Tank graveyard

[robert.munsey]

What do you call four tankers .......<snip>
What is closed up tight, covered in oil, and stinks to high heaven You might have said tankers, but I meant canned fish.

You really are a Infantry troll aren't you

[CDAT]

It isn't.........it is the opposite of the depth of the cone. This is why cratering charges and limpet mines have legs.

Well I am done trying to help you, as you know more then those of us who this is what we did. Long live the Light Infantry they can do more than anyone else.

[robert.munsey]

It isn't.........it is the opposite of the depth of the cone. This is why cratering charges and limpet mines have legs.

You idiot, it is not the distance outside the cone, it is the depth of the cone that has to be right. Along with the angle.
The road cratering charges are built a certain way and the legs are not part of the stand off. When was the last time you employed one Get your facts straight.

[ArmySGT.]

You idiot, it is not the distance outside the cone, it is the depth of the cone that has to be right. Along with the angle.
The road cratering charges are built a certain way and the legs are not part of the stand off. When was the last time you employed one Get your facts straight.

Didn't I just say that Inverted and opposite....... If the cone is 6 inches deep and 30 degrees the focus point is opposite of this ........ 6 inches in front.

Oh.........that is exactly why the legs exist.......the stand off for the plasma jet from the shaped charge.

http://pl.b5z.net/i/u/6070324/i/Inert_M3_40_LB_DEMO_Shaped_Charge.jpg

[ArmySGT.]

Well I am done trying to help you, as you know more then those of us who this is what we did. Long live the Light Infantry they can do more than anyone else.

My secondary MOS in 11B, my primary is 95B..... Which I think became 31B in the force restructure. Which means I had to learn to do more with even less.

No artillery, no Manpads, No mortars, AT4 and AT mines in the defense.

I got a truck and pistol though.

I support the Three, Follow Me!

[ArmySGT.]

With the .50 is that first hand experience or just hearsay I ask because several things that I had been told were fact, when we got the chance to test for our self found out to be untrue. I was told that within one magazine of 5.56 you would chew through the armor of a M113, the 7.62X51 would go in and bounce around, and the .50 would make Swiss cheese out of it. When we go the chance to shoot one (OK it was an old ITV), after hundreds of rounds of 5.56 you were hard pressed to find any place that looked like it had taken any real damage. The 7.62 just left tiny little marks, and the .50 BMG left pock marks. This was with green/black tip. Right before us was some Brits and there Warriors with TP ammo did not even penetrate, it did leave nice sized dents were each round hit, had it been war stock ammo I have no doubt that it would have penetrated.

Now I am talking about the BTR-60 and BTR-70. Can't say for the -80 or -90 from the side.

The M113 is rated for 7.62N AP ammo.... So that is what is supposed to happen. 7.62N in AP has black tips.

.50 BMG does penetrate especially SLAP to ricochet around the inside, still takes more than one strike at zero degrees deflection in the same place. M113s are also rated against 155mm / 152mm shell fragments though I can't remember if it is 20 meters or 50 meters from point of detonation.

Olefin I also thought that it made sense, if you are looking at this objectively. If you are looking at it with rose colored lenses it may not.

Let's stick to the discussion.

[robert.munsey]

Didn't I just say that Inverted and opposite....... If the cone is 6 inches deep and 30 degrees the focus point is opposite of this ........ 6 inches in front.

Oh.........that is exactly why the legs exist.......the stand off for the plasma jet from the shaped charge.

They existed for the old M3 not the current cratering charges brother. The legs on the old M3 Cratering charge did not exist for stand off.
Check your facts, it is not for the plasma jet. Ask your C-IED trainers in your unit for the real facts on EFP warheads.

[robert.munsey]

Now I am talking about the BTR-60 and BTR-70. Can't say for the -80 or -90 from the side.

Let's stick to the discussion.

At what range is the US M61 AP going to penetrate the side of a BTR-60

[ArmySGT.]

Well I am done trying to help you, as you know more then those of us who this is what we did. Long live the Light Infantry they can do more than anyone else.

I have a solution!

[ArmySGT.]

They existed for the old M3 not the current cratering charges brother. The legs on the old M3 Cratering charge did not exist for stand off.
Check your facts, it is not for the plasma jet. Ask your C-IED trainers in your unit for the real facts on EFP warheads.

When did Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFP)s, formerly called platter charges..... Become cratering charges

EFPs are for attacking armor from the side by punching a slug through the armor not burning a hole in armor with a hot plasma jet.

So before you want to insult me........and tell me what is what.....

[ArmySGT.]

At what range is the US M61 AP going to penetrate the side of a BTR-60

Welded steel[2]
7 mm at 86o hull upper front[2][6]
9 mm at 47o hull lower front[2][6]
7 mm hull sides[6]
5 mm hull upper rear[6]
7 mm hull lower rear[6]
5 mm hull floor[6]
7 mm hull roof[6]
10 mm turret front[9]
7 mm turret sides[6]
7 mm turret sear[6]
7 mm turret roof[6]

[Olefin]

When did Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFP)s, formerly called platter charges..... Become cratering charges

EFPs are for attacking armor from the side by punching a slug through the armor not burning a hole in armor with a hot plasma jet.

So before you want to insult me........and tell me what is what.....

actually you have been doing that quite enough on your own - lets dial it down a little shall we

[robert.munsey]

Now I am talking about the BTR-60 and BTR-70. Can't say for the -80 or -90 from the side.

Welded steel[2]
7 mm at 86o hull upper front[2][6]
9 mm at 47o hull lower front[2][6]
7 mm hull sides[6]
5 mm hull upper rear[6]
7 mm hull lower rear[6]
5 mm hull floor[6]
7 mm hull roof[6]
10 mm turret front[9]
7 mm turret sides[6]
7 mm turret sear[6]
7 mm turret roof[6]

Wow ok, you can quote the armor thickness of the BTR. You still did not answer the question.
So I will repeat it;
What range does the 7.62mm M61 penetrate the side of the BTR-60 (we will keep it easy for you).

[ArmySGT.]

actually you have been doing that quite enough on your own - lets dial it down a little shall we

No. I have stuck deliberately to the subject without the name calling. Stick to the subject.

Ok, the Branch jokes I will take responsibility for. Those are unspecific to the individual.

[ArmySGT.]

Wow ok, you can quote the armor thickness of the BTR. You still did not answer the question.
So I will repeat it;
What range does the 7.62mm M61 penetrate the side of the BTR-60 (we will keep it easy for you).

.50 BMG passes right through what little armor a BTR has.

Let me keep it easy for you. I didn't say 7.62N even AP when I spoke of hull penetrations through the side armor of BTR-60s and 70s....

So you misquoted me to begin with.