HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: billb@is.rice.edu (William Stenson Blackwell)
Subject: Phalanx Ammo
Keywords: BIG GUN!
Organization: Rice University
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 17:51:26 GMT


From billb@is.rice.edu (William Stenson Blackwell)

I would assume, not having Jane's handy, that the Phalanx fires Depleted Uranium
core ammo.  This is the round of choice in almost all of the U.S. military's 
cannons (i.e. explosive propelled direct-fire weapon >.50 caliber)


-- 

Bill Blackwell             P H P <==me!   "A just request is to be met
billb@owlnet.rice.edu     F L L F       in silence, by the act."
Houston, Texas, USA          8       -Dante Alighieri "Inferno" XXIV ln.77-78

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Codesmiths <dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Tracers
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:45:59 GMT


From Codesmiths <dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk>



>         Something is wrong here -- lead is much more toxic than
> depleted uranium, so the environmental issue shouldn't be the
> problem.


Two points:

In most of these applications, DU isn't competing against lead. We're
talking about kinetic AP shells rather than small arms rounds, so
very few of these weapons would use lead anyway. Phalanx might, but
not MBT main gun shells.

Secondly there is a problem with the pyrophoric nature of DU. A lead
projectile goes "splat", and might spall off fragments, but it stays
in large pieces. A DU projectile produces a fine spray of dust on
impact, and this is pyrophoric in air. The lead spread over a
battlefield will tend to remain there, whilst the DU leaves fine
particles that are far more easily absorbed by humans & animals in
the area. The stuff is radioactive, but at such a low level that it's
only a hazard when absorbed into the body.

All this said, I think much of the anti-DU hysteria is just that.


There is no difference on radar.

          Andy Dingley    dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR KR COMAN)
Subject: Re: 50 Years ago: Gen. F. Bradley at Yakutsk
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:09:51 GMT


From bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR KR COMAN)

In article <1992Jul28.131339.26257@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> pstinson@pbs.org writes:
>From: pstinson@pbs.org
>Subject: 50 Years ago: Gen. F. Bradley at Yakutsk
>Date: 28 Jul 92 13:13:39 GMT


>From pstinson@pbs.org

>50 years ago this September, Gen. Follett Bradley completed the final
>technical negotiations in Moscow that permitted the Alaska - Siberia
>air route to be established.  

>As the general flew along this route towards Alaska, his B-24 was disabled by
>minus 30 degree weather at Yakutsk and had to be left behind.

>Does anyone know how Gen. F. Bradley got back to the United States?
>Was this originally a two plane operation?  If so, the crews could have doubled
>up, but I have no clear evidence there was a second plane involved from the
>start.  If the general's plane was on its own, then was someone sent after him
>or did the Russians fly him into Alaska?

Digression:  Reminds me of the story reported by Gallagher in his "Defeat in 
the East".   A top-ranking British general in Burma in the dark days of 1942
had to meet with Chinese allies up in the northern border area.  Only planes 
available were 2 RAF Westland Lysanders -- two seat army co-op jobs.  The 2 
planes take off in the darkness to evade the Japanese AF.  The general is in 
one and his ADC in the other.  Leading pilot tries to navigate across 
trackless wilderness.   Encounters engine problems and attempts forced 
landing in the dark.  Plane hits tree stumps turns over and catches fire.  
The general frees self from wreckage and uses greatcoat to beat back flames 
from trapped and unconc. pilot.   
	Meanwhile, 2nd plane observes flames and circles.  Pilot asks ADC "
What should we do?  I can't land down there.  Do we go on to our 
destination?"   ADC replies (which marks him out as one of the world's all-
time greats at this job) "Oh well, I expect I shall have to bale out." (!!!)
	Pilot says to hold it until he's got a bit more altitude.  ADC 
eventually goes over the side, lands safely, and gets up to the burning 
plane just in time to take over the greatcoat from the by now fast 
exhausted general.  ADC continues to beat back flames from trapped pilot 
until help arrives from nearby village.  With this help pilot is freed.
End of story: ADC proffers *his* greatcoat to general!!!

