
117 Meters per second is just over 380 FPS, a 115gr. bullet doesn't sound very lethal to me.
Click to expand...

paint ball guns are usually calibrated at 300fps, and i have seen those break the skin... i know ive had bruises from those that lasted for months... i wouldn't want to get hit by a piece of metal traveling at 300-400fps thats for sure... and a sharp point (rifle bullet) could make it pierce skin...
 
In all honesty, Mythbusters did use an adult pigs head in the test. I am sure this is a much tougher shell than a young childs head.
 
Yeah, I think MythBushters was looking solely at death and skull penetration. They were not concerned with cuts or breaking the skin.
 
Some moron was shooting a semi-auto at midnight approximately 5 or 6 blocks north of me on New Year's. Sounded like a 9mm to me and a few others in my area. Rapid-fire, one magazine after another for probably a hundred or more rounds. I'd be willing to bet they weren't blanks, either. Idiots! My neighbor down the street had his doorwall shot out the same night, from the opposite direction. It was being replaced today.
 
The Mythbusters test was nothing more than a less sophisticated reinactment of Tests Performed By J P Herter of Herter Ammunition and Firearms .
Herter had been struck by a falling .50 BMG round while a Civilian consultant working near the front during WW2 evaluating captured German Infantry Weapons and Weapons from other countries found in German Hands. The expended round left only a bruise on his chest.

Herter's postwar tests involved a Radar system designed to trace incoming AA fire. He used the Radar to track the maximum altitude and velocities on the up and down side of the trajectories.

His conclusion involving examination of the recovered slugs of various ammunition types was the same as that of the Mythbusters tests.
Fired straight up a bullet battles air resistence that scrubbs off all its energy leaving it to freefall without stabilization through air that thickens as it drops.

NASA has a Page on the aerodynamic factors if you want to look it up. Its Terminal Velocities of Falling objects.

As noted at anything less than straight up the projectile is still stable and has remaining energy as it passes the peak of its climb. At 45 degrees the remaining energy is pretty high.

I remember a reference to early Cannon experiments that suggested that at maximum effective elevation/range a round ball maintained 6/7 of its energy as it passed the top of the curve. I think that was before factoring in air resistence though.
 
Part the second: There are a whole range of high-angle trajectories which will result in the bullet running out of energy before it impacts, then accelerating from gravity.

Take a bullet at 1000 fps, losing 200fps every second. It flies for 5 seconds before friction slows it.

In five seconds it would fall approx 500 feet.

So, if it is shot in a trajectory so that it winds up above ground level after 5 seconds, it will then drop close to vertical due to gravity, having expended its parabolic arc in flight.

If at such point it is, say, 10 feet above the ground, it would impact like a pebble dropped from 10 feet. Irritating.

If it is dropped from enough height to achieve terminal, it will be at 300-400 FPS, or about the velocity a .45 ACP has at a couple of hundred yards. Or, about the energy a .22 L has at 100 yards. 20-30 ft lbs.

This IS enough to punch a child's skull, and possibly an adult's torso.

It's not enough for a RELIABLE one shot stop.

But I'm not going to stand downrange and tempt fate, either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Thoughts on a complete rewrite...
2 3
Replies
73
Views
9K
Robert
Robert
Back
Top