Re: [DS] Gently -- Capacity, Points

Alan Brain wrote:

 >>>-->8--
 >>
 >>And this emoticon means...? <g>
 >
 >Snippage. As in scissors >8

OK <g>

 >>Oh, BTW - there are quite a few suspicions that the demonstration
shown
 >>on StrategyPage had been rigged... a fair amount of extra explosives
 >>dumped into the turret of the T-72 :-/ The explosion was rather more
 >>impressive than it should've been...
 >
 >The T-72 was "fully tactical". That means with a 100% fuel and 100%
ammo
 >load IIRC. Wouldn't surprise me if all shells were HEAT or HE rather
than
 >APFSDS-T.

If the amount of HE and propellant was equal to the full ammo load, they

appearently "forgot" to put said HE and propellant in their normal ammo 
casings.

The only way to get an explosion as massive as in that video is if all
the 
propellant and HE stored in the target (approx. 90 kg of HE and 300 kg
of 
propellant for a combat-loaded T-72) is ignited simultaneously... and
the 
only way to ignite all explosives inside a tank simultaneously with a
HEAT 
jet is to put all those explosives in one big exposed pile.

If the "combat load" had consisted of real, complete rounds the jet 
would've hit and ignited at best 1-2 rounds, which then would ignite
some 
more rounds etc. causing a considerably more drawn-out and far less 
intensive chain reaction than the one shown in the video - and throwing 
some half of the on-board ammo out of the tank unexploded. Together with

the turret, of course - the T-72 is K-killed either way, but I seriously

doubt that you'll get that impressive an explosion in real combat :-/

 >> Again correct. The Javelin rises *very* high above the aim point,
 >
 >You should see the movie on the strategy page, not just the stills.

If you're talking about
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/JavelinLiveFireVsT72.mpg ,
I've 
had it downloaded on my work computer since last summer :-/ I've also
seen 
some of Raytheon's other Javelin promotion videos (not sure if they're 
available on-line though; I saw them IRL at the EuroSatory 2000 defence 
industry expo), and played with one of their Javelin simulators :-/ So
yes, 
I have a fairly good idea of the Javelin's trajectory.

 >>However, the controversy in this thread is not whether the Javelin
flies
 >>high or how you aim it; it is whether the BILL2 etc. fly high enough
to
 >>group it with the Javelin for ADS purposes (my position) or if it
flies so
 >>low that the ADS should treat it like a side-attack missile (Ryan's
 >>position).
 >
 >Without knowing *why* they should be treated differently ( detection?
 >background?) I can't help.

I've discussed the "why" both in the post you're replying to here and in

earlier posts :-/

 >At a range of 100m a Bill-2 looks more like a TOW-1 than anything
else,

The difference between the BILL2 and TOW1 trajectories close to the 
intended target (which is where the ADS is most likely to attempt to
shoot 
it down) is 2-3 meters of altitude. Similar, though of course not 
identical, to the difference in height between a hull-down tank and a
fully 
exposed one: at 1-10 meters you'll (hopefully!) be able to hit the tank
no 
matter whether or not it is hull down, but the longer the range the
harder 
the hull-down tank is to hit compared to the fully exposed one :-/

 >it may well be lost in the background of trees, houses, hills etc.

Unless the background is moving towards the ADS at roughly the same
speed 
as the missile, losing the missile in the background clutter is... let's

call it "not all that likely" :-/

Regards,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."