One misunderstood, the other; wish we had?

[Gene Econ]

Guys:

Interesting comparisons of the RPG and the AT-4. Brought back memories of armor / anti-armor net assessments and the various testings that occured.

Just to clarify and not correct. Liners are part of the cone of the shape charge. The liner inverts when the shape charge inverts on detonation and generally takes on a kind of metal plasma form. It gives a bit more kinetic energy to the chemical energy if there is a way of putting it. The whole mess burns through the armor. Pyrophoric effect, if I got that one spelled right. It has been about fifteen years since I messed with that stuff.

Don't confuse liners for shape charges with 'fire formed' penetrators either. Explosive Formed aka 'Fire Formed' are kinetic energy although the penetrator was formed from chemical energy. He, he, he. I was involved with more than a few experiments with EFPs.

Caution on being impressed by things penetrating X amount of RHA. No modern tank uses RHA anymore and laminated armor is mostly intended to defeat long rod penetrators but also assists in defeating chemical energy as the density of the armor changes. I think I can say this as pretty much a fact these days that the use of RHA as a standard for penetration is obsolete -- not generally used when discussing anti armor weapons as it represents a consistent standard for modeling and laminated armor doesn't.

So far, from my understanding, there has only been one incident of a supposed RPG penetrating the hull armor of an M-1 Tank. The Army still isn't sure it was an RPG though and honestly, no one knows but it did penetrate the skirt and went through the side of the tank above one of its wheels. No casualties.

Another thing that has been brought out but is important to know is that slight angles of obliquity have dramatic effects on penetration for both shape charges and kinetic energy weapons. I think that five or ten degrees of obliquity cancels out about fifty percent of the effect right off the bat.

From what I understan, shape charges still need a stand off roughly equal to the length of the chemical cone. Thus the shape of the RPG warhead no doubt. Reactive will work on RPGs. We just don't need reactive as the armor packages on our armored vehicles are sufficient to defeat most hand held AT weapons. I am not talking about Hellfire missles or the like and I bet a Javelin would destroy an M-1 as it is top attack. Oh yes, if you ever saw one reactive tile go off, you would understand why the Army doesn't want to use them.

As a note -- many Stryker Vehicles with the 1/25th SBCT have taken numerous hits with RPGs and so far I think only one or two have received catastrophic kills as a result. Obliquity angles, a significant 'RPG Screen' (cage) and applique armor tiles have allowed these vehicles to take serious RPG hits and keep on moving down the road. It is the kamakazi car and truck bombs that have destroyed Strykers.

I also got involved in hyper velocity KE to an extent. Very difficult to deal with stability at hyper velocities and more difficult to get the projo going at hyper velocity. When I left that world, there still wasn't a definition for hyper velocity. It started at 10K fps but as technology couldn't push a dart that fast, the system started watering down its standards. When I left, it was down to 8K fps.

How's that for three years of my life? That and a dollar gets me a cup of PX coffee. Did have some good times watching experiments though.

Gene

[The Reaper]

Just a heads-up.

This theoretical and hardware discussion has been okay so far.

Before we get too far into what our armor has or does not have, or what is a better penetrator of our vehicles, we are not going to get into any discussion here that would give the bad guys additional info on how to attack our vehicles more effectively.

Anyone asking questions for that info will be dealt with.

Thanks for your attention.

TR

On top of what TR and Peregrino have stated, I think the RPG is the way to go with infantry at all levels. You are not restricted by bore size for the size of your warhead and it's PG & OG series rockets have room for SF/QP "Field Modification(s)". Ambush Master can really attest to this fact with his "porcupine" rounds he used in SOG. With the size of the OG rounds you could probably wrap the thing in BB's or something similar and duct tape it all to give it more fragmentation on top of what it already has.

On a side note, Bulgaria seems to be the country to watch for future development and PIP's on the rocket portion of the weapon/RPG. They have already tested, fielded, and placed on the market a "Thermobaric" round. I saw a short video clip of it in action a while back. Seems to be a very nasty weapon for MOUT and with its design being purposely built for that type of ops, I am suprised that none of them have surfaced in Iraq or Afghanistan. The video clip shows it being used on what appears to have been a wood framed structure. Therefore the blast was much more spectacular than when they used it on a more solid structure (second part of the clip). I will go back and try and locate the clip and post it here for everyone to see how these rounds work. The principal behind these rounds is like that of the old FAE's of the 60's. Chemical, Binary or otherwise, is emitted out of the rocket warhead creating an instantaneous vapor when the nose come into contact with something solid. Almost immediately the vapor mixes with the right amount of air in the target (complex way) then it is all set off by a delay fuze. This creates incredible blast "overpressures" within the structure, killing everybody inside and literally blowing up and out the room or building.

