HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hhtra@usho21.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock)
Subject: Re: Bradley AA version (was Re:helos vs tanks)
Organization: Chevron
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 17:35:41 GMT


From hhtra@usho21.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock)

In article <C02wBD.GwE@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, labrg@emory.edu (Ryan Montieth Gill) writes:
|> 	If you wan't a divisional armoured air defense system to keep
|> 	up with the tanks then do what the Germans did. Build it on an
|> 	existing armour chassis (a MBT will make the engine mainanance
|> 	easy for the mechs, just use the same body that the units
|> 	generally get...It should be a new system...so use M1A1
|> 	chassis..), Design a new turret with a search radar, and a
|> 	target tracking radar, link this to multiple common based gun 
|> 	systems with a common ammo supply feed and some optical sights 
|> 	for back up...and you have the Gephard....or and american
|> 	version....So take an M1A1 chassis...several 20 or 25mm
|> 	guns...put them in a turret with a good set of air search
|> 	radars sets...and get some decent optics.....voila!!!

 This is exactly what LTV and Thompson/CSF proposed - a M1 chassis
 mounted with radars, EO, 6 AA missiles (Chapparels?) and twin guns
 (25mm?). They lost.  Probably politics.  Thompson/CSF is a French 
 company and France had just denied permission for F-111s to cross 
 French airspace on their way to Libya.

 TRAVIS
 hhtra@hou281.chevron.com 

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Apache and AMRAAM
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:33:38 GMT


From bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au

> From MegaZone23 <megazone@obsidian.wpi.edu>
>
>Blair Haworth <Blair.Haworth@lambada.oit.unc.edu> writes:

[comments about Apache helo carrying AMRAAM deleted]

>>which suggests it can be fired from third-party data.  If the Army buys
>>AMRAAM, it'll be as a SAM; the Norwegians are already set to, and it's
>
> Say, Chaparal(sp?) uses Sidewinders with a booster and AMRAAM is compatible
> with Sidewinder rails... So, would it be possible to change the electronics
> suite on the Chaparal to use AMRAAM SAMs? How about replacing Sea Sparrow
> with Sea AMRAAM? (say, does the AMRAAM have a name yet? I think Dale Brown
> uses Scorpion, but he isn't very reliable. In 'Sky Masters' he refers to
> the CIWS as 20mm and 30mm, plus a bunch of other stuff is screwy....)

        Hmmm, AMRAAM on the Chaparal, interesting concept. Then it becomes
a matter of obtaining longer range targetting data (what's the good of
buying AMRAAM if you only use it at Sidewinder range). With a bit of
work, you could build a "poor man's" Patriot system using AMRAAM (but I
wonder if AMRAAM can perform missile intercepts like Patriot can).

About CIWS. CIWS doesn't refer to a single specific type of gun (ie the
20 mm Vulcan "Phalanx"). CIWS is an acronym for a light, rapid fire weapon
system designed for close range air defence, so the CIWS label can be
applied to any gun system built for this purpose (eg the Dutch "Goalkeeper",
Spanish "Meroka" and Italo-British "Seaguard").


           Bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au  OR  bull@monu1.cc.monash.oz
                    DOD# 251  '84 VF 750   Closet Ducatisto
             Disclaimer. If you love your llama, let it lambada.

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Markus Stumptner <mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Subject: Re: Apache vs Werewolf (Hokum)
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:28:21 GMT


From Markus Stumptner <mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>

>From Brian Douglass <anasaz!briand@anasazi.com>
> The Hokum was unveiled at the Farnborough International Air show in
> September.  It is a single-seat helicopter with counter-rotating rotors
> (hmmn).  It has a 30mm cannon, 12 laser-guided anti-tank missiles and 40
> rockets.  It also has an ejection seat.

> And on the ejection seat.  From the picture, the cockpit isn't far enough 
> forward for the pilot not to get pureed (?) by windmilling rotors.

