Depleted Uranium Alternative

You may want to have a look at a new Titanium alloy developed by Liquidmetal that is currently being developed with military applications...in particular, as an alternative to DU kinetic rounds

"..Liquidmetal alloys' technology is currently being developed for use as a Kinetic Energy Penetrator (KEP) rod. The KEP, the key component of the highly effective armor piercing ammunition system, currently utilizes Depleted Uranium (DU) because of its density and self-sharpening behavior. Ballistic tests conducted by the Army have proven that the Liquidmetal® tungsten composite KEP exhibits self-sharpening similar
to the DU KEP. As a result, the Department of Defense is working closely with Liquidmetal Technologies to develop a new class of effective and environmentally benign KEP rods.."
source

video demonstrating kinetic properties of material

Google Video Link

Although I might add that you'd want to make sure you hit your target with the first shot as any ricochets would be truely lethal!

Yeah I could see that: Tank 1 fires at tank 2 and misses, round bounces off of rock and goes flying back across the field hitting some poor sucker at random...

Or what would happen if it went INTO the enemy tank then lacked the KE to bust out and kept rickoteching around? Eesh. You do NOT want to miss when firing that thing, if it is possible, if the earth is unable to stop it or if it is unable to penetrate enemy armor it is going to come right back at you. That is an extremely high risk material.

MIGHT be useful in some engines, ones that are NOT supposed to stop that is, the KE would keep the pistons moving even after the whole thing has gone down. That COULD be useful so long as it is a non-critical system.

This may not work, but I suggest a carbon steel, tungsten core round. Carbon steel is extremly hard and tungsten is heavy. Combine the two and you have as powerful atomisation resistand round.

That could just work, Shadewolf.

Carbon steel rods were originally used in the old cinema projectors to backlight the strip of film. If memoury serves me, I think that carbon burns very brightly at about 5,000 degrees Centigrade.

If a carbon rod was sintered to a tungsten penetrator, one supposes that it would survive the tremendous heat generated at moment of impact and survive the incredible friction generated by penetration.

How about swapping hadness for heat? I'm thinking about thease shaped charge IED's, a concave copper head is transformed by the explosion into a jetstream of molton metal, or plasma. The plasma will hit at speeds of 8,000 meters per second, cutting right through armor. But if it does not strike within a few feet of leaving the device, the plasma will solidify in to a kinetic slug, with less damage caused.

Now how about a long distance projectile? How about the projectile converting into the plasma state 'in fligt'? as opposed to the detonation.

Something like a tank round fired over a few miles - would something like the materials used to make tracer bullets glow possably provide enough heat with the friction from leaving the barrel and traveling through the air to 'melt' a copper slug?

I think a better option would be with very long distance projectiles, idealy from the new (and really cool) rail guns if you look at that link you will see that a problem with that technology could potentially become a benifit - the heat produced in launching a projectile! Bingo, solve the technical difficulties and you could accuratly send armor peircing molton projectiles well over the horizon.

Another possability could be a re entry projectile that heats up that way, I don't know, just waffling!

Tracers are posphrous-coated rounds, ignited by air friction. Works on a small scale, but is not hot enough to melt steel. I do like the plasma jet idea though.

IIRC I heard of a SABOT round that fired a Tungsten or Tungsten Carbide dart. I think it is a totally feasable temporary replacement for Depleted Uranium but in the long run I'm sure some sort of an energy weapon will replace the standard KE round. As for the armor I doubt it would be used on the basis of price and the availability. Plus you could just rely on the HEAT round that uses shaped Explosives to basically liquefy the armor of the tank it just hit. This liquid metal then shoots into the tank and destroys whatever it touches.

[edit on 17-7-2007 by Texxx]

Originally posted by Now_Then
How about swapping hadness for heat? I'm thinking about thease shaped charge IED's, a concave copper head is transformed by the explosion into a jetstream of molton metal, or plasma. The plasma will hit at speeds of 8,000 meters per second, cutting right through armor. But if it does not strike within a few feet of leaving the device, the plasma will solidify in to a kinetic slug, with less damage caused.

You might find something like this interesting. The Monroe Effect (Named for Charles Monroe, not Marilyn, though she was definitely a 'shaped charge') has been in use for a long time in the armor-penetrating role.

Now how about a long distance projectile? How about the projectile converting into the plasma state 'in fligt'? as opposed to the detonation.

Something like a tank round fired over a few miles - would something like the materials used to make tracer bullets glow possably provide enough heat with the friction from leaving the barrel and traveling through the air to 'melt' a copper slug?

