Quote:
kevineduguay1 said:
As I said before ALL DU penetration stats are CLASSIFIED. The 69mm at 500 meters figure just does not add up.
Again why would the US invest all that time and money to create this huge weapon and have it only slightly out perform a weapon like the German WWII era 28mm sPzB41 (pen 66mm at 500 meters)?
|
Because its cheaper and easier? As far as, I know the GAU-8/A and its ammunition do not rank up as one of the costlier weapon systems ever developed by the US military. There is also not a wealth of documentation on the supposed superiority of DU prior to the health impact scandal. There is, however, a wealth of documentation that talks about the ease and low cost of manufacture, and the availability of the material as a byproduct of nuclear power production.
Quote:
kevineduguay1 said:
thatguy96,
I can use the same argument against you about the Bushmaster MK44. Cute picture of the round but where is it written that this 30mm weapon can punch 120mm of armor?
|
Never said it could. In fact
I have not quoted any penetration figures. I just said that it was obvious that somewhere someone along the way made a design decision based on information likely to do with the difference in rounds used by the different weapons.
Quote:
kevineduguay1 said:
Is that source reliable or is it just some trumped up figure put out by some US Government agency to legitimize the funding for this project?
|
I never said it was, and I never said it wasn't. So you could be exactly correct on both points.
Quote:
kevineduguay1 said:
Two of my quotes are from other sites and do not parrot Global Security.
|
I checked all the sites you linked and their citations. You can look at them yourself.
Quote:
kevineduguay1 said:
But given same size penetrators of tungsten and DU, the DU penetrator wins in the weight competition and in the penetration competition.
|
Again, I've seen nothing that conclusively proves that point or to a point where I am anywhere as convinced as you obviously are.