The rotor blades are blasted off on ejection.  I think I recall
reading that the system has already been tested with live pilots.  :-)

--
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: "david.r.wells" <drw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com>
Subject: Re: Iowa Class Battleships
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:39:22 GMT


From "david.r.wells" <drw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com>

In article <BzzCx0.sx@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Stephen Harker <phs172m@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au> writes:
>
>In article <BzH510.AxB@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, yukyuk@beta.lanl.gov (Craig B. Huffnagle) writes:
>> 
>> The Iowa-class Battleships were designated 'fast battleships' capable
>> of speeds up to 33 knots.  The 'slow battleships' were to start with
>> BB 67 of the Montana class.  The Montana class would have carried the
>> 18 in. turrets available at the time and would be capable of speeds
>> up to 27 knots.
>
>	18 in. turrets?  Do you mean 18 in armour or guns?  Every source I
>have read has described the Montana class as being designed for 12 (4x3)
>16 in guns of the same type as were installed in the Iowa class.
>
I have read of rumors of 18" gun armed Montanas, but I understand that the
Navy never considered them too seriously. I'll dig out my sources, and see
if I can find more data. The Navy DID have an 18" L48 gun that they built
after WWI for test purposes. In fact, I think Dahlgren still has it!
Anyhow, the 18" gun Montana may be just one of those stories, like the
35 knot "1948" Montanas. (I do have the plans for the latter, however, 
they are probably based on civilian speculation rather than any official 
Navy plans.)

				David R. Wells

DISCLAIMER: I don't speak for AT&T, and they don't speak for me.

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Ethan L Mckinney <mckinney@athena.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Sonic Sniper Locater
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:25:02 GMT


From Ethan L Mckinney <mckinney@athena.mit.edu>

1)  The US deployed large numbers of passive listening devices in Vietnam -- That
didn't seem to solve the sniper problem.  Try working out the math for how many
you need to cover an area reliably and you'll get a feeling for the problem. 
Data processing would also be ... impressive.
2)  Yes, most bullets are supersonic, which is why they make scary "cracking"
noises when they go overhead.  One of the functions of a silencer is to
decelerate the bullet below Mach 1 (on rifles, that is).  Most pistol rounds are
subsonic, making them much easier to silence (rifle silencers suck).
3)  Actually, some Germans are working on systems using passive listeners for CFE
verification.  Turns out sonic sensors work very well for this, and you can tell
vehicle types apart, because tanks and trucks vibrate differently, and you can
even tell different tank models and their speeds apart because the frequencies
are different.  Aircraft can be distinguished by engine type and number.  Ranges
are somewhat short, though.

					E

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Dave Coder <dave@nucleus.immunol.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Dueling Battleships (edited response)
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:36:52 GMT


From Dave Coder <dave@nucleus.immunol.washington.edu>

<mckinney@athena.mit.edu> writes:
]It is important to realize that firing at a longer range is not  
always a dis
]advantage.  Thusly:  At very long range, shells come almost  
straight down to
]penetrate deck armor.  

Is this correct? I seem to remember diagrams from the Renaissance that 
depict the the maximum range to be an angle of elevation of 45 degrees. 
To get an angle of descent closer to vertical, the elevation needs to be 
increased resulting in decreased range. So it seems you have to be in 
closer to lob shells straight into the deck.


Dave Coder
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
military@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM   | Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486  
(VOICEplus)
Sci.military moderator
From: fbp@igc.apc.org (Foreign Bases Project)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Help Needed on Mil. & Env. Curricu
Date: 12 Jan 93 16:39:35 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department


From Foreign Bases Project <fbp@igc.apc.org>

/* Written  4:47 pm  Jan 11, 1993 by fbp@igc.apc.org in igc:peace.studies */
/* ---------- "Help Needed on Mil. & Env. Curricu" ---------- */

We are helping to prepare a model curriculum on military impacts on
the environment for the Commission on Arms Control Education, a
joint project of the International Association of University
Professors and the United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs. 
To assist us in this work, we would like copies of articles,
publications, and bibliographies on such topics as environmental
impacts of war, environmental causes of conflicts, environmental
impacts of peacetime military activity, etc. We are looking for
materials from a variety of perspectives. Sample course outlines
would also be welcome. 

