<![CDATA[
Path:
spln!rex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!nntp1.phx1.gblx.net!nntp.gblx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newspeer.monmouth.com!priapus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!gemini.tycho.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Approved:
sci-military-moderated@retro.com
Return-Path: news@google.com
Delivery-Date: Tue Feb 26 05:55:32 2002
Delivery-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:55:31 -0800
for <sci-military-moderated@retro.com>; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:55:30 -0800 (PST)
for <sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org>;
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:37:34 -0800 (PST)
for <sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org>;
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:37:33 -0800
for <sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org>;
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:37:33 -0800
for sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 05:37:33 -0800
To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org
From: Tony.Williams@quarry.nildram.co.uk (Tony Williams)
Newsgroups: sci.military.moderated
Subject: Re: 40 mm HEDP against ERA
Date: 26 Feb 2002 05:37:33 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <e64faab.0202260537.2e9d1d39@posting.google.com>
References:
<3c6fa1e7_1@news.estpak.ee> <3C704320.9AC104FA@pp.inet.fi>
<Xns91B9BCE44C67Ejuergennieveler@nieveler-43544.user.cis.dfn.de>
<3C757C66.CE1483FF@pp.inet.fi> <91BCD7A32jyanikkuanet@204.117.192.21>
<3C78004C.88CA085B@pp.inet.fi>
<I1Vd8.15714$H43.1933668@news11-gui.server.ntli.net>
<M%Ae8.6116$Lc.3506121@typhoon.kc.rr.com>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.170.39.36
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Feb 2002 13:37:33 GMT
Content-Length: 1059
Lines: 24
NNTP-Posting-Host: 45894941.newsreader.tycho.net
X-Trace: 1014800285 gemini.tycho.net 79555 205.179.181.194
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tycho.net
Xref: spln sci.military.moderated:43154
"Tony Stelmack" <tstelmack@mmcable.com> wrote in message
news:<M%Ae8.6116$Lc.3506121@typhoon.kc.rr.com>...
> "John Scott" <nospam@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:I1Vd8.15714$H43.1933668@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...
> > Except in a dire emergency (like it had already seen me) I wouldn't want
> to
> > annoy an MBT by firing 40mm at it, even for the dubious pleasure of
> setting
> > off the ERA.
> >
> This implies that the 30mm cannon on the A10 would be ineffective against an
> MBT. I believe I have read to the contrary. Or is it only effective
> because it is hitting (usually) the thinner skinned top?
Yes. It can only penetrate around 75mm at normal battle ranges, so it
would scarcely scratch the frontal armour.
Tony Williams
Author: "Rapid Fire: The development of automatic cannon, heavy
machine
guns and their ammunition for armies, navies and air forces"
Details on my military gun and ammunition website:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/
]]>