Cheers,
Keith Coman

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: bill@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (William Logan Lee)
Subject: Re: TNT equiv of Semtex
Organization: Uni Computing Service, Uni of Sydney, Australia
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 18:05:04 GMT


From bill@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (William Logan Lee)

In article <1992Jul22.171903.22309@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer) writes:
>What is the TNT weight equivalent of Semtex?

Check your local university library.  I believe that "Semtex" is the
(nasty evil) explosives "They" make; and that it is the same as
"Hexogen" (The commercial "nice" explosive "We" make.)

Bill Lee

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Subject: Re: Muskets and Archery
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:28:47 GMT


From ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au


> 
> The last reference to military use of bows is WW1, where German troops
> used old siege crossbows to launch grenades into the Aliied trenches (!)
> 
>
I remember reading somewhere that one of the early SAS leaders recruited by
Stirling wanted to use bows to take out sentries.

Also what happened in Vietnam and the Malayan emergency??  Did any of the
"native" forces use a bow or something similar??

regs

Rob


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George)
Subject: Re: Why execute spies?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:24:36 GMT


From regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George)

In article <1992Jul21.152430.20978@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> "Edward J. Rudnicki
" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil> writes:
[deletions
>soldier who served in the British Army before the US entered the
>Great War. According to him executions for "cowardice" were fairly
>common, but that these were listed as combat deaths for the benefit
>of the folks at home, both family and the public.
[deletions]
Related sidenote: In John Laffin's book on British military bungling in
WWI, he mentions a British Army officer who was given the Military Cross
for executing summarily two soldiers for cowardice.

Robert George
(Speaking only for myself)

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: billb@is.rice.edu (William Stenson Blackwell)
Subject: Re: depleted uranium
Organization: Rice University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:04:27 GMT


From billb@is.rice.edu (William Stenson Blackwell)

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? 
|> How long until succesfully destroyed targets can be scrapped or cannibalized?

The advantages of Depleted Uranium (du) are mainly in its effect against light to moderate
armor.  With a du core, a single round has the ability to carry its KE farther into a target.
This is in the hope of hitting something vital (which usually happens), and knocking the 
target out of commission.  The reason is that du is *safe* and much denser than conventional
rounds (i.e. lead, steel).  When the round strikes, the part of the KE of the weapon is "used"
in deforming the actual round itself, rather than in penetrating the target.  However, the du
core doesn't have the same drop in KE (I could be wrong on this part...), so that it travels
pretty much unabated that last millisecond into an already damaged armor band.  Hence, greater
penetration.  However, the real reason it's used, as opposed to osmium or tungsten. is the 
relative expense of the material.  As its name says, its *depleted*, so according to the 
government, this is a convenient way of disposing of it. ;-)

As to your second question, modern military doctrine doesn't allow for the "scrapping"
or "cannabilization" of destroyed enemy equipment.  Why?  Try these:

1. Modern land tactics prescribe speed over "hitting" power.  The way our forces (U.S.)
  are set up, they aren't equipped to handle a *long* war.  Only a short (>1 year [?])
  one.
2. As above, the troops *shouldn't* have time to cannabalize
3. General incompatibilities between our weapon systems and those of whom we're likely
  to fight
4. The age old adage, "Never use the weapons of a defeated enemy" ;-)


-- 

Bill Blackwell             P H P <==me!   "A just request is to be met
billb@owlnet.rice.edu     F L L F       in silence, by the act."
Houston, Texas, USA          8       -Dante Alighieri "Inferno" XXIV ln.77-78
"My opinions are mine, no one else is that stupid"

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: kmitcham@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kevin Mitcham)
Subject: hardware question
Summary: longest range two person portable weapon
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:06:55 GMT


From kmitcham@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kevin Mitcham)

