Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Misconception on DU munitions Posted: 07-May-2006 at 09:14 |
Many think that the use of DU is harmful, it is, but not for the right reasons. It does cause cancer and it does cause infact deformation. But this is not due to its radio active properties. DU is basically spent uranium, its radioactive properties are harmless. However, Uranium is a heavy metal and like all heavy metals it is poisonous and causes cancers and other ailments. DU rounds largely vapourise on impact, basically they turn to uranium dust. It is this dust which gets into the air, into the soil, into the water and is in one way or another consumed by humans and animals.
As far as I am concerned its use is unethical and tantamount to the use of chemical weapons.
|
|
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-May-2006 at 11:39 |
Zagros-
There is already a thread more or less dealing with this in Current Affairs and International Relations.
It has been an interesting and open exchange, spirited, but so far we have been behaving ourselves, sort of
Edited by red clay
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-May-2006 at 12:12 |
Yes, that topic was the inspiration for this thread.
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-May-2006 at 13:51 |
As far as I am concerned its use is unethical and tantamount to the use of chemical weapons. |
You're spot on on the real harmfull nature of DU, but the thing is when
DU isn't being used, lead is, and it too is a highly toxic heavy metal.
But DU gets all the bad rap.
And what exactly are armed forces expected to use in place of heavy metal tipped armour piercing rounds?
Its a lost cause really, as ultimatly, you are asking armed forces to
not bother shooting tanks and other armoured vehicles, or alternativly,
spend even more money using missiles in their stead (which would
probably please the arms-industry).
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-May-2006 at 14:41 |
How about not fighting wars unless absolutely necessary?
The difference also with lead is that it doesn't vapourise on impact.
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-May-2006 at 17:49 |
Lead does vaporise AFAIK, maybe its a matter of how much it vapourises.
Its also about half as toxic as DU, but likely more of it would be used
to compensate for it not being as *good* as DU when used as munnition.
Not fighting wars is as ever the ultimate solution.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
malizai_
Sultan
Alcinous
Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-May-2006 at 07:06 |
Originally posted by Cywr
As far as I am concerned its use is unethical and tantamount to the use of chemical weapons. |
You're spot on on the real harmfull nature of DU, but the thing is when DU isn't being used, lead is, and it too is a highly toxic heavy metal. But DU gets all the bad rap.
|
Cwyr, i have had the opportunity to work at the British Lead Mills (BLM) and know too well the dangers of Lead poisoning. It is under strict regime of hand washes and health and safety initiatives. Even when you go to the canteen and key in for a cup of coffee at the vending machine, u wash ur hand religiously before sitting down. It is not a joke. I forgot a couple of times and though it wasnt a place suited to a person with my absent mindedness. It may also explain why i act all funny sometimes.
Here in the UK there is i think still continued use of Mercury in dental amalgam, but in reality few people opt for this free service on the NHS(national health service). most people pay out for other remedies. i think mercury is supposed to be more toxic than lead. This practise will be stopped sooner or later i am sure.
As for DU, i think it has radiological as well as toxic effects it give off beta radiation depending on the isotope and a given scenario. The main problem is that it is most hazordous immediately after the impact of a projectile, and dependent on the density of rounds used at a given target. it is this accumulation effect that leads to a serious potential hazard. In the middle-east in dry barren conditions any falling projectiles or penetrators are not likely to burried in the soft ground, like in the balkans. When we consider the quantities used it becomes a serious issue. !000 tns in Afghanistan and 3000 tns in Iraq.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-May-2006 at 10:31 |
APFSDS round do not usually vapourize (since they are not pure uranium 238). I remember seeing a firing demo by the Pakistan Armys Khalid Tank and the shot went through the target's (an old Patton) frontal armour and out the back at 4 Km's and fell way back. They found it and displayed it. Was not even bent.
