I think hollowpoint glans wouldn't work like HP bullets because they travel much slower, to expand like a HP bullet traveling at 300m\s.As for a hollowpoint slingstones...well it might "expand" to pieces in a hard impact.

I dont know much about my bullets, but I thought one of the key points of glandes where that they were a smaller point. This gave them greater pressure per surface area and helped them penetrate into the body like an arrow instead of blunt impact. I think to make a more blunt object (like a stone) pentrate the skin would take alot more power, more than we can typically throw, and so blunt doesnt sound like it would work as well.
Ofcourse you could always design a glande that is blunt so as to deliver a blunt impact (incase you are aiming at armoured targets) but still want the increased flying capabilities of the glandes.

Nemo

Hollowpoint bullets work because they mushroom or fragment with impact making a hug channel, but a glans just doesn't have to necessary velocity. It would collapse and deflect itself preventing much penetration. Now if you want to get into wadcutters and jacketed ammo... this can get pretty awesome.

Bullets have problems with over penetration so HP's make sense, glandes under penetrate so I would go with something like Bill mentioned or maybe all steel, needle pointed glandes.

I've often thought a glande with mechanical broad heads on each side would kill just about anything out there and have great aerodynamics but that is getting a bit complicated for such a simple weapon...

Impressive. A 3 oz. glande going 45m/s would have 63 ft/lbs. With the penetration of razor sharp broad heads that would be enough to drop pretty much any animal on earth.

Morphy wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2010 at 9:39pm:


I agree on both counts. The reason for hollow point firearm ammunition is to make as sure as possible that all of the bullet's kinetic energy is imparted to the target. Any momentum the bullet possesses after it goes through its target is wasted energy that could have been used to do trauma to tissue (the goal, when you're shooting a living thing, after all).

Since I'm not aware of sling ammunition having any tendency to go through-and-through the target, I don't suppose that there's any need to design sling ammo that expands. That would be a superfluous characteristic, and indeed would stand the greatest chance of actually harming the projectile's ballistics.

Thunder Chief wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2010 at 3:29am:


It's not unsportsmanlike, I realize there is such a thing as theoretical interest. The problem is that things get wildly exagerrated, even supposedly serious shows make nonsensical claims like, "3 kilonewtons, enough force to crush a concrete block", and soon the banning brigade gets out because, "we simpy can't allow young kids to be out with weapons that are as deadly as a .45cal." Absolute rubbish! A sling is a sling, not a firearm. It may have been an effective weapon in times past but now it's just an interest, no more dangerous than golf or baseball.

Even more than that, undue emphasis on the sling's deadliness attracts the wrong kind of people. Sort of like people who take up martial arts supposedly for sporting interest but in reality just hoping that someone will pick a fight so they can "punch his his lights out". I know for most it's only a juvenile fantasy and won't really amount to anything serious but still not good. That sort of glamourization of violence is all through our culture. Not something we should be encouraging.