Tank graveyard

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by CDAT

You may want to look a bit more into this, in a nut shell you are right, however the angle of the cone and the stand off must be just right or it will not work well, maybe even less effective (depending on how off they are) than just basic HE. Getting the timing right so that when the round goes off by the time the jet is formed it is at the correct distance is complicated.

It isn't.........it is the opposite of the depth of the cone. This is why cratering charges and limpet mines have legs.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

It isn't.........it is the opposite of the depth of the cone. This is why cratering charges and limpet mines have legs.

Well I am done trying to help you, as you know more then those of us who this is what we did. Long live the Light Infantry they can do more than anyone else.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Well I am done trying to help you, as you know more then those of us who this is what we did. Long live the Light Infantry they can do more than anyone else.

My secondary MOS in 11B, my primary is 95B..... Which I think became 31B in the force restructure. Which means I had to learn to do more with even less.

No artillery, no Manpads, No mortars, AT4 and AT mines in the defense.

I got a truck and pistol though.

I support the Three, Follow Me!

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Well I am done trying to help you, as you know more then those of us who this is what we did. Long live the Light Infantry they can do more than anyone else.

I have a solution!

[robert.munsey]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

It isn't.........it is the opposite of the depth of the cone. This is why cratering charges and limpet mines have legs.

You idiot, it is not the distance outside the cone, it is the depth of the cone that has to be right. Along with the angle.
The road cratering charges are built a certain way and the legs are not part of the stand off. When was the last time you employed one? Get your facts straight.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by robert.munsey

You idiot, it is not the distance outside the cone, it is the depth of the cone that has to be right. Along with the angle.
The road cratering charges are built a certain way and the legs are not part of the stand off. When was the last time you employed one? Get your facts straight.

Didn't I just say that? Inverted and opposite....... If the cone is 6 inches deep and 30 degrees the focus point is opposite of this ........ 6 inches in front.

Oh.........that is exactly why the legs exist.......the stand off for the plasma jet from the shaped charge.

http://pl.b5z.net/i/u/6070324/i/Iner...ped_Charge.jpg

[robert.munsey]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Didn't I just say that? Inverted and opposite....... If the cone is 6 inches deep and 30 degrees the focus point is opposite of this ........ 6 inches in front.

Oh.........that is exactly why the legs exist.......the stand off for the plasma jet from the shaped charge.

They existed for the old M3 not the current cratering charges brother. The legs on the old M3 Cratering charge did not exist for stand off.
Check your facts, it is not for the plasma jet. Ask your C-IED trainers in your unit for the real facts on EFP warheads.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by robert.munsey

They existed for the old M3 not the current cratering charges brother. The legs on the old M3 Cratering charge did not exist for stand off.
Check your facts, it is not for the plasma jet. Ask your C-IED trainers in your unit for the real facts on EFP warheads.

When did Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFP)s, formerly called platter charges..... Become cratering charges?

EFPs are for attacking armor from the side by punching a slug through the armor not burning a hole in armor with a hot plasma jet.

So before you want to insult me........and tell me what is what.....

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

When did Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFP)s, formerly called platter charges..... Become cratering charges?

EFPs are for attacking armor from the side by punching a slug through the armor not burning a hole in armor with a hot plasma jet.

So before you want to insult me........and tell me what is what.....

actually you have been doing that quite enough on your own - lets dial it down a little shall we?

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Olefin

actually you have been doing that quite enough on your own - lets dial it down a little shall we?

No. I have stuck deliberately to the subject without the name calling. Stick to the subject.

Ok, the Branch jokes I will take responsibility for. Those are unspecific to the individual.

[Legbreaker]

What is it about this forum where anyone who disagrees with your point of view and actually shows some actual subject knowledge gets stomped on?
So many armchair warriors!!!

HEAT rounds can be made in small workshops, provided the maths is right. They are at the most basic just another form of shaped charge. The real issue is, as I said, getting the maths right to maximise effectiveness.

Hell, you don't even need a workshop for a shaped charge! I know because I've made them with my own hands out of scrap found around the barracks (nothing you could stick on an RPG though).

Tanks are vulnerable to any number of tactics and weapons. They are not now, in the past, or anytime in the foreseeable future particularly difficult to knock out by a determined opposition. That said, infantry (and I was one of them) are just so much red mist if caught out in the open - it's up to the unit commanders to be aware of their units limitations (of ALL types) and avoid putting them into suicidal situations.