HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)
Subject: Re: depleted uranium
Organization: Cornell University
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:21:52 GMT


From wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)




From wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)

In article <1992Jul30.123936.16542@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>,
rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu writes: 
>> Question:what are the advantages to using depleted uranium in ammunition?
> 
> Militaries make sabots out of depleted Uranium because it is a very dense 
> substance i.e. it weighs a lot for a given volume. A sabot is the part
> of a tank round that accutually penetrates the enemy tank. Most tank rounds
> are composed of a shell and the sabot. The two seperate after firing 
> thereby giving the sabot a higher velocity.
You've got the two parts backwards.  The Sabot (French for shoe) is a light
(often plastic) set of wedges around the relatively long and narrow core. 
Since the total round is lighter than a solid shot it has a higher velocity and
once the sabot drops away the core has a much higher cross-sectional density
and retains its kinetic energy better downrange.  The narrow round also
penetrates armor better than a full bore round with the same energy.  
(BTW -- the sabots themselves can inflict some damage close to the muzzle but
they don't travel very far.  You need to be careful that you're not shooting
over some poor infantry, though.)
  
>> How long until succesfully destroyed targets can be scrapped or cannalbalized?
> There is little radiation left in depleted uranium rounds and targets can
> be scrapped as soon as is handy.
Someone else mentioned that it was possible to tell whether a vehicle had been
hit by DU rounds.  My guess is that this requires fairly special equipment to
detect the traces.  As I remember from some basic physics, even skin will stop
alphas, it's the other stuff that does real biological damage.

-- 
Tom Schoene
wwo@cornella.cit.cornell.edu  -or- wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Whenever you're holding all the cards why does everyone else turn
out to be playing chess?"

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: lafford@serum.clpd.Kodak.COM (Rick Lafford)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: SAS use tungsten coated 9mm
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:41:11 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department


From Rick Lafford <lafford@serum.clpd.Kodak.COM>


>Being more into Poli Sci/Econ rather than Metallurgy, I wouldn`t know for 
>sure, but I would think that this would cause greater penetration to 
>ensure a "kill" rather than a "casualty".  This follows from what I know
>about standard anti-terrorist policy, i.e. if you have to go in, they don't 
>come out ;-).  If you wanted to make an expander, just use a dum-dum and 
>notch the tip. 

Just a quick thought on the subject of assuring a kill on an unknown
target.

To my thinking, you don't know if the terrorist have personal protection
clothing or not. If they do you need solids that will get thru the armour.
If they turn out to be "soft" targets you want something that expends
max. energy internally and assures a knock-down/stay-down hit. 

Would there be any advantage to intermixing two types of ammo in the same
clip, say saboted subcaliber penetrators with hollowpoint? Even if the
hollowpoints won't go thru the body armour, they still can hit with 
enough punch to knock you down.

	Rick

-----------------
Rick Lafford			|If there are better ways to spend your time than
Eastman Kodak Co.		|to fly around with your hair on fire, I haven't
lafford@serum.kodak.com	|found them yet.
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: twh18@isuvax.iastate.edu (Phoenix)
Subject: Re: V22 Osprey/ F/A-18 Crashes
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:36:46 GMT


From twh18@isuvax.iastate.edu (Phoenix)


From twh18@isuvax.iastate.edu (Phoenix)

In article <BsKCC3.DL0@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, ASISKIND@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU writes:
>
>From ASISKIND@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU
>
>> From henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>> 
>>>From twh18@isuvax.iastate.edu (Phoenix)
>>>	Oh, well, seems Navy doesn't has much luck about testing
>>>flight of their exp. aircraft.  Their F-14 crashed, (but
>>>F/A-18 didn't), now it comes to Osprey...
>> 
>> A few crashes during development of an advanced military aircraft are not
>> that uncommon.  You just don't hear about them much unless the program is
>> controversial.  It's hard to make much progress without taking some risks.
>
>Actually, the F/A-18 did crash during flight tests, or soon thereafter.  One of
>the GE F404 engines blew up, taking the other engine with it and causing the
>plane to crash.  I think it was on its way to an airshow at the time.
>
	This brought my interest back again.  Can anyone tell me if F-15
, F-16 crashed during test flight too?

