Velvet exploding bullets?

[BC38]

Yeah, though a noteworthy underlying issue is effectiveness in the scale of small arms.
There's just better things to put in the cavity of a bullet than boom sauce

I'm not that familiar with how artillery shells are constructed.
But don't they have a trigger of some type in the tip, and a more stable explosive like C4 or something that requires a trigger mechanism? More like smokeless powder that requires a primer to set it off?

 

[venomballistics]

I'm not that familiar with how artillery shells are constructed.
But don't they have a trigger of some type in the tip, and a more stable explosive like C4 or something that requires a trigger mechanism? More like smokeless powder that requires a primer to set it off?

it varies ... air burst or direct burst determines the detonator ... I believe the core charge is cast TNT

 

[venomballistics]

I think I remember you putting hot pepper or something in HP bullets??

among other things .... concentrated capsaicin most definitely modified behavior, but not in many useful ways.
Kids ...... just don't

 

[BC38]

it varies ... air burst or direct burst determines the detonator ... I believe the core charge is cast TNT

Well, from what little I know of them TNT is a lot more stable than fulminated mercury. If it is a cast solid I would expect that would make it even more stable.

 

[DWalt]

The real issue is not the main explosive filler type in an artillery shell. And there are many of those. Rather it is the fuse mechanism which must be designed to operate under the extreme acceleration of firing without detonating.

 

[Alpo]

It's been a long time since I read Jackel, but I don't believe it was fulminate of Mercury. I think it was just the liquid metal. You have a little drop of Mercury, which is very heavy, inside the cavity. You fire the gun the bullet goes forward, and Newton's law of motion makes the Mercury go to the back of the cavity, where it stays as long as the bullet is going forward. When the bullet hits something, and stops going forward, Newton's law of motion makes the Mercury go charging forward where it blows the whole front of the bullet apart.



I'm pretty sure that's how the exploding bullets in Jackal worked.

 

[BC38]

The real issue is not the main explosive filler type in an artillery shell. And there are many of those. Rather it is the fuse mechanism which must be designed to operate under the extreme acceleration of firing without detonating.

Exactly. My original point (referencing the book The Day of the Jackal) was that fulminated mercury ISN'T designed or formulated to withstand the extreme acceleration of a fired bullet.

If the rapid deceleration of impact could set it off, it seems to me that the rapid acceleration of being fired poses a pretty significant risk setting it off.

That's why, although I thought it sounded like a cool idea, I never even considered trying it myself.

 

[BC38]

It's been a long time since I read Jackel, but I don't believe it was fulminate of Mercury. I think it was just the liquid metal. You have a little drop of Mercury, which is very heavy, inside the cavity. You fire the gun the bullet goes forward, and Newton's law of motion makes the Mercury go to the back of the cavity, where it stays as long as the bullet is going forward. When the bullet hits something, and stops going forward, Newton's law of motion makes the Mercury go charging forward where it blows the whole front of the bullet apart.

I'm pretty sure that's how the exploding bullets in Jackal worked.

You may be right about that. It's been around 50 years since I read The Day of the Jackal, so my memory about the details of the Jackal's "exploding bullets" may be wrong. Maybe my "research" on the feasibility of the mercury bullets lead me to learning about fulminated mercury. Its been a LONG time so the details are a bit fuzzy.

But my point is still that logic would dictate that anything unstable enough to make a bullet actually explode on impact would also stand a good chance of being too unstable to withstand the equally violent forces of an accelerating bullet.

That seems like simple physics to me. Certainly not something I have ever been willing to put to the test.

FWIW, I also have to wonder if even something as semi-inert as plain old mercury slamming into the rear of the bullet cavity could possibly exert enough force to blow out the back of the bullet, cause the bullet to fragment, or maybe even cause the bullet diameter to balloon to the point that it would stick in the barrel.

Just my random thoughts...

 

[DWalt]

One must be aware that the “Mercury Bullet” was a purely fictional creation of Frederick Forsyth. I think in the movie they were .22 LR. I can’t believe that anyone was ever shot by one, although I suspect that many may have been inspired by the book or the movie to attempt making one. Forsyth may have read about Jacob’s explosive bullets which did use a copper tube of Mercury Fulminate as an impact sensitive initiator (which I previously mentioned) and it gave him the idea for Mercury assassination bullets.

 

[DWalt]

That is cause you could get Dynamite!

Back when I was a kid, the local hardware store would sell it to anyone. Local farmers used it for stump blasting and other odd jobs. I knew one guy who dynamited bedrock for house basements. Sandstone was very close to the surface where I lived. He would drill holes, put in a half stick of dynamite, and light the fuse.That would break up the rock and he would pull out the pieces with a tractor. I used to watch him.

 

[BC38]

Back when I was a kid, the local hardware store would sell it to anyone. Local farmers used it for stump blasting and other odd jobs. I knew one guy who dynamited bedrock for house basements. Sandstone was very close to the surface where I lived. He would drill holes, put in a half stick of dynamite, and light the fuse.That would break up the rock and he would pull out the pieces with a tractor. I used to watch him.

Ahh, the good old days - before the over-reach of the BATFE...

 

[FoundFather]

Yeah, though a noteworthy underlying issue is effectiveness in the scale of small arms.
There's just better things to put in the cavity of a bullet than boom sauce

St. Petersburg Declaration Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 - Wikipedia
kind of slowed their development by militaries. If not for it, we might have highly effective exploding bullets by now since there were already working examples in 1868. If the militaries weren't into them, it kind of left them without a market. Law enforcement is not likely to blow up their citizens. That kind of leaves kids of all ages, like us.....

 

[venomballistics]

St. Petersburg Declaration Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868 - Wikipedia
kind of slowed their development by militaries. If not for it, we might have highly effective exploding bullets by now since there were already working examples in 1868. If the militaries weren't into them, it kind of left them without a market. Law enforcement is not likely to blow up their citizens. That kind of leaves kids of all ages, like us.....

In 1868, the size of the average service projectile was a fair bit larger. Consider our 45-70 for example.
That pill can harbor a useful quantity of malice