From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Mon Aug 26 2002 - 09:02:15 PDT
Dave and all...
I just got a quick email back from a friend of mine who is very much "in
the know" about this stuff since he is involved with R&D, acquisition,
and deployment of US Army AT missile systems. The information about this
electronic armor was not news to him. He said it works as advertised
against the low tech, slow stuff (like an RPG for example), but doesn't
do squat against larger and faster AT missiles. The latter comes as no
surprise to me since from the little I have read it is clear that the
system was never designed to defeat such threats.
So again, this is a fairly specialized countermeasure. It is not
designed to be a "wonder shield" to defend the AFV from any and all
threats, but rather a specific and "low tech" threat (i.e. more likely to
be a problem vs. a high tech threat). Apparently it works against the
threat it was designed to counter and therefore we will likely be hearing
more about this technology in the future. Criticizing it for not being
able to cope with other threats is not a fair assessment of its possible
contribution to battlefield survivability and crew safety.
Steve
>Ok we are talking conventional armour not DU or other need to now stuff that
>might or might not be in use and anti tank launchers (RPG-7) and it is as
>advanced as throwing a manual switch to the inner plate if you should see a
>skinny with a rocket on the CRT.
>The plasma jet does penetrate the insulation of the second layer though and
>in all the info I have dug up there is no one saying if it is a one time
>only.
>I will read more later I have printed a couple of articles. The below was a
>British website with the street info of course...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 13:31:45 PDT