Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!pschmidt@bbn.com
From: pschmidt@bbn.com (Peter H. Schmidt)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Ship armor
Summary: How 'bout reactive armor for ships?
Message-ID: <5987@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 27 Apr 89 03:10:59 GMT
References: <5929@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 22
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: pschmidt@bbn.com (Peter H. Schmidt)

How about reactive armor for ships?  Advantages: light, relatively inexpensive
(compared to re-armoring with steel), removable, and upgradable (easy to
install a new generation of armor to defeat a new missile).

Disadvantages, anyone?

--Peter




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter H. Schmidt	   | All sweeping generalizations are invalid.
BBN Advanced Computers Inc.| The one intolerable is intolerance.
10 Fawcett St.		   | Loving thy neighbor usually isn't worth the 
Cambridge, MA 02238	   | 	effort.
(617) 873-4311		   | (I speak only for myself.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~