Advertisement
    Home        Articles        Reviews        Gallery        Contests        Forums     Search Login
Forums
 Introduction
 Posting guidelines
 Forum key
New Messages
Forum List
 News Forums
   GeneralOct 10 
   IndustryOct 10 
   Shows & ClubsOct 9 
 Site Forums
   ArticlesMay 16
   Build LogsOct 10
   ReviewsSep 22
   GalleryOct 10
   ContestsOct 6
 Modelling Forums
   KitsOct 9 
   ConstructionOct 10 
   PaintingOct 10 
   FiguresOct 10 
   DioramasAug 29 
   1-48th ScaleOct 1 
   Small ScaleSep 23 
 Research Forums
   WW2Oct 10 
   Post WW2Oct 10 
   Pre WW2Sep 6 
 Classifieds Ads
   Buy & SellOct 10 
   CommercialOct 10 
 

Forums - Research / Post-WW2

This Post WW2 forum is intended for asking and discussing reference or historical related issues pertaining to any time after WW2 (1945+) subjects.

Topics  1397
Messages  5045
 Subject:  Re: OT:- Technical armour question.List thread.  
  
 Date:  Mar 6, 2003
 From:  Kurt Laughlin 
"Drewe Manton" wrote
> Is terminal velocity of a HESH round a factor in it's effectiveness? By
> that I mean is a HESH round more effective the faster it's travelling when
> it impacts the target?

Ogorkiewicz notes in his "Technology of Tanks" that HESH must be fired at
relatively low velocities due to the thin shell wall. Max MV is typically
800 m/s. That might be a practical limit that has inhibited
experimentation. In principle, I could see a disadvantage from varying the
velocity either way off nominal (whatever it is), as this would affect the
timing of the fuze initiation vis-a-vis the configuration of the explosive
charge against the armor, meaning that the detonation would occur either
before or after the charge was optimally formed. As a rule chemical energy
rounds act independently of velocity. Higher velocity is desirable mainly
because it reduces time of flight/maneuvering effects against moving targets
and the effect of range errors.

KL
 
Thread Listing 
  OT:- Technical armour question. - Drewe Manton - Mar 5, 2003
. . . Re: OT:- Technical armour question. - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 6, 2003
. . . . . . Re: OT:- Technical armour question. - Drewe Manton - Mar 6, 2003
    Home        Articles        Reviews        Gallery        Contests        Forums     Contact Track-Link