From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 94 19:00:32 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Nuclear Weapons Material
In-Reply-To: <199408260047.TAA20303@zoom.bga.com>
Message-ID: <9408260200.AA05702@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jim choate says:
> > There is some confusion in terminology here.  The brass case is indeed
> > discarded when the round is fired.  Byt 'casing' he means the exterior of
> > the warhead.  The word 'round' is used for both the warhead+gunpowder+brass
> > and then for the warhead itself.  Larger artillery pieces do not use a
> > brass shell case at all.  The round is loaded, and then the powder is
> > rammed in after it.
> >
> That is called the 'jacket' in all the years I have handled weapons that is
> the only correct term for it. The casing is where the powder goes.

Correct -- the Illustrated Encyclopedia of Ammunition fully agrees
with you on this point.

> > > I can find no reference any U-core round being HE or otherwise
> > > carrying a charge. In all cases that I am aware of and can find
> > > reference to it is simply a KE attack on the target where the by
> > > products of the impact bounce around inside the target grinding
> > > up whatever is in there.
> > 
> > I believe that this is true, except that the 'products of the impact' are
> > drops of metal and what they do is worse than grinding something up.
> > 
> 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. 

Correct, in the case of kinetic energy weapons -- shaped charge
weapons end up squirting a jet of molten metal through the armor.
There may be a misunderstanding about what is being discussed here.

However, might I suggest that this has gotten VERY far afield of
cryptography?

.pm