From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Sun Aug 25 2002 - 15:36:49 PDT
Hi Dave,
I agree that this electric armor, if it works correctly, isn't a total
solution. However, note that most of the possible ways to overcome it
are only used by... us and NATO :-) So if the bad guys don't have 'em,
then they can't overcome the armor.
From my conversations with contemporary tankers, they feel that their
most likely end would come in a built up area in the form of a 12 year
old armed with a $10 RPG rocket. If this armor can neutralize such a
threat, a rather significant threat will have been removed. Remember
that more and more the thinking is that the next big conflict will
involve more than just open desert and some rock outcroppings. And if
Bush has it his way, that next conflict could be just around the corner.
The key to survivability is having good all around defensive and
offensive capabilities. It has been know for a long time that in built
up areas our armor (light and heavy) is potentially vulnerable. And as
we move towards a lighter more mobile armored force, that vulnerability
could use a counter measure besides having a ton of infantry acting as a
shield. Especially because they are going to have their hands full with
their own set of problems.
Steve
>Hi, List
>Things to try on a tank with a long extension cord or big generator trailer
>in tow.
>30-millimeter gatlling guns with DU (depleted uranium) ammunition delivered
>by the A-10 Warthog I think with a 1000 rounds in a steady stream some
>should penetrate. 1000lb laser-guided bombs, Maverick, Hellfire missiles,
>30mm Rarden Cannon, Enflilaid shots from ATGW, large DU anti-tank mines get
>them in the soft belly, large camouflaged pits of gasoline or even Hades
>from a C-130 Mike. Or maybe a couple of Marines with a pole switching Plasma
>Magnet pulse gun (Kentucky fried chicken) and cigars for afterwards. There
>is always a way a buttoned up tank can be taken out. In WW2 metal plates
>placed across the road almost always got the top open for a what the hell is
>this peek and an ambush with grenades tossed down the dead commanders back
>side drove what was left of the Jerry's out of there big tigers in hurry
>although this kind of ambush took lots of casualties from infantry marching
>with the tank and only worked in close in areas.
>Electrical Armour is a nice idea but the best way to protect a tank is still
>by having the best trained crews with the best built equipment
>with a shit load of tank killers both fixed wing and rotor flying cover in
>dominated airspace because on today's battle field the tank is a movable
>piece of artillery and of course if you had 40 Abrams dropping DU
>penetrating rounds on your position the psychological effect would probably
>get you to pull the plug and run like hell. As a proud American I think our
>crews would say bring it on and defeat the Armour and the best way to defeat
>a tank is still with another tank.
>If nothing else works there is always a big as hell bang followed by a large
>pulse of EM which could be delivered by an American M1A1 tank and crew
>protected by thick depleted uranium Armour.
>Here is one way to kill a tank:
>http://www.aladdinsoft.com/im/aero/RA10_021.JPG
>
>
>
>Dave
>Open for flame as usual 7x24x365
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ryan Gill" <rmgill@mindspring.com>
>To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
>Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 9:35 AM
>Subject: Re: [MV] 'Electric armour' vaporizes anti-tank grenades and shell s
>
>
>At 12:31 PM -0700 8/24/02, Jarrett Redd wrote:
>>Or perhaps non-conductive warheads?
>
>The whole function of the shaped charge is a sheet of copper that is
>formed into a slug by the HE charge. If you use something that isn't
>conductive in the first place it might work, but then it also might
>not penetrate nearly as well.
>--
>--
>Ryan Gill rmgill@SPAMmindspring.com
>----------------------------------------------------------
> | | | -==----
> | O--=- | | /_8[*]°_\
> |_/|o|_\_| | _________ | /_[===]_\
> / 00DA61 \ |/---------\| __/ \---
> _w/|=_[__]_= \w_ // [_] o[]\\ _oO_\ /_O|_
> |: O(4) == O :| _Oo\=======/_O_ |____\ /____|
> |---\________/---| [__O_______W__] |x||_\ /_||x|
> |s|\ /|s| |s|/BSV 575\|s| |x|-\| |/-|x|
> |s|=\______/=|s| |s|=|_____|=|s| |x|--|_____|--|x|
> |s| |s| |s| |s| |x| |x|
>'60 Daimler Ferret '42 Daimler Dingo '42 Humber MkIV (1/3)
>----------------------------------------------------------
>
>=Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list=
>To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
>
>===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 13:31:45 PDT
