Re: [MV] 'Electric armour' vaporizes anti-tank grenades and shell s

From: Steve Grammont (islander@midmaine.com)
Date: Sun Aug 25 2002 - 22:07:06 PDT


Hi Dave,

>I understand the idea. The problem I have is how does this thin armor,
>consisting of two plates of conducting material with some insulator
>between them
>defuse the shaped charge. Forget about the copper that it supposidely
>vaporizes. What happens to the energy of the shaped charge?

My assumption is that it would fill the space inbetween the two layers of
armor. This is the founding principle of spaced armor. The first layer
causes detonation, the airgap diminishes the concentration of gasses, and
the second layer is (hopefully) thick enough to prevent penetration.

Spaced armor works fantastic against shaped charges. However, it doesn't
do squat against DU or even standard AP. Therefore traditional spaced
armor added a lot of weight to the vehicle which was only good for one
eventuality. With the lethality of post WWII rounds going up and up,
spaced armor basically lost much of its usefullness. Better to trade off
the extra weight of the outer armor for thicker main armor to defeat
sabot and DU rounds.

> Also, how does the capacitor shell heal it
>self after being laced with a load of copper?

I assume this is, like reactive armor, is a "one time" system. At least
if the second round hit in the same general area.

> What if it
>rains, does that short out the capacitor effect? I guess it had better
>be discharged before exiting the vehicle to avoid death by electrocution.

The article did make one thing clear... neither of these things are a
problem. Everything is contained inbetween the two layers of armor.
 Thin layers of shielding material, like rubber, applied inbetween the
inner sides of armor and the conductive surfaces would be all that is
needed to make the armor's touchable surfaces perfectly safe.

Obviously I have NO idea if this thing really works in the field, nor do
I know the details of the physics involved. However, I don't see where
the theory of this breaks down except that a large enough shaped round
could simply overwhelm the system. I would assume the system is mostly
designed to defeat smaller munitions (like RPGs) so perhaps it is all it
can defend against. And having a great deal of knowledge about what WWII
Panzerfausts and Panzerschrecks could do to the Soviet monster tanks in
street fighting, I think such a counter measure is prudent if we are
going to start using AFVs as street sweepers.

Steve



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 13:31:45 PDT