@ The Reaper

X-ray imaging is relatively inexpensive and I'm willing to bet that any trauma surgeon in good standing with his imaging department colleagues will be able to get it done with the minimum of fuss. CT scans with reconstructions is a different matter: the scans can be done quickly enough and without much planning, but he will need to get a friendly technologist to produce measurements and recons on the separate workstation.
In 2003 I conducted a similar test to what I propose Dr Vail does, but my test was to see whather I could determine certain forensic properties of a projectile that could not be removed from the patient. It involved plain films and CTs, but done in such a way that the meat was not handled or manipulated from one exam to the next. Here are some attached pictures, the first one showing a plain film setup and the second one showing a CT setup, in both cases mounted on a homemade jig (my design).

The plain film X-raying in my case was more complex than what Dr Vail needs because certain distances and equipment variables had to be documented before the exposure. However a setup like this for Dr Vail's pupose would allow dual plane imaging of a piece of meat within two minutes, even using conventional film processing. (Three plane imaging is possible if the metallic clamps are substituted for plastic ties). Plain film costs would be modest: you need several boxes of film costing a few hundred dollars and then you need to pay an X-ray technologist/radiographer a day's wage to X-ray those in two planes. Even if you were paying him the top end of an agency scale for radiography, the amount would be somewhere around $350. It would certainly be a lot less than Dr Vail could charge for private consulting ;)
CTs: you would be able to scan all your blocks within one afternoon, provided you had them all on a trolley with dowel rods already in situ. The X-ray tech fee might be a bit more (or it might be a lot less depending on Dr Vail's contacts) but there would be no film costs. They would burn those images onto DICOM discs as a record and export the studies to the 3D workstation for manipulation. By the time you had the CTs you would be able to work out whether there was sufficient consistency to warrant producing 3D wound tracks, or not. So I guess what I'm telling you is that the imaging is not that expensive. Nobody helped me financially when I did my research involving this imaging and I am but one man.

The second issue is to do with the composition of the Le Mas bullets and the comparison to the formula for Coca-Cola.
Well, that is not an accurate analogy because if necessary the Le Mas projectiles could be dismantled and subjected to any number of metallurgical analytical testing and the components would be found. It would however be a matter of good faith for the company to just tell us in the first place what the components are. This is not the same as asking for the technique by which they are made. It is just a matter of courtesy and it is needed for the X-ray analysis. For example in the days when Winchester was making 7.65mm Silvertips with aluminium jacketing, any test like this would have been conducted with the premise that this jacketing would be radiolucent. In a similar vein, with regards to the lead content in a projectile, clinicians may be interested at a later stage to know whether a projectile may pose a plumbism risk in certain circumstances. There are aspects to do with radiological density and projectile recognition too.

I cannot entertain further claims that the components are a secret. If this was a new hair dye or a cooking recipe I would understand but that clearly is not the case.

OJ:

Agreed on the utility of the X-Rays, though wheeling a dead hog or 20 into the Radiology Department might raise a few eyebrows.

If not knowing what the bullets are made of is a show stopper for you, and LeMas does not wish to share that info, they cannot be forced to, so I guess that this is the end of the line for your participation.

As far as concerns of plumbism, I think that ballistic lead poisoning is almost always harmful. Over the long term, I would have to ask a physician how the body treats embedded objects. I would think that would not be a concern at this stage of testing, as the standard issue M855 and Mk 262 bullets have lead cores, so if it were possible to survive a hit from the the LeMas, any fragments remaining would be treated like any other bullet fragments.

If you cannot entertain the failure to provide the composition of the bullets, sorry that you feel that strongly about it, Sir, enjoyed the informed discussion up to this point.

If you still want to see the X-Rays, let me know so that I do not waste my time looking for them.

TR

@ The Reaper

I seem to have trouble posting images, the images did not appear in that post. I will try here again...

This was just a side note, not essential to our discussion, but I can tell you without the need of a physician that synovial fluid is the only substance in the human body that can dissolve lead, and so the presence of lead within joint capsules is a plumbism risk. Cases are rare, but deaths have occurred. It has been my experience that surgeons will only seek to make a projectile retrieval the primary aim of an operation if it poses a chemical or mechanical hazard to the patient, or in some cases if its continued presence promotes unusual emotional stress on the patient. I was just mentioning this as a sundry reason why it may be useful to know the material composition of certain ammunition. Another reason might be to identify ferromagnetic risks in todays world where every second person is having an MRI scan.