	Here are few other questions I had:
1.  I was reading a novel by Larry Bond called Red Phoenix.  In the book,
it said that the Dragon anti-tank missile had a minimum range of 300
Meters or so. Well, I don't get it.  Fighter missiles has a minimum
range because they don't want missile lock to it's launcher or they
don't want launch aircraft crash into debris.  I just don't see
why Dragon need 300M to fire, as far as I know,the LAW missile 
doesn't have a minumum range. (or at lesast, it's 10 feet compare
to the Dragon).

[mod note -- the Dragon is a wire guided weapon, and I believe that the 300
meters is needed for the warhead to be armed and for the missile to get up
to speed ]

2.  Can any one tell me all those Phonetic alphbet they use in
military?  I know quite a few like Kilo, Tango, Charlie, etc, but I
would like to know all of them if it's possilble.

[ mod note -- here goes Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta, Echo, Foxtrot, Golf,
Hotel, India, Juliet, Kilo, Lima, Mike, November, Oscar, Papa, Quebec,
Romeo, Sierra, Tango, Uniform, Victor, Whiskey, X-Ray, Yankee, Zebra ]

3.  Also, does anyone know the saftey envelop of jet fighter's
Ejection?  I mean is there're a speed and/or altitude that will
enable you eject safely?  I am talking about eject from a Jet
Fighter like F-15/F-16 here.

	All comments would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in
advance!
			Ming

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: edremy@leland.Stanford.EDU (eric remy)
Subject: Re: depleted uranium
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:20:37 GMT


From edremy@leland.Stanford.EDU (eric remy)




From edremy@leland.Stanford.EDU (eric remy)

In article <1992Jul30.123936.16542@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu writes:
>
>From rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu
>
>In article <1992Jul28.130025.24034@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, arw4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Aaron R Wininger) writes:
>> 
>> From arw4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Aaron R Wininger)
>> 
>> Question:what are the advantages to using depleted uranium in ammunition?
>
>Militaries make sabots out of depleted Uranium because it is a very dense 
>substance i.e. it weighs a lot for a given volume. A sabot is the part
>of a tank round that accutually penetrates the enemy tank. Most tank rounds
>are composed of a shell and the sabot. The two seperate after firing 
>thereby giving the sabot a higher velocity.

Actually, it's the other way around.  Sabot is the french word for shoe, 
and refers to the part that falls away.  (On old US spin stabilized rounds,
centripital forces pull away a three petaled sabot, newer fin stabilized
rounds have a two petaled sabot which separates from air drag.)  The 
sabot itself won't penetrate a tank, but I really wouldn't want to
be infantry or in a M113 downrange of a tank round....

>
>Rod Holmes
>rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu


-- 
Eric R.      edremy@d31ha0.Stanford.EDU       Department of Chemistry
                        -1/2\nabla^2\psi_{T-72}

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: birmingh@fnala.fnal.gov
Subject: Re: -29 information requested
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 20:12:19 GMT


From birmingh@fnala.fnal.gov


In article <Bsvn3K.Dtn@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, Steven.Schultz@mixcom.mixcom.com (Steven.Schultz) writes:

> I have been looking through the information that I have, and have not
> been able to find the aircraft known as the Sukhoi Su-29. If someone
> out there with a Jane's could give me any information on it, or know's
> anything of it, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

         Okay, I saw what was billed as a Sukhoi 29 at the Heartland
    America Airshow at the Du Page Airport in West Chicago (got a king hell
    sunburn there, too.) I am not absolutely sure that's what it was,
    however. The announcer called it that, but he also called it a Su-26 at
    one point.

         In any case, it is a propeller plane, and not a large one at that.
    The one at the show, flown by Yevgeny Frolov, was painted all red, pink
    and white. The announcer mentioned that the engine was tuned to have a
    growl that impresses judges at aerobatic competitions, and he mentioned
    that one of the other pilots at the show was waiting to take delivery
    of a -29 of his own, so I get the feeling that the Su-29 is a
    competition plane.

-- 
 Phillip J. Birmingham   birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov  
 I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...

