[sci.military] reactive_armor

nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (William M. Aldo) (01/17/90)

From: nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (William M. Aldo)
>From: terryr@ogicse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker)

[stuff deleted.....]

>........ sufficient explosive mass.  Incendiary rounds may generate
>sufficient heat, but I imagine it would be easy to use explosives that
>are relatively immune to that.  The major problem is range.  The
>current primary use of HEAT is by ATGMs.  You are asking those
>operators to close to MG range (effectively 1000m) to scrub off the
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>reactive armor.  This denies them .....
 
[.....remainder deleted]

Using APIT (Armor Piercing Incendiary Tracer) gives a very distinct
flash upon impact with a hard surface (usually metal); however, if
you are going to guide your rounds on to the target by following
your tracers -- beware, tracer burn-out is 900m (at least, it was 
10-15 years ago when I was tank commander).

     **NOTE: you don't have to use APIT to get the 'distinct' flash
     I mentioned -- API would work also.

I remember a story about one of our battalion's older tank comman-
ders (at that time) having problems with his 50-cal engagements
on a firing range. He never seemed to get many hits. When questioned
about how well he zeroed the weapon --- the problem emerged. We
zeroed our main gun (105-mm) at 1200m, our 50-cal at 800m, and the
coax (7.62mm) at 500m (I may have the two MGs reversed, I don't 
recall). This guy had zeroed (?) his 50-cal at 1200m, with
tracer burn-out at 900m .....;-)  so much for our being serious the
remainder of that day!!! A little bit of trivia, I guess.

--

Mark Aldo                                      (osu-cis)!dsacg1!waldo
>From the Internet:                                 waldo@dsac.dla.mil
Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center     | 614-238-5811
DSAC-ZTB, P.O.Box 1605, Columbus, Ohio (USA) 43216     | AV  850-5811
All views expressed are mine and not necessarily those of my employer.

jlk307@csc.anu.oz (01/23/90)

From: jlk307@csc.anu.oz
In article <13233@cbnews.ATT.COM>, nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (William M. Aldo) writes:
> From: nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (William M. Aldo)
>>From: terryr@ogicse.ogc.edu (Terry Rooker)
> 
>>........ sufficient explosive mass.  Incendiary rounds may generate
>>sufficient heat, but I imagine it would be easy to use explosives that
>>are relatively immune to that.  The major problem is range.  The
>>current primary use of HEAT is by ATGMs.  You are asking those
>>operators to close to MG range (effectively 1000m) to scrub off the
>>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>reactive armor.  This denies them .....
> 
> Using APIT (Armor Piercing Incendiary Tracer) gives a very distinct
> flash upon impact with a hard surface (usually metal); however, if
> you are going to guide your rounds on to the target by following
> your tracers -- beware, tracer burn-out is 900m (at least, it was 
> 10-15 years ago when I was tank commander).
 
If tracer burn out occurs at 900m (I was always taught 1100m in my days as a
machine gunner) how then did the British manage to successfully use .50 cal
ranging machine guns before the introduction of Lasers?  They used to state an
effective range for the Centurion and early Chieftain of 1500m for the
105mm/120mm respectively main gun.  I always remember seeing tanks (Centurion
Mk5 mainly and the new Leopard AS1 (1a3) ) firing on the Puckapunyal range here 
in Australia before leaving the army and they regularly practiced firing at
ranges in excess of 1200m  (in fact, come to think of it, I remember seeing one
 long distance shoot done on a bet between two Squadron commanders at 2000m).

What was also interesting was that crews with equivalent training on both the
Leopard and the Centurion tended to get a better first round dispersion with
the old .50 cal ranging MG rather than the Laser because of multiple
reflections from several outcroppings of quartz rock in the target area (which
gave false returns to the Laser system).  Which is why there was a lot of
lamentingover the final passing of the Centurions by the older tank crew
members (despite all their cursing when the ancient warhorse refused to work,
which was most of the time.  In fact one Squadron commander's vehicle spent
more time in workshops than out :-)  ).

Jonathan Kelley