.38spl Long Range Ballistic Stability

The angle would only have to be about 3 degrees from horizontal, depending on all those things that trajectory depends on.
Something like 1 foot at 6 yards.
I'm guessing somebody allegedly shot at somebody, missed, and hit somebody else 5 blocks away.
 
I'm guessing somebody allegedly shot at somebody, missed, and hit somebody else 5 blocks away.
Click to expand...

That is allegedly the scenario. But we don't know much of anything else. Was the shooter standing on flat ground and shooting at someone on a stairway above him? Was the shooter standing at the bottom of a hill and shooting up? Was he at the top of a hill, shoot at some one on the hill ten feet from him, missed and the bullet went on into the valley below him? Did the shot travel at a low upward trajectory? Did it have a high trajectory and then fall to earth? We don't know.

What importance does the yaw of the bullet make in this case? What importance does whether it keyholed or not make or why? We don't know.

B. Lahey hasn't provided a whole lot of info at this point. I tend to think that if he picks up a copy of Rinker's "Understanding Firearm Ballistics" he'd be better served at court than asking here. Asking here is the legal equivalent of walking into a gun store that is also a bar and asking there. It's a fun, entertaining and informative thing but not something I'd try to bring into a courtroom.

tipoc
 
Trial postponed, the judge is sick.

I already have the technical info, thanks to kraigwy. That will be most helpful when questioning the gun expert. However, the jury will not be gun experts, so listening to my fellow nonexperts here is helpful to me, and hopefully to the jury as well when I lay it out in plain language.

The charge is Murder. They are relying upon transferred intent. Read the link I posted about that if you wish. Here it is again: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/transferred_intent
 
I once got hit by a richoet ( in the leg), We were shooting very LV .38 SP Full W/C's at targets from about 150 ft away using a nathral dirt bank as a backstop.
Well there must've been a rock where my bullet struck the bank and the bullet bounced back at me!
The bullet struck my thigh just hard enough to leave a red welt. Stung real bad too!
Intrestinglly, the bullet egained stability on the bounce and struck me head-on
Thank goodness for thick Levis pants and low velocitys!
It's funny how the bullet re-stabilised!
I guess it dosent take a lot of speed, just rotation...
ZVP
 
I read the link about transferred intent earlier.

But again you provide little actual information. I understand why you can't and I'm not asking for that. But you have to see, or should see, that some fellas here being asked to draw conclusions based on little, partial and possibly misleading information may have questions or provide misleading info.

But you do get to my problem here...

I already have the technical info, thanks to kraigwy. That will be most helpful when questioning the gun expert. However, the jury will not be gun experts, so listening to my fellow nonexperts here is helpful to me, and hopefully to the jury as well when I lay it out in plain language.
Click to expand...

Counting on the ignorance of firearms on the jury's part seems a poor strategy. It also raises ethical questions. Knowing that you have little actual knowledge of what your speaking of and relying on that partial knowledge to get a conviction, knowing that you don't have the whole picture, seems questionable. But then I know that it's common. I also know I don't know all involved.

tipoc
 
Last edited:
tipoc, if you are so certain this thread is useless, you are free to leave. Please do.

If you think my consulting nonexperts to anticipate the mistakes of other nonexperts and come up with ways to explain technical matters is ethically questionable, then you should report me to the Indiana Bar Association. I post here using my real name. My bar number is #29577-71. Please leave this thread and do as you please.

I have given all the facts I can give at this time.
 
I did not say the thread was useless.

I do say I don't know the facts.

I haven't accused you of anything.

I have asked you about what you are doing and told you my concern based on what you've said.

I've asked you about that and not ratted you out or tried to snitch you out. I have no reason to do that. That is your stock and trade, I assume, not mine. It didn't occur to me that you were doing anything illegal. It is interesting that you seem to think that I would have.

You're a lawyer and should be experienced with this and less sensitive to people questioning you.

tipoc
 
tipoc said:
. . . .Knowing that you have little actual knowledge of what your speaking of and relying on that partial knowledge to get a conviction, knowing that you don't have the whole picture, seems questionable. But then I know that it's common. I also know I don't know all involved.
Click to expand...
tipoc,
I'm not convinced that B. Lahey is the one trying to get the conviction:
B. Lahey said:
They are relying upon transferred intent.
Click to expand...
Unless I'm wrong, B. Lahey in playing defense on this one.
 