Newsgroups: sci.military,soc.history
From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)
Subject: 50 Years Ago: Sunday, 16 August, 1942
Followup-To: soc.history
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:35:16 GMT


From military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)

Sunday, 16 August, 1942

The Soviet Union evacuates the city of Maikop, removing most of the oil
equipment and stockpiles and destroying the rest.

US Army Air Corps medium bombers see their first action in North Africa,
hitting Axis positions in Egypt.

The German Navy launches Operation Wunderland.  The pocket battleship
Admiral Scheer sorties into the Kara Sea to attack Soviet merchant ships.

Anti-British riots continue in India, mostly in Calcutta, Madura, and
Nagpur.

--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--
Bill Thacker			            military@att.att.com
Send submissions for "50 Years Ago" to military-request@att.att.com

"The German Fascists who expected with the capture of Maikop to enrich
themselves at the expense of Soviet oil have miscalculated.  They did not
get the Soviet oil and will not get it." - STAVKA communique'
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: scw@ollie.SEAS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: Re: why velcrow insignia
Organization: UCLA School Of Engineering & Applied Science
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:26:59 GMT


From scw@ollie.SEAS.UCLA.EDU




From scw@ollie.SEAS.UCLA.EDU


In article <1992Jul30.125156.18302@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> carssdf!watson@rutgers.edu (- Self Empl. Sys.Integrator) writes:
>From carssdf!watson@rutgers.edu (- Self Empl. Sys.Integrator)
>Why do air force flying uniforms seem to have all insignia 
>attached by velcrow?   Is this a laundry consideration?

Velcro (TM I'm sure).

It's to enable easy removal of ALL identifying information before flight
(Say do all the tags have those little red streamers [remove before flight]?)
into a hostile situation to deny the enemy and information beyond
Name, Rank, Service Number, branch of service, a Date of Birth.

Basicly all that a pilot carries in the way of identification are his
Dog tags and a Geneva Convention card (I've got mine at home someweres),
looks a lot like a Liberty Card , wallet size with Slots for the information.
Us infantry types usually carried our ID cards too, as we were more likley to
end up somewheres where we'd need it with out touching down at our home
base (some stack of Seabags in a tent back at Da-nang or wherever) first.

I mean who's going to doubt the bonafides of some guy that just landed
an F-4 on your runway?

Woods, Stephen C.
Sargent   USMC
2141956   24FEB47
-----
Stephen C. Woods; UCLA SEASNET; 2567 BH;LA CA 90024; (310)-825-8614
UUCP: ...{ibmsupt,ncar!cepu}!ollie}!scw  Internet:scw@SEAS.UCLA.EDU
"Non, je ne regrette rien"--1st Para, LE 1963

Newsgroups: sci.military
From:     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>
Subject:  Re: light aircraft in strike role
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:14:52 GMT


From     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>


Perry Morrison writes:
#In low intensity conflicts, have light aircraft been used in a close
#air support role? I believe there was some use during the Rhodesian

Cardoen, the Chilean cluster bomb manufacturer, has advertised the
PJ-1, a 5 kg light bomb intended for use from ANY aircraft. It is of
the "stick it out the window and let go" variety. Echoes of the Great
War :)



#The reason I ask this question is because the Australian armed forces
#believe that in the next 20 years or so they will face small numbers
#of insurgents in the far north of the country (Northern TErritory).

Wow. What is the expected origin of these insurgents: dissatisfied
citizens or outside agitators?



Ed Rudnicki     erudnick@pica.army.mil     All disclaimers apply
"It demoralized them. Not to mention killed them."
     --- 3rd AD officer describing effects of DPICM in ODS

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: "tzung-i.lin" <tzung@cbnewsf.cb.att.com>
Subject: Fly-by-wire and delta wing fighter revival?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 18:38:42 GMT


From "tzung-i.lin" <tzung@cbnewsf.cb.att.com>

Hi,

I recall that from an article on International Defense Review some
year ago discussing Mirage 2000, the author claimed that delta wing
fighter is revived by using Fly-By-Wire flight control system,
something to delta-wing's disadvantage can be avoided by using 
FBW.

Can someone explain or confirm or deny this?  I really appreciate it.

