Concorde Vs Bullet

rick_little99 wrote:

OK, i think you are looking at the problem a little too simply. It is
not just a relative motion issue. Air travelling towards the aircraft
would not be able to enter the muzzle (as it has nowhere to go). The
bullet would then travel down the muzzle at the speed of sound say (I
know it has to accelerate but lets just say it travels at a constant
speed) relative to the muzzle (i.e. the bullet would be travelling its
velocity plus that of concorde). Upon reaching the end of the muzzle
it would hit a wall of air travelling at the same speed as it so would
effectively instantaneously slow down to the speed of concorde. It
then could go one of 3 ways, it could bobble about in the space between
the end of the muzzle and the air around (the boundary layer), fly back
past the aircraft and possibly hitting the aircraft on the way past or
it could go bounce back down the muzzle.


Do you have any idea how much energy it would take to stop a bullet in
an inch or two when the bullet is traveling 3,000+ fps?


Matt

wrote)
Good question Mont. I've never read anything about MiG-15s flying in
Vietnam, but I guess there may have been a few kicking around, maybe early
in the war like you suggested. All the North Vietnamese aces flew MiG-17s
IIRC.


When you consider some of the hardware from earlier wars we had sitting
around on airfields over there...


Montblack

MiG 19 and 21 too.



"Montblack" wrote in
message ...
| wrote)
| Good question Mont. I've never read anything about
MiG-15s flying in
| Vietnam, but I guess there may have been a few kicking
around, maybe early
| in the war like you suggested. All the North Vietnamese
aces flew MiG-17s
| IIRC.
|
|
| When you consider some of the hardware from earlier wars
we had sitting
| around on airfields over there...
|
|
| Montblack
|