Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!think!snorkelwacker!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: HEAT shell question and proposal.
Message-ID: <12882@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 8 Jan 90 05:11:13 GMT
References: <12756@cbnews.ATT.COM> <12820@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Computer Services, Australian National University
Lines: 20
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: bxr307@csc.anu.oz
	I am surprised that no one in the military is looking at the use of
HESH (H.E. Squash Head or HEP to the US people out there) as a counter to
reactive armour as used by the Soviets on their latest tanks.  I would have
thought that something like the 120mm HESH round used by the British Army in
their Chieftains and Challengers would have been the perfect solution.  It
would literally "blow off" the reactive armour boxes and leave large gaping
holes in their covering of the main armour plate as well as severely disabling
the vehicles crew (cuncussion), perhaps killing them (by the scabbing of
secondary projectiles off the inner armour) and destroying or damaging most of
the vehicles optical/optronic systems through the cuncussion.  I see the days
of the HEAT round are numbered by the development of reactive armour.  While
such things as top attack profiles for missiles will help for a time, eventually
they will also be defeated by simply coating the top of the target with
reactive armour boxes as well.  However if HESH is adopted for missile warheads
then the problems with reactive armour will be largely negated.

Brian Ross