Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: x35147d3@usma8.usma.edu (Bergman Charles CDT)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Anti-tank weapons
Message-ID: <1991Apr5.092103.8254@amd.com>
Date: 4 Apr 91 04:14:15 GMT
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Lines: 25
Approved: military@amd.com



From: x35147d3@usma8.usma.edu (Bergman Charles CDT)

IN reply to Ronald Sayer's question about anti-tank weapons.

     I know the TOW, TOW II, and Hellfire use shaped charged warheads.  It
seems to me that the missiles could not be effective with a kinetic energy
warhead.  There would be very little kinetic energy in these low velocity
missiles.  A sabot type warhead needs extremely high velocity to punch through
armor, ie. it needs to be fired from a conventional high-velocity barrel--a
tank!
     Additionally, the Apaches would be totally ineffective against other
targets unless it had some high explosive charged warhead in the Hellfire
missile, besides the 2.75 inch rockets. The Hellfire is laser designated and
has two in-line shaped charges to penetrate armor, but can be used against
bunkers and other hard targets.

Basically, you need to re-evaluate what a kinetic energy round is.  Unless you
had a missile that travels over a mile a second then no way.
You must have a charge on these missiles.

Charles K. Bergman
x35147d3@usma8.usma.edu
x35147d3@usma8-emh2.army.mil