Tzung-I
tzung@hugo.att.com


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu
Subject: Toll-free number connects Canadian military and families
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:40:01 GMT


From Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu

Here is a press release from the Canadian Department of National Defence.
I don't know whether the U.S. military has a similar toll-free number;
if it doesn't, it probably should.

Toll-free Number Connects Military and Families

Ottawa, August 7, 1992 -- The Associate Minister of National Defence, the
Honourable Mary Collins, announced today that the Department of National
Defence is introducing a 1-800 number to provide a communication link
between Canadian Forces families and members serving on UN peacekeeping
missions around the world.

The toll-free national information line will be a point of contact for
family members. Trained staff of the Director Military Family Support will
operate the service at National Defence Headquarters Monday through Friday
between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. EST. Messages may be left at other times.

"The Gulf War taught us the need that CF families have for timely and
accurate information about loved ones serving far from home,:" said Mrs.
Collins. "Canada's numerous peacekeeping missions will continue to require
military personnel to be separated from their families for long periods of
time."

The information line is intended to relay family messages and answer
questions about a CF member's whereabouts or condition, but not to
facilitate direct communication between family and member. The service
line is designed to supplement the information function of the CF Family
Resources Centres which exist at bases and stations across Canada.

Families and relatives may access the service by dialing 1-800-665-1514.

 - 30 -

[Note to journalists: For information call the National Defence press
office at (613) 996-2353, or after hours (613) 996-7811.]


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: born@iscsvax.uni.edu
Subject: Good Military Books?
Organization: University of Northern Iowa
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 17:56:30 GMT


From born@iscsvax.uni.edu

I'm teaching four one hour class sessions on U.S. Military History to new
Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) students this fall.  The concentration is on
leadership, valor, and military ethics.  If you had to choose two books to read
on this subject, what would you choose?  I've considered a few but am
interested in some fresh ideas.  Thank you in advance.

                                    Kevin Born, Department of Military Science
                                    University of Northern Iowa

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose)
Subject: Re:  Re: Marines, are they needed?
Organization: INEL EG&G Idaho
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:39:17 GMT


From dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose)

In article <Bsw1ot.2sH@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>,     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil> writes:
> From     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>
> 
> 
> Don Palmrose writes:
> #Navy aircraft were extremely effective against Libya.  One reason why people
> #think they were not is because the Naval Aviators do not want fancy camera
> #equipement taking up room and space that can be fitted with electronic jammers
> 
> 
> This is a rather specious comment. I sincerely doubt that any Aardvark driver
> had anything to do with the contents of a Pave Tack pod. I don't know why
> it has a VTR and the A-6's TRAM doesn't (or does it), but this has nothing
> to do with what the pilot wants or doesn't. One could surmise that the
> F-111 pilots may not like having that pod take up their weapons bay and
> cause drag when deployed, but again it's not their call.
> 
> 
> Ed Rudnicki     erudnick@pica.army.mil     All disclaimers apply
> "It demoralized them. Not to mention killed them."
>      --- 3rd AD officer describing effects of DPICM in ODS
> 
> 
> 

My comment was directed to a posting saying that the US Navy's portion of the
attacks on Libya were not effective.  I stated that this was due to the Navy
PR guys not being able to produce video for the media like the Air Force can.
This was again the case during Desert Storm.  I remember reading an article
(in _Proceedings_ maybe) that gave this lack of good video camera equipment on
Navy planes as the reason.  Due to space and cost considerations, better 
quality video cameras were left off. 

My "specious comment" was a way of saying all of the above with a little
ironic humor thrown in. ;-)   If you didn't like it so be it but the Air Force
does have a tendency to go for bells and whistles in their stuff (i.e. just
look at all the fancy woodwork in their O-clubs!! ;-)  ).

Later, dude...

Don Palmrose
"I'd rather serve on a ship not designed to sink...."





========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip ===========

Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever,
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any
information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.  No specific reference constitutes or implies
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.  The views and
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Subject: Re: How to spike a gun?
Organization: Utah State University
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:33:54 GMT


From sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)


From sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)

In article <BsKCnp.E2s@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, 
 dgfritz@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Doug Fritz) writes:
 
> Spiking a gun such as a cannon or artillery piece disables the
> gun, but how does a foot soldier spike a gun?