This may seem to be a bit of a strange question, but does anyone have any
idea what is the weapon that a: can be carried by two people; and b: has 
the longest range? In particulair, what weapon that can be carried to the top 
of a fire tower and fired from there, has the longest range?  What weapon has
the longest accurate range?
From: jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au (Joseph Askew)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Muskets and Archery
Summary: Sorry can't be much more accurate
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:41:15 GMT
Followup-To: sci.military
Organization: Statistics, Pure & Applied Mathematics, University of Adelaide


From jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au (Joseph Askew)


In article <1992Jul21.151849.19965@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> short@asf.com (Lee Short) writes:

>From Lee Short <short@asf.com>

>In article <1992Jul13.195407.16139@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Joseph Askew writes:

>>To the best point of this war - the Koreans were supposed to be using metal
>>hulled ships! The historical records talk of steel-clad Naval vessels -

>Could you please be a bit more specific here?  Did the ships truly
>have metal *hulls*, or were the hulls *plated* with metal armor?  What
>metal was used -- steel or iron (or yet another metal)?  Remember that
>prior to the invention of the Bessemer furnace, steel was *very*
>difficult and expensive to produce -- thus I find it difficult to
>believe that the metal used was actually steel.
>
>Lee

Sorry should have been a bit more specific. I think they were refering to
metal *plates*. The references I have seen have been not very specific and
I'm not sure I believe it all anyway - the Japanese writers hadn't seen
anything like it before and if you don't know what a metal plated ship is
you're unlikely to be able to recognise a metal hulled one. I think that
the reference is to steel. The Chinese were (at least some time round here)
producing more iron than Britain was well into the Eighteenth Century.
I wouldn't accept the story at face value though, it is likely to be excuses
for why the Japanese lost - I don't think that in the 1590's anyone could
build a steel-clad ship. And I do realise the difficulty in mass production
of steel products without blast furnaces, but the Chinese were using coal
for domestic purposes under the Mongols so I wouldn't put much past them
I think they were way ahead of everybody else at that time.


Joseph Askew
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: "Paul A. Byers"  <PAULB@saturn.uark.edu>
Subject:  BMP-3
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 17:52:29 GMT


From "Paul A. Byers"  <PAULB@saturn.uark.edu>

I'm looking for some informed stats on the BMP-3.

How much ammo does the 100mm gun have?
What sort of rounds does it carry for the 100mm?
Is the 100mm maily for support (kill bunkers, suppress grunts) or a
tank killer?
How many troops does a BMP-3 carry?

Thank You.

Paul A. Byers
University of Arkansas

PB06098@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU
PAVEL@UAFHP.UARK.EDU
PAULB@SATURN.UARK.EDU

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: andy@sail.stanford.edu (Andy Freeman)
Subject: Using Heat Seeing Missles
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 18:10:19 GMT


From andy@sail.stanford.edu (Andy Freeman)


How does one avoid fratricide (not own-goals) with heat-seekers?

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: shuksan!major@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Mike Schmitt)
Subject: Re: Murpheys laws of combat, was Tracers
Organization: The Boeing Co., MMST, Seattle, Wa.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:40:16 GMT


From shuksan!major@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Mike Schmitt)


: There is a real basis for this. For example, in the Falklands, there were a 
: limited number of detailed maps. Units were issued maps covering their
: areas of operations, with adjacent units getting adjacent maps, etc.
: Argentinian scouts were effective at finding the gaps in the lines, and
: often fought there. Thus to the British, they always appeared on the map
: edges.

  A real difficulty is coordinating combat action along 'boundaries' -
  between two units.  A very effective tactic is to 'attack down the
  zipper' between two units.  The key is discovering where these boundaries
  exist.  

  A classic example occured in Vietnam - circa '67 along the boundary between
  the II Corps Tactical Zone and the III Corps Tactical Zone.  Both commanders
  jealously guarded their 'zones' and forbade 'cross-zonal' action - therefore
  they both set up a 5km 'buffer' on either side of the 'boundary' where NO
  one would venture into.

  Lo and behold - the NVA 272d Regiment easily slipped down the 'zipper'
  completely unnoticed and unhindered.  Surprise!  Hey, where'd they come
  from!?  

