- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: This is how the Sabot round turns enemies into a fine mist
Posted on 5/4/16 at 1:14 pm to TigerstuckinMS
Posted on 5/4/16 at 1:14 pm to TigerstuckinMS
quote:Holy shite!!
North of 5000 ft/sec
Posted on 5/4/16 at 1:32 pm to TJGator1215
quote:a vast majority of your everyday technology was created during or for wartime.
The technology created to kill people is absurd.
This post was edited on 5/4/16 at 1:33 pm
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:07 pm to FelicianaTigerfan
quote:
And how much does that uranium dart cost?
quote:
Normal uranium is not as hard as tungsten. But a classified technique allows it to be hardened. This is believed to involve alloying it with titanium and cooling it so that it forms a single large metallic crystal rather than a chaotic mass of tiny crystals. This structure is very strong and produces an improvement similar to the difference between a brittle pencil lead and a carbon-fibre tennis racquet. The final advantage of uranium is cost. Machined tungsten is expensive, but governments supply DU more or less free.
They apparently will be replaced by the real expensive stuff, "brilliant munitions."
quote:
It is likely that DU will be phased out eventually, not for health reasons but for military ones. It was introduced to solve the problem of breaking through heavy armour. But tank armour is concentrated mainly at the front, facing the main threat; it is thinner on the sides, and thinner still on top. If the entire vehicle were clad in thick armour it would be too heavy to move. Instead of brute force, the clever approach would be to attack the weakest point.
After decades of development a new generation of anti-armour weapons is being fielded. These "brilliant" weapons find their own targets, unlike mere smart bombs, which have to be directed. One example is Sadarm (Seek And Destroy Armour). It is fired like a normal artillery shell into the target area, where it ejects two submunitions that descend by parachute. As they fall, Sadarm scans the ground with radar and infrared sensors. Targets are identified, and the most important are selected - a Scud launcher in preference to a tank, a tank rather than a truck.
Sadarm fires a slug of molten metal at the selected target. The slug takes on an aerodynamic shape as it travels through the air, ideal for piercing armour. Though less powerful than a DU shell, it can break through the top armour of any tank.
Engagements between tanks are fought face-to-face, at a maximum distance of about 4km. Sadarm can be lobbed at an enemy 20km away. Missiles carrying brilliant munitions can range out to 100km or more.
Sadarm and other brilliant weapons use tantalum, an exotic heavy metal for which little data is available. But it appears to be highly toxic, especially when vaporised. We will probably discover its full effects only after the next hi-tech war.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:26 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
And how much does that uranium dart weigh?
Around 20 lbs, give or take, according to Wikipedia... moving at around 3500 mph.
It's a massive amount of kinetic energy. 4000 lb car moving at 240 mph kinds of massive, and when it hits, it's all concentrated in a spot about an inch in diameter.
It does Very Bad Things(tm) to whatever it hits, and all because it's dense and has gone plaid.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:30 pm to TigerstuckinMS
I remember right after the First Gulf War there was a lot of talk about our exposure to depleted uranium and it possibly being connected to Gulf War Syndrome. It's been 25 years and (knock on wood) I'm doing fine.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:40 pm to Sparkplug#1
quote:
People should be killed softly.
with his song?
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:43 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
I remember right after the First Gulf War there was a lot of talk about our exposure to depleted uranium and it possibly being connected to Gulf War Syndrome. It's been 25 years and (knock on wood) I'm doing fine.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:44 pm to carnuba
quote:
People should be killed softly
Well being killed by a sabot round is about the best way to go. It happens so fast you're turned to pink mist before you know what's happened. One second you're there, the next second you've been obliterated.
This post was edited on 5/4/16 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 5/4/16 at 2:52 pm to CadesCove
quote:
Sadarm and other brilliant weapons use tantalum, an exotic heavy metal for which little data is available. But it appears to be highly toxic, especially when vaporised. We will probably discover its full effects only after the next hi-tech war.
You see, this is why you can't believe every thing you are told.
