# Civil War Gunboat vs Armor P 50 cal Q **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 7, 2011, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568 "2011-04-07T19:38:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Patch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a183cd/32.png) [@Patch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patch)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/41 "2011-04-10T02:48:11Z")
> [@jeffsdad](#): > > from what i read, the civil war ironclads typically had 2 inches CAST iron (if that makes a diff). also, i believe most shots would be at 3 fourths mile. and only the ammo I could carry. bear in mind that i would be in modern protective gear with state of the art helmet etc and ultra modern scope on rifle. I mean if i can afford to build a time machine, I am going back with the best. If the iron clad has 2" of armor (or 4", even, with two plates) backed by another 24" of timber, the .50cal simply isn’t going to punch through. If you want to take out an Ironclad and have a time machine, bring along a Javelin ATGM. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/42 "2011-04-10T02:58:02Z")
FWIW, I found [this Barret web page](http://www.vincelewis.net/rifle.html), which says: > [@](#): > > The .50 caliber bullet fired form a Barrett M83A1 or M-107 can easily penetrate 1½inches of solid steel armor plate, which is the normal amount of “protection” offered by most of the worlds Armored Personnel Carriers (APC’s), Armored cars, trucks and other “light” vehicles. Generally speaking, as long as its not a main battle tank, the .50 caliber round fired from the Barrett at moderate ranges will penetrate it. > > A brick or a concrete wall that is about 1 or even 2 foot thick also offer no protection and can be shot clean through. Mobile or static radio trucks, parked up airplanes engines, buildings, fuel depots, rail tank cars, machine gun ‘pill-boxes’, bullet proof limo’s, trucks, body armor clad enemy soldiers are all easy prey to the Barrett .50 I don’t know how to reconcile this with **Crafter\_Man** ’s earlier post. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/43 "2011-04-10T03:01:09Z")
> [@Patch](#): > > Media bullshit. The press latched onto it and ran amok with a bunch of misinformation, like they did with the _eeeeevil_ Black Talon bullet in the early 90’s. > > The Teflon coated bullet, or KTW, was designed to allow bullets to penetrate windshields more effectively. The Teflon doesn’t increase penetration – the fact that the bullet is made from tungsten/steel is what does it. > > [You can read more about them here.](http://www.alphadogweb.com/firearms/copkillerbullets.htm) Thank you for that. I learn new things every time I visit here. Or unlearn bad old information. ---
**Author:** ![Patch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a183cd/32.png) [@Patch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patch)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/44 "2011-04-10T03:08:29Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > I don’t know how to reconcile this with **Crafter\_Man** ’s earlier post. I need a copy of _Jane’s Small Arms_, but this will do for now. [Short Range Media Penetration by 50 BMG AP](http://www.survivalmonkey.com/50bmg-penetration-table.html#ixzz1J5NrZ4MO) From “The Ulimate Sniper” by Maj. John L. Plaster, USAR (Ret). page 222 Short-Range Media Penetration by .50 Cal. AP rounds Penetration @ 100 yrds * * * CONCRETE (solid) - 9 inches TIMBER (logs) - 96 inches STEEL (nonarmored) - 1.8 inches ALUMINUM - 3.5 inches RUBBLE (asphalt, soil, cement) - 20 inches TAMPED SNOW (19.9-24.9 lbs/cu ft) - 77 inches DRY SOIL - 28 inches WET SOIL - 42 inches DRY SAND - 24 inches WET SAND - 36 inches DRY CLAY - 42 inches WET CLAY - 64 inches ---
**Author:** ![chacoguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/50afbb/32.png) [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/45 "2011-04-10T03:22:33Z")
> [@Patch](#): > > I need a copy of _Jane’s Small Arms_, but this will do for now. > > [Short Range Media Penetration by 50 BMG AP](http://www.survivalmonkey.com/50bmg-penetration-table.html#ixzz1J5NrZ4MO) > > From “The Ulimate Sniper” by Maj. John L. Plaster, USAR (Ret). > page 222 > > Short-Range Media Penetration by .50 Cal. AP rounds > > Penetration @ 100 yrds > > * * * > > CONCRETE (solid) - 9 inches > > TIMBER (logs) - 96 inches > > STEEL (nonarmored) - 1.8 inches > > ALUMINUM - 3.5 inches > > RUBBLE (asphalt, soil, cement) - 20 inches > > TAMPED SNOW (19.9-24.9 lbs/cu ft) - 77 inches > > DRY SOIL - 28 inches > > WET SOIL - 42 inches > > DRY SAND - 24 inches > > WET SAND - 36 inches > > DRY CLAY - 42 inches > > WET CLAY - 64 inches Hole-eee Shit! :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/46 "2011-04-10T03:56:36Z")
100 yards is pretty much point blank range for a sniper. Penetration of that stuff at five hundred or a thousand yards would be more useful. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/47 "2011-04-10T04:50:59Z")
SHooting a biler will not make it explode. You’d simply make it lose steam pressure. If you were really lucky, you might hit it in such a manner as to vent the steam into the crew compartent, which would be bad for them. But it’s not like this didn’t happen quite often anyhow. Sailors knew that was a risk; a ship damaged in such a manner mgiht lose speed but was certainly quite functional/ You might cause a couple deaths that way if any. ---
**Author:** ![Patch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a183cd/32.png) [@Patch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patch)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2011, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568/48 "2011-04-10T17:43:43Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > 100 yards is pretty much point blank range for a sniper. Penetration of that stuff at five hundred or a thousand yards would be more useful. Best I could find: [Data from an old aircraft manual in a thread on aircraft MGs](http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/armor-penetration-20mm-vs-50-cal-911.html#post51845) .50 AP vs armored plate (no data on the plate type) 0^ impact angle 200 yds - 20mm 400 yds - 18mm 600 yds - 16mm 20^ impact angle 200 yds - 14mm 400 yds - 11mm 600 yds - 9mm 40^ impact angle 200 yds - 8mm 400 yds - 7mm 600 yds - 7mm The problem with looking at steel penetration is military-grade steel is hardened to resist penetration, as opposed to a simple steel plate, and it’s not always clear what type of steel they’re referring to when you find penetration tables. Also found this comment. [The .50 is rated to penetrate .87" of face-hardened armor plate at 100 yards. .75" at 500 yards.](https://snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2027980) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/civil-war-gunboat-vs-armor-p-50-cal-q/577568.md?page=2)