  
 
  
-- 
Mike Schmitt - Disclaimer: These opinions are not my employer's.  My opinions 
are protected by the 1st Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of
America.  If you don't like it - get out of my country.   
"Professionals are predictable, it's the amateurs that are dangerous."
From: portal!cup.portal.com!Arthur_T_Hu@uunet.UU.NET
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: 8th AF Loss Rates for Fighters
Date: 28 Jul 92 12:54:07 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department


From portal!cup.portal.com!Arthur_T_Hu@uunet.UU.NET

I just got this from a new book in the library, "Little Friends" (forgot to
take down the other info...)

Loss rate / 1000 sorties = 7.84 (compare to 2.5 F-105 N. Vietnam and 1.0
F-15E Desert Storm, or 5.0 worst year for F-105)

Number of days with operations 368
AV number of sorties per op day 628
Total sorties flown 261039
Less spares and aborts 257443
Credit sorties 242931
effective sorties 234393

Heavy bomber support 207857
strafing & bombing sweeps 49586

Number of aircraft dropping bombs 14990
Tons dropped on targets 4980.7
Aircraft missing in action (lost) 2048

Enemy claims in air
destroyed 5222
probably destroyed 348
damaged 1568

on ground
destroyed 4250
probably destroyed 23
damaged 2886

arthur@rad.com
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee)
Subject: Re: Muskets and Archery
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:24:03 GMT


From anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee)


In <1992Jul16.200150.1496@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au (Joseph Askew) writes:


>From jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu.au (Joseph Askew)

[ Stuff about Longbow against French knights deleted]
:lost my reference ), but I have a definite memory of a comparision
:between the Mongol composite bow and the English longbow in which the
:long bow came off second best. The mounted archer was the dominant

There was an article in a 1990 or 1991 issue of the Scientific 
American on the bow.  It was a very detailed article describing
the construction and history of the bow.  The article did state
that the composite bow was better than the longbow.
--
Anthony Lee (Time Lord Doctor) (These are my opinions !)
email: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au	voice:+(61)-7-3651204 FAX:+(61)-7-3651999
SNAIL: Department Computer Science, The University of Qld, 
       St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Codesmiths <dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: B52 Question
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 17:52:17 GMT


From Codesmiths <dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk>



> "A B52 taking off under full water injection."

Water injection is commonly used on gas turbines to compensate for
the effects of high ambient air temperatures. Jet thrust depends on
the mass flow rate, hot air is less dense, so less mass. Water
injection cools the exhaust turbine inlet gas, increasing density.

Usually the water is injected into the combustion chamber, but it
has also been used upstream of the compressor.

The mixture injected is usually water & methanol. The methanol acts
as anti-freeze, and also as an additional fuel. This keeps the fuel
system simple, as there is no need to adjust the main fuel flow rate
as the water system is switched on & off.

On pure jet engines, water injection is used to keep the peak thrust
available at higher air temperatures. On turboprop engines, it may
actually boost the power available. On any engine, it is intended as
a short-term power boost, not for cruising.



          Andy Dingley    dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk

Newsgroups: sci.military,soc.history
From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)
Subject: 50 Years Ago: Tuesday, 21 July, 1942
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:17:56 GMT


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

Tuesday, 21 July, 1942

Despite Allied air attacks, a Japanese convoy reaches New Guinea and lands
troops of the 18th Army at Gona and Buna, heading off the Allies' 
Operation Providence.

Rommel reports in to the German High Command.  He warns that the situation
will be critical until reinforcements are received, and that his German
units are at only 40% of their normal strength.  Rommel also suggests that
the Italian troops are unreliable and should be broken up and incorporated
into German units.  The message is intercepted by British ULTRA
cryptologists and forwarded to Auchinleck, who decides to begin a major
attack directly against the Afrika Korps.  Indian and New Zealand infantry
begins the attack, clearing mine-free paths for the following tanks.

