Quoted: There are some medicos here at ARF. Can't they scrounge up a cadaver or two so we could get scientific answers about all the cherished caliber controversies?
|
Because cadaver's (dead flesh) actually don't replciate the results in live flesh. There is a bit of scientific research on this, all it would take is a trip to a Medical Library and do a bit of research in the periodicals.
What wouldn't you give to find out once and for all if the 5.7 really is nothing more than a .22 magnum, or the next thing to a magic death ray?
|
Again it's research that has been done, confirmed, and published several times over:
--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: “Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: “Personal Defense Weapons—Answer in Search of a Question”, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: “Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.
--Roberts G: “Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 31 Grain SS-190 FMJ Bullet Fired by the FN P-90 in 10% Ordnance Gelatin.”, AFTE Journal. In Press.
(references courtesy of Dr Roberts)