DU ammunition (120 mm NATO ,125 mm Pakistan, 125mm China and the new 125mm Russian) can penetrate any armour at almost all ranges. No way in hell are militaries going to stop.
|
|
TeldeInduz
General
Joined: 07-Mar-2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 857
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-May-2006 at 09:42 |
Originally posted by Sparten
APFSDS round do not usually vapourize (since they are not pure uranium 238). I remember seeing a firing demo by the Pakistan Armys Khalid Tank and the shot went through the target's (an old Patton) frontal armour and out the back at 4 Km's and fell way back. They found it and displayed it. Was not even bent.
DU ammunition (120 mm NATO ,125 mm Pakistan, 125mm China and the new 125mm Russian) can penetrate any armour at almost all ranges. No way in hell are militaries going to stop.
|
Whenever the DU round explodes, and most do in the end, it vapourizes. DU is a good deterrent to have in an arsenal but like nukes shouldnt be used.
|
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................
|
|
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-May-2006 at 09:51 |
Originally posted by TeldeInduz
Originally posted by Sparten
APFSDS round do not usually vapourize (since they are not pure uranium 238). I remember seeing a firing demo by the Pakistan Armys Khalid Tank and the shot went through the target's (an old Patton) frontal armour and out the back at 4 Km's and fell way back. They found it and displayed it. Was not even bent.
DU ammunition (120 mm NATO ,125 mm Pakistan, 125mm China and the new 125mm Russian) can penetrate any armour at almost all ranges. No way in hell are militaries going to stop.
|
Whenever the DU round explodes, and most do in the end, it vapourizes. DU is a good deterrent to have in an arsenal but like nukes shouldnt be used.
|
Tell that to the tank crews when their tungsten AP rounds bounce off the armor of the oppositions tanks. DU saves lives in a combat situation which is why it's used.
Edited by DukeC
|
|
TeldeInduz
General
Joined: 07-Mar-2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 857
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-May-2006 at 10:03 |
Originally posted by Zagros
Many think that the use of DU is harmful, it is, but not for the right reasons. It does cause cancer and it does cause infact deformation. But this is not due to its radio active properties. DU is basically spent uranium, its radioactive properties are harmless. However, Uranium is a heavy metal and like all heavy metals it is poisonous and causes cancers and other ailments. DU rounds largely vapourise on impact, basically they turn to uranium dust. It is this dust which gets into the air, into the soil, into the water and is in one way or another consumed by humans and animals.
As far as I am concerned its use is unethical and tantamount to the use of chemical weapons.
|
Careful Zagros, else you'll be in on the conspiracy after DukeC has sussed you out
|
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-May-2006 at 12:27 |
Originally posted by TeldeInduz
Originally posted by Sparten
APFSDS round do not usually vapourize (since they are not pure uranium 238). I remember seeing a firing demo by the Pakistan Armys Khalid Tank and the shot went through the target's (an old Patton) frontal armour and out the back at 4 Km's and fell way back. They found it and displayed it. Was not even bent.
DU ammunition (120 mm NATO ,125 mm Pakistan, 125mm China and the new 125mm Russian) can penetrate any armour at almost all ranges. No way in hell are militaries going to stop.
|
Whenever the DU round explodes, and most do in the end, it vapourizes. DU is a good deterrent to have in an arsenal but like nukes shouldnt be used.
|
As far as I am aware, the ammunition is DU tipped - the DU provides penetration, allowing the war-head-proper to slip in, and in so doing it vapourises.
An otherwise great Russian invention. I think the moral of the story is not to get into any pointless and fruitless wars like that currently being waged in Iraq.
Edited by Zagros
|
|
malizai_
Sultan
Alcinous
Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2006 at 09:27 |
DU in the food chain?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1273053.stm
"So far all the results for every single one of the samples collected in Kosovo is showing some depleted uranium in the urine," he said.
http://www.sundayherald.com/14886
|
|
Zagros
Emperor
Suspended
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2006 at 10:02 |
Thanks for the links.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-May-2006 at 07:08 |
Military necessity will always prevail over enviromental issues. A DU shot made the M60 in the Gulf War able to kill tanks like the T-72.
|
|
aghart
Shogun
Joined: 05-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 232
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-May-2006 at 04:59 |
[QUOTE}
Tell that to the tank crews when their tungsten AP rounds bounce off the armor of the oppositions tanks. DU saves lives in a combat situation which is why it's used. [/QUOTE]
Well said!!. DU rounds were created because the invention of modern "chobbam" style tank armour rendered all current APFSDS rounds obselete..