As you mentioned in the first paragraph, if you generate the plasma too soon, it will simply cool off in flight and lose energy in the process, so converting it at the firing end of the trajectory vs at the impact end probably won't work too well.

Tracer bullets use phosphorus to create a glow. I'm not sure that it could melt your copper jacket for you, but even if it could, it won't impart the energy needed to create a plasma jet.

I think a better option would be with very long distance projectiles, idealy from the new (and really cool) rail guns if you look at that link you will see that a problem with that technology could potentially become a benifit - the heat produced in launching a projectile! Bingo, solve the technical difficulties and you could accuratly send armor peircing molton projectiles well over the horizon.

Another possability could be a re entry projectile that heats up that way, I don't know, just waffling!

Rail guns (assuming they can be made practical), won't need to use the Monroe Effect and copper plasma jets. They'll do fine in the AP role using simple 'dart' penetrators. Melting your slug when you fire it is a VERY bad idea, as it can lead to plugging the bore of a conventional gun, or shorting out a rail gun...and even if you don't run into those problems, you're going to lose penetrating power and accuracy as the molten slug cools off in flight.

The idea of an orbital penetrator has also been around a while...I think Robert Heinlein called it "Thor's Hammer". No need for self-forging projectiles here either...sheer kinetic energy is more than enough, assuming you can get your penetrators in orbit, and then guide them down with sufficient accuracy.

[edit on 18-7-2007 by Brother Stormhammer]

[edit on 18-7-2007 by Brother Stormhammer]

Ok, maybe I'm just incredibly uninformed, but I would think heavy metal poisoning would be more of a problem than the small amounts of radioactivity that would be found from an expended shell (especially if it gets atomized so it can be inhaled). In that case wouldn't Tungsten be as dangerous if not more dangerous in this case (especially if lead lined)?

Second, what type of radiation is given off? Alpha? Beta? Gamma? and yes, it does matter.

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC
Ok, maybe I'm just incredibly uninformed, but I would think heavy metal poisoning would be more of a problem than the small amounts of radioactivity that would be found from an expended shell (especially if it gets atomized so it can be inhaled). In that case wouldn't Tungsten be as dangerous if not more dangerous in this case (especially if lead lined)?

Second, what type of radiation is given off? Alpha? Beta? Gamma? and yes, it does matter.

All good questions.

Uranium, including U238 is a heavy metal and some people argue that this is more of a health concern than the fact that DU is radioactive. In fact, the people who are NOT against the use of DU weapons on the battlefield LOVE to stress this position.

The truth, as I see it, is that DU is of concern for both its metalic toxicity and its radioactivity. In an email to me, Dr. Diane Stearns, who recently became the first scientist to demonstrate that U238 binds to DNA, wrote this:

As for your question, each heavy metal is unique in the range of ways that it can damage DNA. In the case of binding to DNA it is well established for chromium, and recently discovered (by us) for uranium, but does not happen with, for example, nickel, cadmium, arsenic, or lead. It is my opinion that DU is a concern both as a heavy metal (chemical) and as a radioactive element. And yes, I agree that a heavy metal binding to DNA is bad, and a heavy metal that binds to DNA and is also radioactive is worse.

It is reasonable to say that, just as you wouldn't permit someone to burn a 1 kg hunk of chromium or lead into nanoscopic dust in your backyard, you shouldn't also condone the American forces doing the same thing with uranium in Iraq. Yes, the stuff is toxic and should not be pulverized to dust. It is ridiculous that many proponents of DU actually argue that the stuff is perfectly safe.

Is the heavy metal toxicity worse than the radioactivity? It is hard to say. But the radioactivity cannot be passed off as insignificant.

As you say, the KIND of radiation matters. DU is about 99.8% uranium-238, which is primarily an alpha emitter. An alpha particle is 2 neutrons and 2 protons - an entire helium nucleus. They carry a lot of energy, but don't travel far. Our dead skin cells normally protect us from alpha damage. But if an alpha emitter gets inside the body, it can be deadly in small doses. The case of the Russian espion who was poisoned by polonium-210 is an example.

Because of DU's pyrophoricity (aka self-sharpening effect), a shell that hits a hard target will put up to a kilogram of DU dust into the air. This is a radiological poison in my book. There are reports of DU strikes causing rapid death in uninjured people nearby.

And there is another important consideration that doesn't get enough attention at all. The DU is "just U238" we are always told by its proponents; it's not like it's U235 or anything, from which we can make A-bombs and power reactors. U238 is a very stable nucleotide with a half-life of billions of years.

This argument is spurious as well as invalidated by the dust problem. The pellets we feed into reactors are about 5% U-235. Purified uranium before enrichment contains only about 0.7% U235. Enrichment concentrates it. The leftover tails still contain about 0.2 to 0.4% U235. This is what they call DU.

