Path: spln!rex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!gemini.tycho.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Approved: sci-military-moderated@retro.com Return-Path: nntp-bounce@supernews.net Delivery-Date: Sat Feb 23 11:44:23 2002 Delivery-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 11:44:23 -0800 for <sci-military-moderated@retro.com>; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 11:44:21 -0800 (PST) id QQmdmj21619 for <sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org>; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 19:26:28 GMT id 16ehoS-000EcM-00 for sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 19:26:28 +0000 for sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 19:26:27 GMT (envelope-from nntp-bounce@supernews.net) To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org From: Robb McLeod <rmcleod@islandnet.com> Newsgroups: sci.military.moderated Subject: Re: Effectiveness of HESH against modern armor Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 11:26:33 -0800 Organization: | Message-ID: <adqf7ugvr8gjr8dbr95ni1gubl3kg05kl9@4ax.com> References: <3c672d5.0202201603.64165060@posting.google.com> <da4a16f.0202220937.768221f1@posting.google.com> <t7ad7uo8q0i30bg785n1itb3ln6gsrue7e@4ax.com> <de5bf54f.0202222130.50cc4d86@posting.google.com> <a57g73$s5u$1@gw.retro.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Content-Length: 2775 Lines: 57 NNTP-Posting-Host: 815c700b.newsreader.tycho.net X-Trace: 1014493948 gemini.tycho.net 79557 205.179.181.194 X-Complaints-To: abuse@tycho.net Xref: spln sci.military.moderated:43029 On 22 Feb 2002 23:26:27 -0800, gherbert@gw.retro.com (George William Herbert) wrote: >Paul Lakowski <psl@interchange.ubc.ca> wrote: >>>[Chobham] >>Yes no one knows for sure ....but:-) >> >>I have scores of open source research papers from APG, Rafeal >>[israel], DERA [chobham facility], EMI and many more locations >>[Including China and Korea and Russia] that all study long rod impact >>of modern armor .....And guess what , the're modern armor is all the >>same, and all the projectiles are the same...so unless theres some >>massive multi cultural conspiricy going on around the world , I >>suggest these are the real thing. This is even more likely ,when one >>realizes that each of these many many test shot cost $10,000 dollars >>and a single data point cost > $100,000 to generate. Again if these >>are not 'real targets' then alot of governments around the world are >>wasting millions upon billions of reseach dollars on a cleverly >>concocked conspiricy. > >Or, there's a Secret Ingredient (tm) to the overall design which >can be adequately analyzed by all the above but is not at all >obvious from the testing itself. > >>I doubt the M-1 or LEO-2 front turret contains any spaced >>plates...more likely there sandwich construction.Infact LEO-2 front >>turret cavity has been photoed and has no spacers at all [normally >>associated with spaced armor]. > >Have you run mass density equations on it? The numbers don't work >out unless there are some low density materials involved. > >The spacers may look perfectly solid. They might in fact be >perfectly solid, until hit by impact level forces... I don't think Paul is confusing the packaging with the cotents, as you seem to be implying. Moreso that these vehicles are not using variable-angle spaced steel plates like in the NATO triple heavy, but the same style stratified ceramic-air/polymer/whatever arrangement. We are talking about HESH here, right? HESH can't deal with spaced steel plates well. In contrast, a HESH scab coming from the exterior steel plate could pulverize a Western ceramic arrangment pretty effectively so that a follow-on APFSDS round could penetrate. Most modern MBTs aren't going to suffer first-round penetrator by similarly advanced long rod penetrators so the shear damage that HESH can inflict on the structure is fairly attractive. Certainly, HESH must have the best chance of any ammunition for inflicting a firepower or mobilty kill without a penetration. It could deform the turret armour so that the turret couldn't traverse or the gun change elevation. Similarly a track hit could cause a lot of damage. -- Robb McLeod (rmcleod@islandnet.com) A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk I have a work station...