From: J. Forster (jfor@quik.com)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 22:27:36 PDT
Employee@MilVeh.com wrote:
> When the warhead fires its jet of molten copper, it
> penetrates both the outer plate and the insulation of
> the inner plate. This makes a connection and thousands
> of amps of electricity vaporises most of the molten
> copper. The rest of the copper is dispersed harmlessly
> against the vehicle's hull.
What I calculated in my post was the power required to vaporize 25 grams of
either lead or copper per second.
> But despite the high charge, the electrical load on
> the battery is no more than that caused by starting
> the engine on a cold morning.
A 12 volt 100 Amp-Hour battery has stored energy of 12 x 100 x 60 x 60 =
4,320,000 watt-seconds (joules) . That's enough to vaporize about 34 bullets, if
fully depleted. An RPG would require a lot more energy per shot.
> In a recent demonstration of the electric armour for
> senior Army officers, an APC protected by the new
> British system survived repeated attacks by
> rocket-propelled grenades that would normally have
> destroyed it several times over.
>
> Many of the grenades were fired from point-blank range
> but the only damage to the APC was cosmetic. The
> vehicle was driven away under its own power.
Is point blank the most lethal range?
> Prof John Brown, of the Defence Science and Technology
> Laboratory, which developed the Pulsed Power System at
> its R&D site at Fort Halstead, Kent, said it was
> attracting a lot of interest from both the MoD and the
> Pentagon.
>
> With the easy availability of RPG-7 rocket launchers
> "it only takes one individual on, say, a rooftop in a
> village to cause major damage or destroy passing
> armoured vehicles", he said.
>
> But the use of electric armour, which will protect
> against all shaped-charge warheads including artillery
> and tank shells, would reduce the threat to zero.
It depends on the exactly how the shaped charge is constructed and the mass of
metal projected into the armor. It is possible that the electrical discharge
could create a countering shock wave, like reactive armor. I doubt the system
is anything like as simple, small, effective, and low power as represented.
I am reminded of stories of early tests of laser weapons against drones, where
the drone's fuel tanks were almost empty, so they were basically flying bombs
and really went poof !!. It fooled the congressmen.
-John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:23:34 PDT