I am still interested in the X-rays, yes please.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...inFilmMeat.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...lainFilmCT.jpg

You can post a max of five photos per individual post, as long as they are an approved file type and do not exceed 800x600. Just click on the Manage Attachments button below and follow the cues. No need for a host server, they will upload fine here.

Nice fixture, what is that, a canned ham in the photo?

It may take me a while to locate the X-Rays, I will post them as soon as I can find them.

TR

@ TS

Well the premise of this debate is that the performance of the Le Mas projectile cannot be realised in ballistic gelatin, but only in living tissue. I would like to see testing of this ammunition in as 'homogenous' a section of living tissue as possible. That's why I suggested the thigh rather than the thorax or head because those structures involve a high probability of a mixed tissue/bone strike.

:rolleyes:

I am not here asking for help in the marksmanship department, thank-you, but if I struggle with some of the concepts of shot placement at any point in my civilian existence, I will be sure to contact you immediately. Perhaps you could be a little less abrasive and a little more focussed on the debate at hand. This isn't about shot placment it is about finding a portion of tissue that can be used to produce the most consistent results possible, such as consistency can be mentioned with regards to live tissues. I certainly wouldn't expect objections at this stage of the debate about shot placement in the hogs for the purpose of testing...unless you are now stipulating that these bullets can only be tested in the thorax and cranium?

@ The Reaper

I cannot get the internal attachments to work, they work for me on other sites, must be a config problem on my side.

That is indeed a large tinned corned beef into which I inserted by hand various projectiles that had been fired previously into a water tank at a ballistics lab in SA. Here is the plain radiograph (just a section):

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...aphLateral.jpg

And here is a CT slice that I viewed right here on my home PC from the hospital DICOM CD. There is viewing software on the CD that works with any PC, that is the standard in distributed cross-sectional imaging these days:

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...comSliceCT.jpg

The only additions are the black annotations.

Nice radiology work.

TR

There is a fine line between a lively discussion and being a smart ass here. That line tends to shift depending on whom the 2nd party in the discussion is when it comes to guests. It is hard to see, so let me help you; you are standing right on top of it.

The TS is not abrasive, that is simply a collateral benefit of the steel from which he was forged - and one of his most endearing characteristics.

One of the reasons that I don't particularly care for gelatin as a medium is that I don't shoot people in the thigh, that is the point the TS is making. I agree that your idea would be interesting to see and if gelatin and thigh is a closest match; for the cost of a box of ammo, well worth doing as part of any test.

I personally would be much more interested in seeing the results of a test with penetration of the ethmoid and zygomatic bones, followed by cornea, pupil, vitreous and lens, followed by the frontal, temporal and occipital lobes.

Or the results of thoracic shot placement on internal organs.

Human, not sus scrofa

@ NDD

I always start a conversation in a civil, professional manner. If someone chooses to be condescending or abrasive then he will get the same back from me. If you call that being a smartass, well then TS made me a smartass. I am not some kid that has been left on TS's front lawn for him to baby sit, I am a professional and I put great courtesy and effort into these posts. If you don't like how I responded to him, that's tough doodoo. He should have addressed me on equal terms in the first instance.

Well by the same token, I am not a smartass, that is just collateral benefit of my natural tendency to be endearing in turn.

I don't follow you there. As far as I can tell, neither the TS nor I have made any such link between thigh tissue and gelatin for the purposes of these tests.

If there was ever one part of the body that would produce the most variation in shot to shot terminal trajectories, it is the facial bones. It is quite common to find angled trajectories because of facial bone deflection. I have many cases in my research that illustrate this, in fact one of them involves a trajectory that started at the mandibular head, suffered an inferior trajectory change to the lung apex, passed through the diaphragm and lodged in the liver. A gunshot face and head is of no value in establishing a baseline or a control for the documentation of a projectile's performance.
As an aside, because I see 'Doc' in your title, how many shots have you ever seen that involve the zygoma, ethmoid bone, eye and occipital lobe? I'm curious because in my experience I have only ever seen one fractured zygoma, and in that case the bullet fractured the temporal bone too but nothing else. The trajectory that you suggest above is impossible with a standard projectile, as it does a loop and a 90 degree trajectory change.
Okay here is an actual case from file, where a guy sustained a gunshot in the region of the glabella (between the eyes, above the bridge of the nose). He actually sustained no brain injury because the bullet was deflected by the bones of the left maxillary sinus. The bullet was deflected inferiorly and broke several of the victims teeth. The red arrow points to blood and daughter projectile fragments lodged in the maxillary sinus on the left.
The green trajectory is your proposed interesting test trajectory. I've plotted it as generously as possible, but as you can see it is a highly unlikely trajectory. Note that the trajectory would have to have a superior then inferior angle in the region of the temporal lobe, in order for it to work.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...b/CTFacial.jpg