I don't think a foot soldier would be called on to spike a cannon,
unless the cannon's crew was dead and the foot soldier was the only
one at hand. Cannon were usually spiked (or otherwise disabled) by
their own crews in the face of retreat so that the guns could not
be used by the enemy (or at least not until the crew was safely
withdrawn). 

The way I understand it, a cannon is spiked by first putting a ball 
in the chamber (under the touch hole). A spike is then pounded into 
the touch hole so that the tip of the spike is bent over inside the 
tube. Make sense? The spike hits the ball and the tip bends so that 
the spike cannot be pried out of the hole (you'd probably have to 
drill it out). And because the tip of the spike wedges the ball into 
the chamber, the ball must extracted with some special tool. 

I think I read that most units had spikes that were specifically 
designed (diameter and length) to disable a cannon. 

--                                              __  __   ______   __  __ 
Chadd  L. VanZanten  SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU   +   /\ \/\ \ /\  ___\ /\ \/\ \
``Gentlemen!  You  can't  fight in here,   +   \ \ \_\ \\ \___  \\ \ \_\ \
this is the War Room!''                    +    \ \_____\\/\_____\\ \_____\
     --Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove   +     \/_____/ \/_____/ \/_____/ 

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: mcgp1!flak@nwnexus.wa.com (Dan Flak)
Subject: Cloverleaf
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 20:12:32 GMT


From mcgp1!flak@nwnexus.wa.com (Dan Flak)

> Can anyone describe this clover-leaf tactic? I searched
> Shaw's book in vain for any mention of it. Thanks

The cloverleaf maneuver I learned in pilot training was sort of
like a "twisted loop". 

You start from straight and level flight, and pull up as if
beginning a loop. However, instead of keeping wings level as in a
loop, you bank so as to turn in the horizontal plane as well as
the vertical plane. You play with the bank rate so that by the time
you come out of the bottom of the maneuver, you are heading 90
degrees to the heading you entered the maneuver.

What I just described is one "leaf" - string four of them back to
back and you have the complete cloverleaf.

I'm sure that what I learned in UPT is a very "stylized" version
of what's used in combat. Like, who cares if you roll out
precisely 90 degrees off inbound course, as long as you shake
the bandit?

-- 
                     Measure what's right, not what's easy.
       Dan Flak - McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., 5400 Carillon Point
  Kirkland, Wa 98033-7397, 206-828-8006, (usenet: flak%mcgp1.uucp@nwnexus.com)

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: pstinson@pbs.org
Subject: B-29 in Soviet hands
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:34:56 GMT


From pstinson@pbs.org

No B-29 was turned over to the Soviets willingly.  Several were siezed at gun
point when they strayed into Soviet airspace due to battle damage while on
raids against Japanese targets.

The first incident was in July of 1944 when B-29 #42-6256 from the 771st Bomb
Squadron, 462nd Bomb Group, 58th Bomb Wing lost its no. 3 engine to flak
damage.  With a hostile reception from Soviet fighter aircraft it was forced
down near Vladivostok.

In Nov. of 1944 B-29 #42-6358 and B-29 #42-6365 the "General H.H. Arnold
Special", both from the 794th Squadron of the 468th Group, 58th Bomb Wing also
fell into Soviet hands.  The crews were later allowed to "escape" from a
detention camp near Tashkent and eventually found their way into Iran.  

All three of these bombers were taken apart and studied.  Then piece by piece a
copy of the B-29 emerged.  When the existence of the Tupelov 4 was confirmed in
1947 it was given the NATO code name Bull.  It is unlikely though that any of
the impounded B-29's (including several more siezed in 1945 from other Wings)
or the Tu-4 copies ever saw action against Nazi targets during WWII.

That B-24 left behind at Yakutsk, however, was not taken apart, but was put to
use as soon as the engines could be repaired.  Bradley's crew may even have
given Soviet airmen some useful hints on how to fly the thing.  I doubt the
B-29 crews were inclined to be as helpful under their different circumstances. 
There is a big diffence between freely turning an aircraft over and having it
taken under protest.

Therefore that B-24 WAS the only heavy bomber GIVEN to the Soviets that was
used by them with our blessing during the war.

Newsgroups: sci.military,soc.history