Another angle:

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    114 hours ago

    Speed matters more than mass when calculating kinetic energy. A 767 is much, much faster than a B-25.

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 hours ago

      While you’re right, the MTOW of a B-26 is around 17 tons, the 767 is 150-200 tons.

      So there is a factor of around 10 between them, so if the 767 flies 3 times as fast - which it doesn’t, the B-26 cruises at more than 0.35 Mach at close to sea level, and the 767 is not supersonic - that means that the factor from the speed can’t be more than about 3 squared, so 9.

      So the factors from the weight and the speed are roughly equal IMO.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
      link
      English
      113 hours ago

      Speed matters more than mass when calculating kinetic energy.

      Are you sure about that? An air rifle shooting supersonic aluminum pellets has considerably less kinetic energy than a .22 LR bullet, because of the weight of the bullet. Some air rifles actually shoot their projectile faster than a .22, but they have like 10x less energy upon impact.

      • @evidences
        link
        English
        2
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        I’m no mathlete but looking up the formula for kinetic energy it’s K.E. = 1/2 m v^2 so I’m pretty sure velocity is going to have exponentially greater effect on kinetic energy than mass.

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
          link
          English
          212 hours ago

          I guess it’s because of the huge difference in weight that we see such a difference in kinetic energy from pellet guns, even though velocity has an exponential impact on the energy. A standard pellet weighs under 14 grains, and a .22 LR bullet weighs 40 grains. Thanks for sharing the formula though. I didn’t realize how huge of a contribution velocity makes for kinetic energy, and I’ll definitely look for a faster rifle whenever I upgrade my air rifle.