All well and good, the difference is you are a guest here and he isn't. You want to make the rules, start your own discussion forum and when I come to visit as a guest, I will either follow them or you can call me on it. Or ban me.
Perhaps I misunderstood. I read somewhere that gelatin resistance most closely matched thigh tissue resistance. If that is not the case I am mistaken - it happens.
When I shoot people in the face, my objective is not to establish a baseline for the documentation of a projectile's performance. I would just like to see the results as that is usually where I place my shots.
Difficult with one. Not two. I never shoot just one.

I am not a ballistics expert. I simply stated the test I would like to see according to the shot placement I teach my Little People to use. I realize I probably won't get to see it.

I have the actual x-ray films and will make digital photos tomorrow and will post them.

ss

BTW, I have also stated that thigh shots are a true minority and that the basis of gel being a simulated shot to the thigh is again inaccurate as we have discussed. There is no homogeneous part of the body: no where is it devoid of skin, suncutaneous tissue, fascia, and bone. My outside guess is that less than 2% of all extremity wounds are along the long axis of the thigh...not many people shot lying down. Just a fact of real world shootings.

Odd Job:

You are a guest here, seem to be an educated individual, and I am trying to treat you as such.

At the same time, this is a board for Special Forces personnel. I do not believe that you have passed that test. Till then, you are a guest here.

Team Sergeant is a retired SF soldier and is one of the founders of this board. As such, he has considerable lattitude in what he can say here. There has been no name calling, picture posting, personal attacks, or particular rudeness here since early in the thread. He made an observation and a simple answer as to why the thigh would be the prefered tissue area to impact would have been sufficient. His wife is an experienced trauma surgeon at a major metropolitan medical center and can translate for him if necessary.

I would avoid getting into a pissing contest with him, as I am finding the discussion stimulating and it will be more difficult if you are not here to post, but you do as you see fit.

NDD is a former teammate of mine, a Special Forces medical sergeant, a combat veteran, and is currently employed as a contractor in what has been called one of the most dangerous places on Earth. He knows things. Trust me.

TR

If what I wrote offends your delicate sensibilities I suggest you return to your crowd of tacticalchildren.com forums for a group hug.

We have Ivy League professors, attorneys, physicians, dentists, Sergeant Majors, Generals, etc and we get along just fine.

Grow a thicker skin or leave.

Mention me one more time and you will be a memory.

Team Sergeant

Odd Job, I would be happy to take that shot for you. I will do my best to locate historical hog data which approximates the bullet impact trajectory you illustrate below, however the end results will not very much from what can be seen below from the performance of the Le Mas 45acp Armor Piercing CQB bullet with the slight variation that live hog skull impacts often fully displace both eyeballs to the limits of remaining connective tissues.

@ The Reaper and TS

I always start a discussion in a gentlemanly and civil manner. It doesn't matter where I am, that is the way I conduct myself. I didn't ask anybody here for his background, and nobody here knows mine. What I have done in SA and what you have done on the battlefield has got nothing to do with how you deport yourself on a public internet forum. If one of you signs up on a radiology forum that I frequent, he gets the same respect as any other member, I don't tell him that because I am a long standing member I can be condescending and address him however I like. He arrives there with the respect that is due to him, and he retains it until proven otherwise.

Now let me make this quite clear. If I was actually serving in one of your units as a junior, or if I was in a boarding school then I would be subject to this discrepency in how I am treated. But I am not, am I? This is a forum, gentlemen, an internet forum: I am here in London and you have absolutely no say in what I do in life. I have expertise and you have expertise. We have different expertise and we are not each other's masters. How you treat me is how I will treat you.
If you don't like it, tough.