h a l f b a k e r yAmbivalent? Are you sure?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
A protection system that destroys bunker buster munitions is a must for any hardened bunker, most current bunker busters use a very hard tip with a lot of mass behind it to pierce the layers of concrete between it and it's target much like kinetic energy penetrators used by tanks. a series of explosive
charges similar to reactive armour panels for tanks but probably with a control system to detonate charges for maximum effect could be used to stop and disrupt these bombs much as gen 3 reactive armour shattered kinetic energy penetrators (break into little chunks so the force is more spread out)
A system like this might allow much cheaper bunkers to survive anything short of an orbital kinetic kill vehicle system (giant tungsten telephone pole in orbit, kind of like hitting something with an asteroid but one that goes into the ground)
oh yeah, one more thing, many bunker busters can use not only a conventional explosive charge but also a nuclear charge. that means that even if your concrete stops the bomb the shockwave it produces can still collapse your bunker, with the proposed system your explosive charges would be able to disrupt the nuclear bomb and cause it to fissle(dud) rather than eplode (nuclear bombs need explosive lenses to uniformly compress their core(most of them) if one blasting cap fails or there's another explosion nearby neither fission or fusion happen)
kinetic energy penetrators
http://en.wikipedia...c_energy_penetrator
like a needle but harder, bigger and fired out of a tank's main gun at many times the speed of sound [RichardT, Apr 21 2010]
GBU-28 bunker buster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-28
the kind of thing such a system would be up against, these destroyed iraq's hardened bunkers. [RichardT, Apr 21 2010]
bunker buster test footage
http://www.youtube....watch?v=hAfjFm2jJo4
Test of a typical bunker buster [RichardT, Apr 22 2010]
[link]
|
| |
School's out early this year. |
|
| |
It would work only if the bomb impacts the armor
at a shallow angle - from the Wikipedia article on
explosive reactive armor, that seems to be a
requirement for breaking up kinetic energy
penetrators. |
|
| |
[+] For the idea of using explosive reactive armour
on buildings, though. This could be useful to
protect buildings (embassies, etc) in places where
they are likely to come under RPG fire. ERA is
supposed to be effective against shaped charges. |
|
| |
//ERA is supposed to be effective against shaped charges.// I think because shaped charge rounds generally travel at lower velocity than KE rounds. |
|
| |
My name's not [ian], [21quiz] |
|
| |
My name's not ian either, in case that comment was intended for me. Nor is my name Dave. |
|
| |
I like this idea but why should it exclusively be for bunkers? This idea could scaled down (or up!) for anything which might have an explosive fall on it, which as we all know includes everything. |
|
| |
//explosive reactive armour//
There's another kind?
Spring-loaded, perhaps?
Pneumatic? |
|
| |
I'm already tempted to install some - just as soon as I get my hollowed out volcano. |
|
| |
Would this be for coal bunkers? Isn't it a bit of an over-reaction? |
|
| |
//Isn't it a bit of an over-reaction?//
Once the oil's run-out?
No, I don't think so - haven't you seen Mad Max 2? |
|
| |
//It would work only if the bomb impacts the armor at a shallow angle//
Remember, this isn't a tank. The charges could be wired to a computer with sensors to track incoming bombs. alternatively you could attach them electrically to a sensor above and beside them so that the shockwave they produce hits the bomb from below, at an angle. That would be the simpler option. |
|
| |
//ERA is supposed to be effective against shaped charges.//
It was developed for that purpose but the principle can and was applied to deflecting kinetic penetrators which are the closest analogue to bunker busters I can think of. Again, ERA in it's simplest form is effective only against shaped charges, but if computer controlled it could be made effective against a much greater variety of threats due to the ability to use panels adjacent to the point of impact and the ability to direct the explosive blast. Greater control combined with sensing capabilities could be used to react to threats before such a reaction would normally be possible enabling the deflection and destabilization of incoming projectiles before they actually hit. |
|
| |
I agree though about buildings though that would be a good idea, then again slat Armour would be another option |
|
| |