Incendiary ammunition could possibly damage an aircraft well enough to take it down especially in .50 caliber.
Incendiary ammunition could possibly damage an aircraft well enough to take it down especially in .50 caliber.
I have a feeling we are all on a special list, knowing how high up GRM shows up on google search.
I'm a good guy, Mr FBI man!
pilotbraden wrote: One hit with an incendiary round in a gasoline tank would not be good. There are many types of .50 caliber ammo that would be deadly. .History Soon after American servicemen deployed to Europe for World War One, it was recognized that an automatic weapon capable of firing a cartridge larger than those currently in service was sorely needed. In addition to being more powerful than the standard rifle cartridge, this new cartridge would also need an armor penetrating capability to serve as a against the recently introduced tank. Although America was not able to produce such a weapon before the end of the war, research and experimentation with a number of captured German anti-tank firearms eventually lead to the Browning M1921A1 .50 caliber machine gun. Introduced in 1922, the Browning M1921A1 machine gun fired a massive .50 caliber cartridge and had an effective range of over 1000 meters. The M1921A1 was later modified to improve barrel life and reliability, and was redesignated the M2HB (heavy barrel) machine gun in 1933. The M2HB is still in service with the U.S. military where it is used in a number of roles, ranging from infantry heavy machine gun to vehicle, helicopter, and small boat and craft armament. Description There are currently eleven .50 caliber cartridges in service. M2/M33 .50 Caliber ball cartridge: The M2 is the original standard .50 caliber ball cartridge. The M33 is a redesigned, modern version of the M2, and is identical in all respects. The M2/M33 can be identified by its unpainted (copper) tip. M1/M10/M17 .50 Caliber tracer cartridge: The M1/M10/M17 are tracer variants of the M2/M33 cartridge. They are essentially identical to one another in terms of ballistic performance and function. These M1 has a red painted tip, the M10 has a orange tip, and the M17 has a brown tip. M1 .50 Caliber incendiary cartridge: The M1 incendiary cartridge is an incendiary cartridge primarily intended for use against aircraft and material. The M1 can be identified by its blue tip. M23 .50 Caliber incendiary cartridge: The M23 incendiary cartridge is similar to the M1 incendiary cartridge and is used in the same capacity as the M1. The M23 cartridge has a blue tip with a light blue ring below it. M2 .50 Caliber armor piercing cartridge: The M2 armor piercing cartridge was designed for use against soft skinned and lightly armored vehicles as well as for use against enemy built up defensive positions. It has no incendiary component. The M2 can be identified by its black tip. M8 .50 Caliber armor piercing / incendiary cartridge: The M8 armor piercing / incendiary cartridge was designed for use against soft skinned and lightly armored vehicles as well as material destruction. It has an incendiary component. The M8 can be identified by its silver (aluminum) tip. M20 .50 Caliber armor piercing / incendiary tracer cartridge: The M20 armor piercing / incendiary tracer cartridge is the tracer variant of the M8 API cartridge. The M20 can be identified by its red tip with a silver (aluminum) ring below that. M1A1 .50 Caliber blank firing cartridge: Designed for use with training simulators, the M1A1 has no projectile and contains a reduced powder charge. The M1A1 can be identified by its crimped and sealed cartridge opening in place of a projectile.
We're not talking about the Ma Deuce, the Barrett is semi-automatic, 10 round mags. Good luck shoot an aircraft down with that, especially from a helicopter.
I would guess they would refer to small aircraft rather than 747s and that kinda stuff. The .50 BMG can punch through an engine block on a car so I'd guess a prop plane wouldn't fare much better.
I could easily see a Barrett taking out a rogue 172. A 747 on the other hand is going to need something far more explosive and longer-ranged, like a SAM.
A .50-caliber anti-materiel rifle could probably take out a Cessna, but it would be exceedingly difficult to take out a 747 before it could hit its intended target. I don't care if it's mounted in a helicopter or not.
Maybe NYPD bought some Stingers from the Russians.
What would happen to the hypothetical stray rounds coming off from a moving helicopter chasing after a moving target?
Nothing moves from Newfoundland to Miami without a proper escort.
MitchellC wrote: What would happen to the hypothetical stray rounds coming off from a moving helicopter chasing after a moving target?
"collateral damage" is the proper euphemism. You're right, though....that could cause considerable nastiness.
You'll need to log in to post.