Here is what they look like:

http://www.ciar.org/~ttk/mbt/article...10104_2_n.html

Rifle Grenades are now made of polymers with most of the metal going towards the fuze and body (sometimes). The "bullet Thru" and the "Bullet Trap" have taken over the market and it is somewhat "rare" to find the old style that have to be launched using what is commonly called a Ballistite round. Weight is not a problem these days. The problem lies with how to carry them. Most will carry them in a quiver style bag or strapped to their web gear or vest (the Serbs and Croations secure them to their vests and even had special vests made up for just that purpose). I have seen some Latin American and South American countries just secure them any way they can on their person, usually tied to the belt or taped to the shoulder harnesses. With the two aforementioned types of launching methods, there IMHO (and uneducated), no real reason for not using them. The biggest reason to use them is cost effectiveness. Practice RG's can be reused over and over again with long lifes afforded to rubber and polymer constructions. Practice rounds for the 40mm can only be used once and at one time were expensive to make, still are but not as much as they used to. I am referring to the ones that had a small explosive charge in the nose with dye. Peregrino, TR, and others, you will know more about this than me (could they have been designated M382?). Anyways, we move on to "casualty radius". The 40mm HEDP has one of 5-9 meters. A RG on the other hand can up that to approximately 15 meters (some of the older style Israeli BT/AP-AT APERS-HEAT's are 20 meters). The Yugoslavian M60 AP RG has a similar radius. Once a "recruit" has had enough "time" on the range in order to achieve acceptable accuracy he/she then can be issued RG's for confict resolution when the time arrives. Factoring in the climate on the battlefield, the stress of being shot at I would think a person could at least put them through a window at 100 yards, knock out a squad at 200+ yards out in the open, and achieve at least a M/K on armor at shorter ranges out to 100 yards(?) What do you all think?

Here is pretty good site that has been down for a while but back up and deals with the 40mm vs RG's:

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Qu...ndgrenades.htm

NOTE: THe above is "off & On".

This one shows the "jet" from a shaped charge:

www.llnl.gov/str/Baum.html

Interesting site on the Hellfire:

http://www.missilesandfirecontrol.co...ELLFIREII.html

enjoy

[HOLLiS]

I am a little lost here. Problem I see with RPS's is the size of rds limits the number one can CARRY (key word). Selection of rds adds more limits. When one carries another something, something else has got to be left behind. Example carrying another RPG round means less ammo for the rifle. I think from my own experience the average grunts carries way to much, and sometimes not enough of the right stuff when the shit hits the fan.

I think the M79/blooper/thumper is a great compromise for Infantry Vs Infantry. One can carry more blooper rds than RPGS. I guess if a person is mechanized no biggy, But for the ground pounder a biggy especially when you have to carry a few 60 mike mikes, a can of gun ammo, plus your own gear. And if 81's go out with you, you have to help carry their stuff too.

The only weapons of Mr. Charlies that anyone liked were the AK 47 and the light weight 60 mike mike tube. Noone would use a AK 47, because the sound tended to draw "friendly" fire. I also think the RPG tube is long and can be a hinderance. We had the LAWW, (?) but there was not much use for them where I was.

In case of Armour, I think the A-10 Warthog is the cats meow....... for other options there is always the radio, call for support.

Just some thoughts, I can be way behind the times. I just never thought much of having a RPG, but would not mind owning a Blooper gun(M79)

[The Reaper]

I think there is a bad comparison taking place here.

The real alternatives are 1) AP: 40mm GL vs. Rifle Grenade, and 2) AT: RPG vs. LAW/AT-4/Carl Gustav 84/etc.

TR

The way I am looking at it is this:

If I were going into combat and had "MY" choice between each item in the two categories it would be rifle grenades over the 40mm and the RPG over the samples given by TR. The reason I feel is simple. RG's nowadays are very lightweight, usually a 1/4 to 2 pounds (depending on construction). With this weight comes "more" explosive power and the capability to do much more damage to structures, machinery, vehicles, bunkers, etc., etc. The 40mm is limited by it own design. You get what you have and nothing else. Add on the launcher (M203) to a rifle and you have a bulky, heavy weapon. With the RG the flash hider is the launcher, the bullet in your weapon is the propelling device, recoil is on par with a 203 if not less and everybody now has the poor man's mortar. You also get acceptable accuracy (ask the Bosnians and SERB's) and any error on your part can/is made up by the wider blast/fragmentation of the warhead.

The same thing can be said for the RPG. With the "enclosed/disposable" AT weapons you are again restricted as to the diameter of the warhead and what it can do. Rockets for the RPG can be almost any diameter theoretically as long as the body where the propellant is contained has been carefully loaded. What I mean by this is that the CG & CP (center of gravity and center of pressure) are very close to one another thus giving it stability over longer range. The problem with "windcocking" is always going to be there with both and all types of RG's, RPG's, rockets, and missiles. Like I stated before, Bulgaria is coming out with better quality, more warhead confirgurations, and lighter weight.

The above is just my opinion with allot of research done on my part and I feel that it could be useful to the QP's. You guys are the "masters" of improvisation. AM's "porcupine" rounds are enough proof to me!

[The Reaper]

MAB:

Spoken like a man who rides for a living.

Those little 2 lb. items have a way of adding up. 100 lbs. of lightweight gear still weighs 100 lbs.

The basic soldier already has way more stuff than he can carry. It is a zero sum game. You add two pounds, you have to take away two pounds of something else. Like food. Or my spare pair of socks.

Given that, I'll take the 20 rounds of 40mm over the 5 rifle grenades, any day.

On the RPG, I would tend to agree with you on that one. We copied the wrong German AT weapon. The Carl Gustav and 90mm RCL were nice, but the launchers (and ammo) are very heavy.

TR

TR,

Ya, but you should see my Batmans's utility belt.