Than you in advance for your assistance.

To send or for further information:
************************************************************
JOHN M. MILLER                *  Int'l Clearinghouse on the 
Internet:fbp@igc.org          *   Military & the Environment
Bitnet:fbp%igc.org@stanford   *  PO Box 150753 
UUCP:uunet!pyramid!cdp!fbp    *  Brooklyn, NY 11215-0014 USA
PeaceNet/EcoNet:fbp           *  Phone/Fax: (718)788-6071
*************************************************************.
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: dave pierson <pierson@empror.enet.dec.com>
Subject: More Humor in Manuals
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:40:12 GMT


From dave pierson <pierson@empror.enet.dec.com>

Addendum to the collection of humorous things found in Military manuals:
Picked up a WWII vintage hadnbook on US Bombs & Fuzes at a local militaria
meet.
In discussing the AN [Army-Navy] series bombs, and their suspension
requirements:

	For suspension in torpedo slings, the torpedo sling guide key found
	on Navy bombs can be made on AN bombs by using the base of the
	single suspension lug with the lug removed by gentle hacksawing.


Uhuhhhh.  "gentle".

(Yeah, the fillers are quite insensitive, but the concept of having to hacksaw
the bomb to fit the dropping gear....)

thanks
dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation	|the opinions, my own.
40 Old Bolton Rd		|I am the NRA.
Stow, Mass, USA	
01775				pierson@msd26.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J Raffles

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: MR KR COMAN <bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za>
Subject: Re:  Waterloo account in Les Miserables
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:33:30 GMT


From MR KR COMAN <bakc@giraffe.ru.ac.za>

>From: mjwhite@engin.umich.edu (Michael White)
>Subject: Re:  Waterloo account in Les Miserables
>Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 04:26:30 GMT
>From mjwhite@engin.umich.edu (Michael White)
>In 24800 Kunal Taravade writes:
>--> Napoleon lost because of a tragic accident involving a large battalion
>which --> fell, both men and horses, into a ditch which the strategists had
>--> failed to identify as a possible source of danger. 
>
>Hugo (and others) seized on the myth of the ditch as an excuse for the 
>defeat.  However, Napoleon once stated that the failure of the campaign
>was due to the fact that no one, from colonel on up, did their job
>properly.

	Just a thought.  At the much, much earlier battle of Blenhiem (1704?)
when the Duke of Malborough defeated the French, a deep ditch or stream
was ostensibly a reason for a an upset/disaster that befell the French
cavalry.  At some stage they mounted a charge, bashed thu some light 
shrubbery and then the whole lot pitched forward into a deep but concealed
water-feature -- they did not have a good day.    Just wonder whether old
Vic Hug used a bit of creative licence to move this bit of folklore out of
Germany into Belgium and fast-forward it by about 100 years?????
Cheers,
Keith Coman
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If we pay dogfood salespeople more than we   :  Dept of Management
 do teachers, we should not be surprised if   :  Rhodes University
 our dogs eat like kids, and our kids end     :  Grahamstown, 6140
 up reading like dogs."                       :  Rep of South Africa
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Emmanuel Baechler <baechler@lia.di.epfl.ch>
Subject: Still on the Swiss Military
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:26:16 GMT


From Emmanuel Baechler <baechler@lia.di.epfl.ch>


>    highways convertable into landing strips for jet aircraft by
>    simply removing highway dividers?

Some parts of our highways can be used as landing strips. It is mainly
designed as an additional option to get more small war-time airports.

>    pylons on bridges, tunnels and so forth PRE-MINED (that is 
>    already charged with explosives to accomplish almost
>    imediate demolition without the need to secure the explosives
>    from somewhere?  (just one or two responsible people and 
>    a "key" to turn the switch)?

If memory serves me, that's true too.