Nearly every house in America has a product with tantalum.
It is used for surgical implants as well.
Exotic metal indeed.
This post was edited on 5/4/16 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:00 pm to CadesCove
quote:My guess is that it would be easy to develop countermeasures for this kind of weapon.
It is likely that DU will be phased out eventually, not for health reasons but for military ones. It was introduced to solve the problem of breaking through heavy armour. But tank armour is concentrated mainly at the front, facing the main threat; it is thinner on the sides, and thinner still on top. If the entire vehicle were clad in thick armour it would be too heavy to move. Instead of brute force, the clever approach would be to attack the weakest point.
After decades of development a new generation of anti-armour weapons is being fielded. These "brilliant" weapons find their own targets, unlike mere smart bombs, which have to be directed. One example is Sadarm (Seek And Destroy Armour). It is fired like a normal artillery shell into the target area, where it ejects two submunitions that descend by parachute. As they fall, Sadarm scans the ground with radar and infrared sensors. Targets are identified, and the most important are selected - a Scud launcher in preference to a tank, a tank rather than a truck.
Sadarm fires a slug of molten metal at the selected target. The slug takes on an aerodynamic shape as it travels through the air, ideal for piercing armour. Though less powerful than a DU shell, it can break through the top armour of any tank.
Engagements between tanks are fought face-to-face, at a maximum distance of about 4km. Sadarm can be lobbed at an enemy 20km away. Missiles carrying brilliant munitions can range out to 100km or more.
Sadarm and other brilliant weapons use tantalum, an exotic heavy metal for which little data is available. But it appears to be highly toxic, especially when vaporised. We will probably discover its full effects only after the next hi-tech war.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:03 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
My guess is that it would be easy to develop countermeasures for this kind of weapon.
What would you propose?
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:06 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
My guess is that it would be easy to develop countermeasures for this kind of weapon
Tanks have been on the battlefield for 100 years now. In that time it's been a never ending process of developing new ways to kill them and new ways to keep them from being killed.
This post was edited on 5/4/16 at 3:06 pm
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:19 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:The pyrophoric effects of the DU create white hot molten metal that sprays through the interior of the tank. It can cause stowed rounds to cook off as well as damaging unshielded/hardened components of the tank.
As the round penetrates the tank, the outer layer of the round and the armor where it hits both become molten and shoot inward like a jet. There is some shrapnel created on the outer edges of the hole. We called this "spalling".
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:32 pm to CadesCove
Lasers would be difficult to stop.
What is the difference in the sabot round and the projectile from a rail gun?
What is the difference in the sabot round and the projectile from a rail gun?
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:43 pm to StarkRebel
quote:
We should introduce this device to ISIS.
We would have to give them tanks first.
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:44 pm to Darth_Vader
How many problems that could solve?
"Gunner, sabot, idiot."
"Up!"
"Identified!"
"Fire!"
"On the way!"
"Gunner, sabot, idiot."
"Up!"
"Identified!"
"Fire!"
"On the way!"
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:49 pm to Ace Midnight
Very good. Course you left out "driver move out, gunner take over". But that's only if you're in a defensive position though. 
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:52 pm to Darth_Vader
Didn't I tell you, once, that I read Team Yankee right before I enlisted? Armor was the only combat arms branch on my preference sheet when I got commissioned (I had a GRFD, so that was just a formality, but still).
Posted on 5/4/16 at 3:59 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Didn't I tell you, once, that I read Team Yankee right before I enlisted?
Great book. I read Red Storm Rising on my way to Germany in 88. Figured that would get me ready since at that time we thought it was a matter of when and not if WWIII happened.
quote:
Armor was the only combat arms branch on my preference sheet when I got commissioned (I had a GRFD, so that was just a formality, but still).
I don't know how it is now, but I was told back in my day Armor was the combat arms branch to be in for officers who wanted to make general. I was enlisted myself so that may have just been talk.
This post was edited on 5/4/16 at 4:01 pm
Popular
Back to top


0









