Tango01 | 04 Aug 2020 10:22 p.m. PST |
"The U.S. Army uses a lot of bullets and explosives to fight and win on the modern battlefield. Known chemical compounds that explode, technically known as energetics, are lead-based primary explosives. In new experiments, Army researchers and their partners at Purdue University observed some new compounds that may be an environmentally friendly alternative…" Main page link Amicalement Armand |
Thresher01 | 04 Aug 2020 11:02 p.m. PST |
Yea, that's a great idea to spend scarce defense dollars on, when we're having to cut back due to lack of funds. |
whitejamest | 05 Aug 2020 6:08 a.m. PST |
If there are good alternatives available, and we can avoid seeding areas with toxic chemicals, which are very likely to have negative consequences for people down the road, that seems like a good idea to me. Environmental fallout of war is real. There are still areas of France that are uninhabitable because of all the toxins infused in the soil during the First World War, quite apart from the question of unexploded ordinance. Also, our own soldiers are going to be in pretty close proximity to explosions and fired bullets. If they can breathe in less aerosolized lead, that seems like not a bad thing. Munitions are going to evolve over time, in various ways and for various reasons. This seems like something worth looking into. I don't think anyone is proposing immediately spending billions of dollars to instantaneously overhaul existing stockpiles. |
HMS Exeter | 05 Aug 2020 10:09 a.m. PST |
Bows and arrows are eco-friendly. |
Andrew Walters | 05 Aug 2020 10:26 a.m. PST |
Such a fascinating topic, so many ways to spin it: We're going to kill a lot of people, but in an environmentally-friendly way… We'll save money in the long run because we won't have to pay to clean it up… What are the connections between the companies that produce environmentally friendly ammunition and the congress persons who are pushing this idea? |
Thresher01 | 05 Aug 2020 11:14 a.m. PST |
"Bows and arrows are eco-friendly". White cotton flags are too. "What are the connections between the companies that produce environmentally friendly ammunition and the congress persons who are pushing this idea?". You can bet they are tight, and that the "eco-friendly" munitions will cost 2X – 20X more than the ordnance that is bad for you. |
Tango01 | 05 Aug 2020 11:58 a.m. PST |
|
Garand | 05 Aug 2020 1:46 p.m. PST |
Considering the last 2 military actions taken by the US has been to kick over a government & rebuild the countries in question, this doesn't really seem to be a bad idea… Damon. |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 05 Aug 2020 6:29 p.m. PST |
whitejamest and Garand touch on an important point: Our own forces are exposed to the toxic chemicals from their own weapons. That exposure may not mean immediate reductions in combat effectiveness, but it will cost us all when the VA has to take care of them later. Also, they're human beings willingly putting themselves at risk to protect us. That might move some of us to want to reduce how much they get hurt. |
Wolfhag | 06 Aug 2020 10:15 a.m. PST |
Bullets are toxic because of the kinetic energy poisoning feature they have. Here is a solution: Combine this bullet: link with this gun: YouTube link or this gun: link Of course only for the urban environment. I think you could expect one-shot-one-kill headshots out to 200 yards, maybe a little longer with the lighter bullets. A 550-grain bullet will do a lot more damage than a 55-grain bullet. Consistent headshots with a 550-grain bullet will most likely have the bad guys fail their morale check. Having your buddies head spontaneously explodes for no reason. Wolfhag |
Tango01 | 06 Aug 2020 1:01 p.m. PST |
Thanks!. Amicalement Armand
|