>    Underground shelters and hospitals stocked and manned to supply
>    shelter and/or medical service to the population in times of
>    war (including atomic warfare)?

That's definitely true

> As as side note, does anyone have accurate figures on how much money
> is spent (either %of GNP or actual $ or francs) by the Swiss for
> military budgets?

Unhappily, I don't.


Emmanuel Baechler.                        | Tel.: ++41-21-693-2732
Laboratoire d'Intelligence Artificielle   | e-mail: baechler@lia.di.epfl.ch
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne  |     or: baechler@liasun6.epfl.ch
MA-Ecublens                               | Standard Disclaimer
CH-1015 Lausanne	Switzerland

Ban the bomb. Save the world for conventional warfare.

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: dgd@kcbbs.gen.nz (David Dix)
Subject: Re: Worst Allied WW2 Fighters
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 17:39:01 GMT


From dgd@kcbbs.gen.nz (David Dix)


In <BzzD2q.12u@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Anssi Oorni <oorni@hkkk.fi> writes:

>I think that you are refering to the attack the Italians made against
>Harwich on 11 November 1940. The fighters were not Fiat G-50s but
>CR42s. RAF claimed "some thirteen" bombers and fighters shot down.
>Since the Battle ended officially on 31 October this attack was not
>part of it. The Italians actually made their first "attack" on 29
>October but they turned back as soon as AA opened fire at them. Only
>some bombs were scattered over Ramsgate.
>
>Source:
>
>Richard Hough and Denis Richards, The Battle of Britain

The first appearance over Britian of the Itialian Air Force was on the
25 October 1940 at night when sixteen Fiat BR.20 bombers were sent to attack
Harwich. None were shot down over England however changeable weather
conditions over Northern Europe caused one bomber to crash on take-off
and two more ran out of fuel on their return flights and their crews
baled out.
On the 29 October during the day a force of fifteen Fiat BR.20s, escorted by
73 Fiat CR.42 fighters carried out a snap attack on Ramsgate. They were not
intercepted by defending fighters but several of the bombers suffered damage
from anti-aircraft fire. 
The effective anti-aircraft fire encouraged the Itialians to dispose of their
bombs as quickly as possible and head home.

>From Battle of Britian by Alfred Price



Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Subject: Re: Whispering Death?
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:29:20 GMT


From Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)

In article <C0HvLM.Fq8@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>
mikes@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Mike Sheumaker) writes:

> I've got a stupid question. Since the Corsair was powered by a radial engine
> (air cooled), what were the radiators for? Oil coolers? Intercoolers for the
> supercharger?

They were oil coolers, I believe.

Corky Scott

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: zoran siveski fac ee <zoran@hertz.njit.edu>
Subject: British armor
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 17:42:29 GMT


From zoran siveski fac ee <zoran@hertz.njit.edu>






Could anyone make comments on the veracity of the alleged event described
below?

				Regards, 
					Zoran

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from the Monday, December 28, 1992 Washington Post


During a recent patrol near the northeast Bosnian city of Tuzla, a
convoy of British ``Warrior'' armored fighting vehicles was ambushed
by XXXXX militia forces. The XXXXX opened fire with everything they
had--mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and other heavy weapons.

The XXXXX never made a dent. The 45 tracked British Warriors in
Bosnia weigh 30 tons each, have reinforced armor plating, are
armed with 30mm rapid-fire cannon and can race across the
countryside at more than 50 mph. The next best thing to being in
a bunker on a Balkan battlefield is to be in a Warrior.

The XXXXX grenades ricocheted off the British armor, making 
``poing'' sounds and leaving, at worst, small burn marks on the
white paint identifying the Warriors as being under United Nations
command. Instead of firing back, the British plowed ahead and did
not stop until they reached the local XXXXX militia headquarters.
 


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Paul Tomblin <PTomblin@gvc.com>
Subject: Carriers - A whole lotta flying going on?
Organization: Not officially GeoVision Systems Inc., Ottawa, Ontario
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:42:49 GMT


From Paul Tomblin <PTomblin@gvc.com>

A simple question:  Do carriers have CAPs flying all the time, 24 hours a
day, or just during time of war or increased alert status?

