Path:
spln!rex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!nntp.abs.net!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: Sun Dec 09 22:52:20 2001
Delivery-Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 22:52:20 -0800
for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:52:18 -0800 (PST)
id 16DK2F-0005lK-00
for sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:35:31 +0100
for ;
Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:35:30 -0800
for ;
Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:35:30 -0800
for sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:35:30 -0800
To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org
From: psl@interchange.ubc.ca (Paul Lakowski)
Newsgroups: sci.military.moderated
Subject: Re: Advanced tank main guns
Date: 9 Dec 2001 22:35:29 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID:
References:
<5dcb47db.0111130437.2f46f7dc@posting.google.com> <3BF20796.FEDA5A6A@yahoo.com>
<9upc92$drt$1@news.panix.com>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.23.94.43
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Dec 2001 06:35:29 GMT
Content-Length: 1292
Lines: 27
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4d4adb7c.newsreader.tycho.net
X-Trace: 1008038563 gemini.tycho.net 36736 205.179.181.194
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tycho.net
Xref: spln sci.military.moderated:40817
Brian Trosko wrote in message
news:<9upc92$drt$1@news.panix.com>...
> Juerg Hoelzle wrote:
> > 2000 m/s and more. The optimum velocity for a system (means energy
> > imput)is around 1600 to 1800 m/s. It is more effective to make the
> > penetrator longer than faster.
>
> This does not follow. If, as you suggest, "energy input" is what you're
> trying to maximize, making the projectile a bit faster is considerably
> more effective than making it longer.
I'm afraid this is incorrect. As the striking velocity of the
penetrator increases above ~ 1.8km/s the efficence starts to drop off
as the value moves 'asymetotically' towards the Hydro dynamic limit
value for that penetrator material Vs the armor material. Thus each
incremental velocity increase reaps lesser benifits.
Increasing the rod length by changing the lenght to depth can improve
penetration until this reached about 35-40:1 at which point theirs
effectively little increase in penetration.
Also with current propellant tech it takes a dramatic drop in the
projectile mass to increase the MV substantially, so you end up
robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Also it appears that higher velocity penetrators are more vulnerable
to damgage from spaced and flyer plate arrangements.