Subject:
|
Re: Theoretical Question: Missile Design
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 13:18:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
485 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, David Laswell wrote:
| |
Also, long skinny objects will be able to physically
penetrate deeper into any armor than a large fat object will, which is why M1
Abrams tank uses depleted uranium discarding sabots, which can punch through
the armor of pretty much any tank out there. In the case of a detonation
device, being able to impale the exterior armor before detonation means that
you can punch through the remaining armor much easier. Having a shaped
charge that explodes forward will also concentrate the blast on the gaping
weak point that you just created.
|
Which is why later model T-80’s employed re-active armor to explode on contact
and redirect the shaped charge prior to detonation. I believe the Challenger
and Leopard tanks use this mechanism as well...
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Theoretical Question: Missile Design
|
| (...) Okay, so try this on for size: impact detonation trigger. You want it to be in the center of the missile, and you want it to be able to contact at oblique angles. The easiest way to do that is to have it mounted to the end of a long cone. (...) (21 years ago, 7-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
