Newsgroup: it.cultura.storia.militare
Titolo: Articoli come questo mi convincono sempre

più che al pentagono non sappiano proprio come buttare i soldi... Voi che ne
dite?
Hunt for banned weapons goes ballistic
 In-Depth Coverage
By David Hambling, with additional reporting by Kurt Kleiner
Forget Hans Blix, the UN and inspectors schooled in the art of uncovering
biological, chemical and nuclear agents. There is a quicker way to prove the
existence of weapons of mass destruction.
Gather the latest intelligence, decide where the weapons are stashed, and
fire a high-velocity projectile at the target. High-tech sensors packed into
the projectile will then instantly beam back confirmation that the weapons
are there.
It is a high-risk concept that raises many questions, not least its
technological feasibility and the political ructions that would follow if
such a device were ever built or used. But the US military is taking the
idea seriously, New Scientist has learned.
In 2002, in a two-page research paper commissioned by the army, experts from
the Institute for Advanced Technology at the University of Texas, Austin,
detailed real test results of a prototype projectile designed to verify the
existence of WMDs. They say such a device offers a way to inspect for
weapons without permission or cooperation.
Hardened concrete
To inspect reinforced concrete bunkers or factory buildings suspected of
housing WMDs, the researchers designed a projectile that can penetrate
several metres of hardened concrete without damaging its load of sensors.
Its casing is built from AerMet 100, a nickel-cobalt steel with traces of
molybdenum and chromium. Heat-treating the casing after it is made gives it
an extremely hard surface. The tapering projectile is 230 millimetres long,
with a maximum calibre of 45 millimetres, making it wide enough to carry a
useful payload.
Five test firings have shown that when the projectile is fired at a velocity
of 1200 to 1400 metres per second, it can penetrate more than 1 metre of
concrete and emerge relatively intact at around 1000 metres per second. The
shell maintains its streamlined shape, losing only 12 per cent of its mass
as it passes through the concrete.
Penetrating projectiles can often be sent off course by the shock of impact,
and the uneven erosion of the casing as it passes through hard material such
as a thick wall. To overcome this, the new projectile has a series of deep
groves cut into its casing which act as fins, helping the shell to maintain
a straight trajectory as it passes through the concrete.
G forces
The projectile's designers, ballistic expert Mehmet Erengil and director of
biological defence Steve Kornguth, both of the Institute for Advanced
Technology, and James Valdes of the army's Aberdeen Proving Ground in
Maryland, do not address what sensors would be on board, how robust they
would be, or whether they could survive impact forces that would be in the
region of 100,000g. They were not able to respond to questions put to them
by New Scientist.
One solution could be to encapsulate the non-sensing part of any hardware in
plastic. Integrated circuits encapsulated in this way have no internal voids
or moving parts. Such circuits have already been designed to measure the g
forces experienced by high-impact projectiles.
But it is unclear whether chemical, biological and nuclear sensors could be
designed this way, and also be capable of sending back their results by
telemetry.
Michael Levi of the Brookings Institution in Washington DC points out that
such "non-permissive" testing may not have any advantages over existing
inspection methods. Anyone hiding weapons could simply dig deeper bunkers to
defeat any possible penetrating shell, he says.
Act of war
Others point out that firing such a weapon could itself be interpreted as an
act of war. The high-energy projectiles could kill any occupants of a site
being tested, and to sense biological or chemical agents the projectile may
have to puncture the agent's containment vessels, releasing them into the
atmosphere.
Also, critics could still question the authenticity and relevance of
intelligence provided by the shell and released by the government.
But John Pike, director of Washington DC think tank GlobalSecurity.org, and
a former technology chief at the Federation of American Scientists, says the
design of the shell could work.
"It's enormously elegant," he says. "I would almost say it's surprising no
one ever thought of it before. I don't know in the real world whether
they'll do that. But it would not be the most wasteful expenditure ever."

 
L`idea di una tale "sonda" e`una gran cretinata.
the Volk
-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - 
http://www.Mailgate.ORG


ROTFL!!!
Certo che questo metterebbe al sicuro gli americani da altre figure di
merda!!!
"Le armi di distruzioni di massa c'erano!!!! Ce l'ha confermato il missile
che le ha distrutte!!!!" (ovvio che poi non si trovino piů...)
Hanno proprio la faccia come il culo...
Saluti            Meneldil