Chobbam was designed to protect tanks from ATGM with hollow charge "HEAT" warheads which it does very well, the unexpected suprise in the package was that it also prevented penetration by APFSDS rounds as well.
DU being more dense made for a far better penatrator than tungston and was able to penetrate the new modern armour designs. DU is also a lot cheaper than tungsten as it is a by product of the nuclear power industry.
As for the ethical argument there is a solution but it costs money and so will not be adopted.
The answer is to have both types of munitions in stock. DU munintions when facing an oppnenent who is equiped with modern "chobbam" armoured tanks and Tungston munitions for use against the "riff-raff".
If this policy had been adopted from the start this argument would never have started because DU munitions would still be untried in combat!!.
|
Former Tank Commander (Chieftain)& remember, Change is inevitable!!! except from vending machines
|
|
Russian
Pretorian
Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-May-2006 at 12:32 |
Originally posted by Sparten
Military necessity will always prevail over enviromental issues. A DU shot made the M60 in the Gulf War able to kill tanks like the T-72.
|
"Environmental issues" will make military necessity impossible, we are all part of nature, and it is far more powerful than we are, we are gonna run out of resources, it will not.
|
|
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-May-2006 at 13:08 |
Originally posted by TeldeInduz
Originally posted by Sparten
APFSDS round do not usually vapourize (since they are not pure uranium 238). I remember seeing a firing demo by the Pakistan Armys Khalid Tank and the shot went through the target's (an old Patton) frontal armour and out the back at 4 Km's and fell way back. They found it and displayed it. Was not even bent.
DU ammunition (120 mm NATO ,125 mm Pakistan, 125mm China and the new 125mm Russian) can penetrate any armour at almost all ranges. No way in hell are militaries going to stop.
|
Whenever the DU round explodes, and most do in the end, it vapourizes. DU is a good deterrent to have in an arsenal but like nukes shouldnt be used. |
DU rounds do not explode, they're solid shot and contain no explosive charge. Neither do they vaporize when they hit the target, small pieces from the tip of the dart flake off as it passes through armor(that's why they're refered to as self-sharpening) and these ignite when they enter the tank interior. Most of the solid shot remains and in some cases can pass entirely through the target, something that wouldn't be possible if the dart vaporized.
|
|
Russian
Pretorian
Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-May-2006 at 14:28 |
"DU being more dense made for a far better penatrator than tungston and was able to penetrate the new modern armour designs. DU is also a lot cheaper than tungsten as it is a by product of the nuclear power industry."
DU is good, but you can also protect pretty well against DU, with DU armor, or Explosive reactive armor, like russian Kontakt-5 second genetration heavy era, west agreed on the effectiveness of this armor, after their DU rounds were shattered by ERA, I can show you photo if you want, also, there is Kaktus era, third generation, but noone knows what that is and what are capabilities.
|
|
Russian
Pretorian
Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-May-2006 at 14:32 |
"DU being more dense made for a far better penatrator than tungston and was able to penetrate the new modern armour designs. DU is also a lot cheaper than tungsten as it is a by product of the nuclear power industry."
DU is good, but you can also protect pretty well against DU, with DU armor, like Abrams, or Explosive reactive armor, like russian Kontakt-5 second genetration heavy era, west agreed on the effectiveness of this armor, after their DU rounds were shattered by ERA, I can show you photo if you want, also, there is Kaktus era, third generation, but noone knows what that is and what are capabilities.
Du armor protectcion is even simpler, it is just a massive piece of metall, and a less massive piece o metal sollapses with it, so, which one survives? the one that is more massive, but in a few shots it is gonna be penetrated anyways.
|
|