Professional Soldiers ® - View Single Post - One misunderstood, the other; wish we had?

jbour13 · 08-05-2005, 14:51

QP's, Thanks for the corrections, I mis-interpereted the info. I'm not a munitions guy and read it as being a primary explosion designed to open the armor and a follow-on detonation to create the spalling to destroy the intended target. Just trying to understand, not trying to dig myself in. I see the bottom and would like to clarify my post. I'll limit myself to questions on the effects then.

I don't mind if you pick apart the post TR, I would actually enjoy the constructive criticism and know if what I'm reading is correct and how to best educate myself and others. It's essentially my job to understand the capabilities of these weapons systems. You're the ones that teach HN troops the right from wrong, and I'm just as ignorant to the capabilities. I just don't have the ability to decipher all of the complicated terminology that is going to affect how people move on the battlefield.

By private proof I should have said because it has pictures and instructions on the AT-4 telling you how to employ it (effectively with no training....probably not). Can you dispell the rumor that an RPG warhead is not as sensitive to bumping and detonation as some have led me to believe. I'd like to know since we (generalized troops) may come along them on the battlefield and have to move them. General rule should apply, don't touch if you don't know, but it'd be good info if the munition/weapon posed a continued threat to troops. Especially if you had to pick-up and move and didn't want it to recirculate back into enemy inventory.

And along the lines of Dep Uranium rounds, I understand the basic differences. Just wanted to point out that the action of the rod going through the other side of the APC like a dep round would. I know the radioactive issues with dep rounds put it completely into a different category. More appropriate analogy could have been something like the old 30.06 AP rounds having a tungsten core. Don't know if that is more appropriate.

I'll stop bugging you QP's and try to break down the info to my simple minded standard and educate myself.

Thanks for the info so far.

V/R
SGT B

08-05-2005, 14:51	#24
jbour13 Area Commander Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: JBLM Posts: 1,246	QP's, Thanks for the corrections, I mis-interpereted the info. I'm not a munitions guy and read it as being a primary explosion designed to open the armor and a follow-on detonation to create the spalling to destroy the intended target. Just trying to understand, not trying to dig myself in. I see the bottom and would like to clarify my post. I'll limit myself to questions on the effects then. I don't mind if you pick apart the post TR, I would actually enjoy the constructive criticism and know if what I'm reading is correct and how to best educate myself and others. It's essentially my job to understand the capabilities of these weapons systems. You're the ones that teach HN troops the right from wrong, and I'm just as ignorant to the capabilities. I just don't have the ability to decipher all of the complicated terminology that is going to affect how people move on the battlefield. By private proof I should have said because it has pictures and instructions on the AT-4 telling you how to employ it (effectively with no training....probably not). Can you dispell the rumor that an RPG warhead is not as sensitive to bumping and detonation as some have led me to believe. I'd like to know since we (generalized troops) may come along them on the battlefield and have to move them. General rule should apply, don't touch if you don't know, but it'd be good info if the munition/weapon posed a continued threat to troops. Especially if you had to pick-up and move and didn't want it to recirculate back into enemy inventory. And along the lines of Dep Uranium rounds, I understand the basic differences. Just wanted to point out that the action of the rod going through the other side of the APC like a dep round would. I know the radioactive issues with dep rounds put it completely into a different category. More appropriate analogy could have been something like the old 30.06 AP rounds having a tungsten core. Don't know if that is more appropriate. I'll stop bugging you QP's and try to break down the info to my simple minded standard and educate myself. Thanks for the info so far. V/R SGT B Last edited by jbour13; 08-05-2005 at 14:58.
jbour13 is offline