But if DU contains nearly half the U235 that purified "natural" (read concentrated) uranium does, what makes it so safe radiologically? The proponents of DU weapons like to talk about the orders of magnitude involved that prove U238's extremely long half-life means DU is no more dangerous than cornstarch. But going from 0.7% to 0.2% is no order of magnitude, nor is going from 5% reactor fuel to 0.2% (dirty) bomb fuel really. So they are wrong even by their own arguments.

My last post (and my first ever on this forum) didn't get to the actual topic of the thread, but I will now.

I recently wrote a blog entry on the topic of finding a self-sharpening replacement for DU shells. It is here on my blog, Debating Depleted Uranium.

The source is a science magazine. The article is here: Nanostructured composite material may replace depleted uranium

the composite particles are composed of alternating nanoscale layers of tungsten and metallic glass that have an uncanny resemblance to fudge-ripple ice cream.

Most coverage, including my blog, grabbed onto the fudge ripple hook. (It was my most-read blog entry ever)

Originally posted by Harlequin
Tungsten

The Rheinmetall 120mm L55 firing tungsten penetrators has around 18-20 megajoules of kinetic energy - which is very sinilar to the M829 APFSDS DU round fired from the M1A1 using the Rheinmetall L44 gun.

Also due to the fact the Germany is banned from using DU.

Originally posted by Now_Then
How about swapping hadness for heat? I'm thinking about thease shaped charge IED's, a concave copper head is transformed by the explosion into a jetstream of molton metal, or plasma. The plasma will hit at speeds of 8,000 meters per second, cutting right through armor. But if it does not strike within a few feet of leaving the device, the plasma will solidify in to a kinetic slug, with less damage caused.

Now how about a long distance projectile? How about the projectile converting into the plasma state 'in fligt'? as opposed to the detonation.

Something like a tank round fired over a few miles - would something like the materials used to make tracer bullets glow possably provide enough heat with the friction from leaving the barrel and traveling through the air to 'melt' a copper slug?

I think a better option would be with very long distance projectiles, idealy from the new (and really cool) rail guns if you look at that link you will see that a problem with that technology could potentially become a benifit - the heat produced in launching a projectile! Bingo, solve the technical difficulties and you could accuratly send armor peircing molton projectiles well over the horizon.

Another possability could be a re entry projectile that heats up that way, I don't know, just waffling!

It's in use, and is called the M830A2 HEAT for the M256 120mm on the M1.

It has been proven that ERA, Chobham, and RHA can defeat sharped charges.

Just to point out a microwave or smoke detector emit more radiation that a M829E3, and that you inhale more deadly vapors by passing through an old home lined with asbestos.

And undoubtably many members on this forum don't have the access to military documents or information as I do, and some have more access...but, the US military isn't taking any major risk, and issues a radioactive handling guide and asbestos gloves to tank crews and ammo handlers for 120mm rounds.

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Boondoggle]

The projectiles used by Australia are 67 grain tungsten and lead jacketed rounds. The tungsten penetrator has a small cupped tip and there is an air pocket at the tip between the penetrator and the jacket. When the projectile hit its target ie. Truck etc. The jacket hit the metal squashes and the penetrator punches through metal leaving jacket at entrance. If you go to REAME Museum in Australia at Albury Victoria you will see 3 x Aluminium plates set 50mm apart and you can see the SS109 projectile has punched through these plates at 100ms. Projectiles can be bought at gun shows here in Australia cheaply bought from ADI. The main reason they are so cheap is that they weigh 67 grains and need a fast twist barrel for them to work. many civilians have been caught out by this and wonder why some rounds go up down and all over the place.the penetrator is approximately 7-8mm long. The cup in the tip is about 1mm diameter. The new F88S that has been introduced is designed to use the new US rounds. I don't know much about this but would like to found out whats so different?

One thing everyone on this thread appears to have missed...

Uranium is a Pyrophoric Metal.

Which means that it can, under certain curcumstances, BURN.

Tungsten Carbide makes a good "Second Choice" as a penetrator, but it is not pyrophoric.

When a DU penetrator punches through armor it spalls, filling the armored vehicle with fine Urainium dust. Eventually the heat from the friction causes the urainium dust in the vehicle to start burrning. The result is a secondary explosion inside the crew compartment.

Tungsten Carbide is almost as effective as a hypervelocity penetrator, but does not cause a secondary explosion in the crew compartment.

Edited to add a link to a "study."

www.dtic.mil...

[edit on 1-6-2010 by hlesterjerome]