I guess what I really want to know, is what planes are flying, and what
planes are ready on the deck during normal peace time hours.

-- 
Paul Tomblin, pt@compass.gvc.com
(This is not an official opinion/statement of GeoVision Systems Inc.)
"There is nothing wrong with making up .signature quotes, but... make *new*
ones." - Apologies to Henry Spencer and D.Sim

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Gary Coffman <emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu>
Subject: Re: SNIPER DETECTION.
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 04:26:34 GMT


From Gary Coffman <emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu>

In article <C0Jpx5.8zD@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Trevor German <tjgerman@53iss6.waterloo.NCR.COM> writes:
>	To sense the direction only three microphones would be reqired 
>	positioned at the corners of some defined triangle. The triangle 
>	would not need to be large and could be anything from a foot  or
>	so on the edge up. Since it should be portable this is a definate
>	asset. 
>
>	The signal processing would be designed to select noises with sharp
>	attack angles (speed of volume increase) and would recognise similar
>	noise shapes from each three sensors within the time that sound can
>	travel the distance between them. By time dating the arrival of a 
>	sound at all three sensors it is a simple matter of geometry to
>	determine the direction in which the sound originated. 

To backtrack the sniper, you need at least minute of angle resolution.
That's about the accuracy limit for practical military small arms. That's 
not "simple geometry" with practical close spaced acoustic sensors. Assuming 
speed of sound is 1100 fps, 0.05 inch error at the sensor translates to one 
minute of angle error in target location. Building sensors smaller than 0.05 
inch across that will respond properly to the impulse noise without excessive 
phase shift is not off the shelf technology. Things like speed of sound
changes due to temperature, atmospheric pressure, and humidity would have 
to be factored in as well, not to mention problems with multipath reflections.
It looks like a hard problem to do much more than build a system that can 
say more than "it came from over thataway somewhere."

Gary
-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George)
Subject: Re: Treatment of Jewish Pow's by Germans..
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:36:55 GMT


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

In article <C0G11z.z7@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
writes:
[deletions to save space]
>
>    Perhaps a better question: how did the Germans know the soldier
>or airman was Jewish in the first place?  It seems fairly obvious to me
>that, if your name was "Issac Eisenstein," for example, that the Army
>should issue ID tags with the name "Joe Smith" on them.  The serial number
>could be cross-referenced to provide proper burial services or whatever,
>but when going up against such an anti-Jewish foe doesn't it make sense
>to obscure the more obvious signs?
>
>[mod note -- The author of _A Blood Dimmed Tide_ is Gerald Astor (I
>mentioned this book in my mod note in the original article.
>
>He mentions of several Jewish POWs who had the appropriate military
>abbreviation of their religion stamped on their dog tags.  However, several
>POWs where were Jewish managed to get new dog tags issued that did not
>indicate that they were Jewish
>
>Dan's idea of leaving the religion off of the dog tags and cross
>referencing the service # certainly bears merit
[deletions to save space]

     Wouldn't "false-name" identification tags violate the Geneva Convention's
requirement that name, rank, serial number be provided? If so, one can
easily envisage the Nazis claiming that this relatively minor violation of
the Geneva Convention released them from any and all obligations to adhere
to it. ( Cf. the shackling of Allied prisoners in the Desert War for a brief
time)

[mod note -- I didn't mention changing the person's name, only that some
GIs changed the religion that was stamped on their dog tags

Steve]
     I have reflected on this myself, particularly after viewing the WWII
POW display at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio. I recall the id cards
issued by the Germans, which did list religion (although the religion
on the particular card said only "Prot.").
Robert George
(speaking only for myself)

"The very essence of individual freedom is equal justice under a rule of
law, a law to which every man shall be subject and which no executive
can modify."
    Senator Robert Taft , March 11, 1944

Newsgroups: sci.military