Admiral William Leahy, American ambassador to Vichy France, is named
Roosevelt's Chief of Staff

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

"It is worth noting that in 1939 Germany, with half our population, had
four times as many 16-millimeter sound-film projectors as we, and more
than five times as many motion pictures specifically designed for
instruction." - Waldemar Kaempffert, "Training by Film," writing for the
New York Times
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kirsten C. Jacobus)
Subject: Seeking sources on medieval firearms
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:19:20 GMT


From jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kirsten C. Jacobus)




Hello, I'm seeking good sources on medieval explosives, firearms, bombards,
etc.  (For the easily incensed, I am not turning to this group before 
the library, but as a supplement to more paper-based resources.  I've found
that people tend to be the best source of information--at least where to
find information.)  

I am able to handle modern and Middle English, Modern German, have a
smattering of Latin, and can puzzle out a few words of some dialects of
Middle High German.

I also have access to interlibrary loan here at Purdue University.


Note that I would prefer sources that delve into matchlock and pre-matchlock
technologies and techniques, especially the pre-matchlock stuff.  I can
already find a wealth of stuff regarding wheel-locks, flintlocks, etc.


I would especially appreciate any sources which concentrated on the 14th
century (AD1301-AD1400) and the very early 15th century.  If there's anything
earlier, I'd go for that, too.


Thank you for your consideration.



Newsgroups: sci.military
From: "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>
Subject:  Tracers
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 18:09:57 GMT


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


>From "Elements of Ammunition" (1946):

TRACERS: There are two types of small-arms tracer bullets, those derived from 
ball bullets, and those derived from armor-piercing bullets. The former have
the rear half of the lead core replaced by the igniter and tracer composition.
The latter have a portion of the steel core replaced by tracer and igniter
composition. The igniter composition (essentially barium peroxide and
magnesium) is pressed at about 70,000 psi with a step punch to present a large
surface for the propellant powder gases for easier ignition. It burns through
to the tracer composition (strontium peroxide and nitrate, magnesium, and 
other ingredients).
The length of trace for caliber .30 rounds is about 1200 yd., and for caliber
.50 rounds, 1800 yd. A longer trace of 2500 yd. has been developed for caliber
.50 rounds; the tracer composition is essentially strontium nitrate, potassium pe    
perchlorate, and magnesium, and is slower-burning. In the so-called night
tracer cartridges, which neither blind the gunner nor reveal his position to
the enemy, a dim igniter (essentially strontium peroxide, calcium resinate,
and magnesium) burns for the first 100 yd. for the caliber .30 and the first
200 yd. for the caliber .50 bullet. A tracer caliber .45 bullet for submachine
gun training traces for about 160 yd.
A so-called headlite tracer caliber .50 bullet satisfies the Air Force
requirement for a bullet to simulate a ball of fire. The object is to make the
enemy think that he is under fire from much larger-caliber weapons than small
arms, and the psychological effect is pronounced. The standard M1 tracer bullet
is modified by replacing the usual igniter and tracer composition by strontium
peroxide igniter composition only; although the tracer distance is reduced from
the usual 1800 yd. to about 600 yd. the visibility from the front end is about
three times that of the usual tracer bullet. Thus the M21 headlite bullet
really burns from the rear.


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: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Subject: Re:  (Pre-)WW2 unit insignia id
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:52:05 GMT


From fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)

>From     Will Martin <wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL>
>
>Hi!
>I have a little book from 1942 that illustrates US military insignia
>and it lists a "36th Infantry Division", both in WWI and the
>then-current WWII. However, the insignia it depicts for that unit, in
>both wars, is a down-pointing arrowhead (with an irregular outline,
>indicating a chipped-flint arrowhead), colored bright blue, with a
>yellow "T" in the middle of it. [I have no idea what the "T" means;
>the book gives no explanations, just pictures with unit designtions.]

Was part of the 36th the unit that was tied down in (Italy?) for some
time, eventually relieved by troops of the 442nd RCT (Nisei from Hawaii).
If it was, I recall that most of the original composition of the 35th
was from Texas.

I could check, but it would take several days to get time...


--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: sci.military