From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 0b4e443fd10a1cfc17f3acbd770d3b203a18031959499d603f7fb2a76b533ec6
Message ID: <9408260206.AA05720@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <199408260047.TAA20303@zoom.bga.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-08-26 02:06:33 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 25 Aug 94 19:06:33 PDT
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 94 19:06:33 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Nuclear Weapons Material
In-Reply-To: <199408260047.TAA20303@zoom.bga.com>
Message-ID: <9408260206.AA05720@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Jim choate says:
> The pieces in most cases are simply slivers of metal that breaks off the
> inside of the tank because of hyper-sonic shockwaves. They are not molten
> and do not in general cause a fire. Other than a lucky hit on a live
> round with the ammo door open there is little chance of starting a fire.
Actually, my last comment was premature -- I hadn't read what you said
carefully. If you meant to say that such things as discarding sabot
shots don't penetrate the armor directly, according to the Illustrated
Encyclopedia of Ammunition, non-shaped charge armor piercing
projectiles do indeed pierce the armor.
Incidently, I was wrong on one point -- there is a kind of shell
called a "piercing shell" designed to explode after penetration -- but
these are apparently not very successful with modern armor and are
rarely used.
Perry
PS again, this really should be terminated -- it doesn't belong in
cypherpunks.
Return to August 1994
Return to “pstemari@bismark.cbis.com (Paul J. Ste. Marie)”