I used to be an HVAC/Refer mechanic at a hospital in Alaska.

One evening, while on my equipment check rounds, I found a .38 cal semi-jacketed soft point bullet on the roof of a 5-story building. The only deformation was to one side of the slug. The rifling striations were interrupted by the "skid marks" from the roof which were nearly perpendicular to the rifling and on one side only. Only one small dent in the nose and one in the heel of the slug. That denotes yaw with little spin from the rifling at whatever fairly long distance it was fired and maybe some bouncing.
 
Trial ended today, there would have been no winners whatever the verdicts. Ugly.

Final number from shooter to the poor little guy: 390 yards. A .38spl 125gr SJSP. Several witnesses testified in the trial of a codefendant that the shooter leveled the revolver at the intended victim, effectively countering an argument that the shot could have been fired at a high angle without murderous intent. The forensic pathologist testified that the projectile was indeed most likely tumbling when it struck the victim in a distinctly sideways orientation.

The revolver, a .357 Rossi (but manufactured by Taurus), was loaded with only one round of properly sized ammunition, the round which hit the victim. It was also loaded with several rounds of .32-20, which fired but landed in parts unknown. The ballistics witness test fired the revolver with some .32-20, the projectiles did not engage the rifling, exhibiting instability and significantly reduced velocity. The only round in the revolver likely to do damage at long range was the one that did just that.

There was one round of 9mm 115gr FMJ fired by a second shooter that hit a community center 530 yards away with enough left on it to do some damage.

Media coverage :
http://m.wsbt.com/news/teen-found-g...-now-facing-gang-enhancement-charges/38800920

http://m.wsbt.com/news/jury-begins-deliberations-in-south-bend-toddler-murder-trial/38782770

http://m.wsbt.com/news/trial-for-teen-accused-in-south-bend-toddlers-murder-continues/38762966
 
Last edited:
Interesting outcome. I feel sad for all involved.

On the ballistics stabilization question. I think a snubby has enough barrel length to keep the bullet pointed generally in the right direction for 50 to 100 yards (which is all anyone expects it to do) but it may not have been stabilized sufficiently to prevent yawing at 390 yards.
Probably would have had little or no yawing with a lever gun or even a 6 inch revolver.
In fact bullet shape and bullet length have A LOT to do with long distance stabilization. Hence the invention of the longer Spitzer bullet and the boat tail for better long range performance. I suspect that the fact this was a 125 grain hollow point is the greatest reason for the yawing. Hollow points lose velocity more quickly (think of it as trying to keep a horizontally flying ashtray pointed in the right direction in spite of wind resistance) and the fact that it was a shorter 125 gn bullet out of a snubby didn't help either. With those details it's not super surprising that the bullet was tumbling at that distance.
Plus it sounds like the shooter may have tried to shoot the wrong caliber out of the gun. If he did that before the fatal shot was fired, it may easily have affected the rifling of the gun, thereby increasing the likelihood of bullet destabilization.
 
Last edited:
I cannot find the twist of a Rossi .38 but if, after the merger, they get the same barrels as Taurus, that would be 16.5".

News report states:
Bradbury was found guilty of providing a gun to a man convicted of murder for firing the fatal shot and sentenced to 60 years.

So what happened to the trigger man?
 
It was an early merger Rossi/Taurus 2" .357

Marked "Rossi by Taurus" or something goofy on there somewhere.

Trigger man got 60. Bradbury initially got 90, now 60 after the appeal.
 
There are other factors to consider to cause a bullet to yaw. Wind speed, the shape of the hollow point (compared to a fmj, which would have less wind resistance), how much powder was used loading that .38, ect. Must have been Jerry Miculek! Oh wait, he only does 1000 yard shots with his revolver. XD
 
I cannot find the twist of a Rossi .38 but if, after the merger, they get the same barrels as Taurus, that would be 16.5".
Click to expand...
I wonder how that figures in with Greenhill's formula?

Poking around some, I also found this It's an Excel spreadsheet that can calculate bullet stability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top