MarineGtoACommo said:
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-48) is like putting a hunk of iron against a big grinding wheel.