I seen weight mentioned once or twice. Suppose a 30 round magazine of Environmental friendly (green tip) 5.56mm was used as compared to a 30 round mag of DU, what would be the factors of weight in that scenario also? I know that 5.56 was brought about for weight concerns as well as others. You can carry more 5.56mm as compared to the 7.62X51 that the M60 fired. That would also be a factor wouldnt it? Weight for the individual soldier.

Originally Posted by ONERING

I've heard them being made in 25mm, 100mm etc Why not use them if we have them, it could get bad guys cowering behind wars and blow up tanks with a shot. Put them in our xm109 25mm barrett rifles and use them to take care of the Nk.

Te ammo fired by the M1 is DU, APFSDS-T. There is a DU 50cal round SLAP-T (SABOTED LIGHTWEIGHT ARMOR PIERCING- TRACER), most US direct fire weapons over 20mm have DU rounds they can fire.

Originally Posted by hicks

The Apaches used them in Desert Storm.

It's just too dangerous to use them in every type of weapon. The bullet itself isn't what does the most damage to an indivdual, it's breathing in the powder that is created after impact.

No. The reason DU is used is because i.e. like the 120mm APFSDS-T rounds the M1 fires, the penetrator is DU and as the penetrator passes throught armor it sharpen itself,hence Armor Peircing .

Originally Posted by Cadet Seaman

No. The reason DU is used is because i.e. like the 120mm APFSDS-T rounds the M1 fires, the penetrator is DU and as the penetrator passes throught armor it sharpen itself,hence Armor Peircing .

Dear Member,

"It sharpens itself" WHAT??????

Jack E. Hammond

Originally Posted by jackehammond

Dear Member,

"It sharpens itself" WHAT??????

Jack E. Hammond

Yes, the Depleted Urainium sharpens itself. Thats why it got the nick-name "Silver Bullet" in Desert Storm. The M1 tank crews had trouble with the round exiting one target and entering another. The round enters using its Kenetic Energy and pushes through the armor and sharpens itself. Hence Armor Peircing.

Dear Cadet Seaman,

Please take my word for it. The DU round (or any AP round) does not sharpen itself as it punches through armor. In fact with some DU rounds they have had to develop a special unit on the tail so the round will not go in one side and out the other so it will in fact fragment on the inside of the tank after punching through.

Jack E. Hammond

Originally Posted by jackehammond

Dear Cadet Seaman,

Please take my word for it. The DU round (or any AP round) does not sharpen itself as it punches through armor. In fact with some DU rounds they have had to develop a special unit on the tail so the round will not go in one side and out the other so it will in fact fragment on the inside of the tank after punching through.

Jack E. Hammond

Well I just happened to aquire that information from my father , who is a Master Gunner on the M1A1. DU does sharpen itself. The round you speak of that has a "special unit on the tail" APFSDS-T (Armor Peircing Fin Stablized Discarding Sabot-Tracer) is to stablize the rounds trajectory. It is the only Sabot the U.S. M1A1 and M1A2 use. The whole story about the round fragementing is a rumor. The M1A1 and M1A2 have DU plates on the hull and turret front.

APFSDS-T with DU penetartor.

Yeses and nos to both accounts.

The DU behing highly dense has armor "piercing" capabilities. However, not being totally invincible, it sheds from the outside-in, in effect sharpening itself or simply disintegrating - your choice of symantics.

Since it does sharpen, or disintegrate or atomize upon impact AND because it is pyrophoric, it ignites making for a highly disgusting fire and aftermath.

For someone in the turret, there is absolutely no worries about breathing the dust. Should any of the remainder of the projectile penetrate the other side of the hull (hulk), well then you just got this moderately radioactive slug sitting around somewhere.

As for DU's use in shoulder fired weapons, it's a waste since the muzzle velocity isn't there to penetrate heavy armour and it would simply penetrate the lighter stuff without the desired effect of the pyrophoric reaction.

Originally Posted by MarineGtoACommo

Yeses and nos to both accounts.

The DU behing highly dense has armor "piercing" capabilities. However, not being totally invincible, it sheds from the outside-in, in effect sharpening itself or simply disintegrating - your choice of symantics.

Since it does sharpen, or disintegrate or atomize upon impact AND because it is pyrophoric, it ignites making for a highly disgusting fire and aftermath.

For someone in the turret, there is absolutely no worries about breathing the dust. Should any of the remainder of the projectile penetrate the other side of the hull (hulk), well then you just got this moderately radioactive slug sitting around somewhere.

As for DU's use in shoulder fired weapons, it's a waste since the muzzle velocity isn't there to penetrate heavy armour and it would simply penetrate the lighter stuff without the desired effect of the pyrophoric reaction.

Dear Member,

I am not going to get in a p*ssing contest with the other member. But they did consider DU cones for the Marines SMAW in the late 1980s that had an astonishing penetration effect over the standard copper or aluminum cones, but decided against it. I have the feeling that the reason was political.

Finally, while the APDS-FS round for the M1A1 Abrams may not have a fragmenting effect on the end of its "arrow" other nations and US manufactures (ie Israel) developed them for their tungsten based APDS-FS rounds. Reason being against older tanks and with side shots they had over penetration and they wanted more effect behind the armor similar to the older solid AP rounds that has a small burst charge in the tail.

Jack E. Hammond

BTW> The former US Army Abrams manager stated the "fireworks" that people see (ie usually that famous video of the USAF A-10 tank buster attacking a M-4 is like putting a hunk of iron against a big grinding wheel.

Originally Posted by jackehammond

Dear Member,

I am not going to get in a p*ssing contest with the other member. But they did consider DU cones for the Marines SMAW in the late 1980s that had an astonishing penetration effect over the standard copper or aluminum cones, but decided against it. I have the feeling that the reason was political.

Finally, while the APDS-FS round for the M1A1 Abrams may not have a fragmenting effect on the end of its "arrow" other nations and US manufactures (ie Israel) developed them for their tungsten based APDS-FS rounds. Reason being against older tanks and with side shots they had over penetration and they wanted more effect behind the armor similar to the older solid AP rounds that has a small burst charge in the tail.

Jack E. Hammond

BTW> The former US Army Abrams manager stated the "fireworks" that people see (ie usually that famous video of the USAF A-10 tank buster attacking a M-4 is like putting a hunk of iron against a big grinding wheel.

It's APFSDS-T not APDS-FS.

Finally, while the APDS-FS round for the M1A1 Abrams may not have a fragmenting effect on the end of its "arrow" other nations and US manufactures (ie Israel) developed them for their tungsten based APDS-FS rounds. Reason being against older tanks and with side shots they had over penetration and they wanted more effect behind the armor similar to the older solid AP rounds that has a small burst charge in the tail.

Its a flechette("Arrow"). The US Has a few tungsten penetrator rounds i.e. HEAT. The reason tungsten is use s because it one of the softest metas yet one of the hardest to melt. HEAT rounds use a shaped charge with a tungsten penetrator because the charge explodes and "burns" through the armor.