"Peter Stickney" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" writes:

What's the range of a 105 RR ?

Peter, please watch how yo do your snippage--all of these were not my
comments/questions.


Well, the Davey Crockett wasn't a 105 RCL. It came in 2 flavors - a
120mm bore tube with a range band of between 300m and 200m, and a
155mm tube with a range band of between 200m and 4000m.
Warhead yield was dialable in a range of 20t to 250t. (.02 KT - ,25
KT). (It was a muzzleloader, btw)

One presumes you meant "2000" meters...


Of course it was an artist's sketch.

The same artists are now working on sketches of nuc bunker busters.
Another bad idea IMHO.

And a very old idea. The first nuclear penetrating bomb was the Navy's
Mk 8, from teh very early 1950s.

A bit different concept these days. The idea then was to have a weapon that
could penetrate some depth to create a big crater. The idea now is to
penetrate much deeper with a very small yield device that minimizes venting
of radioactive debris to the surface.


You are referring to the Davey Crockett, which was indeed fielded. It
used
the W-54 warhead, the smallest spherical implosion device ever fielded
by
the US, mounted on what was basically a "spigot" which was inserted into
the
tube, with the warhead being that bulbous bomb-like contraption sticking
out
of the end. The same warhead was the basis for the SADM.

Yeah, Basically, it was an Atomic Bottle Rocket. It was technically
feasible, but when you consider that it was still a Nuke, with all the
security, accountability, and authorization requirements that a Great
Big Nuke has, I don't think any of the very few Infantry units that
got them really liked teh idea. After all, what's the point of a
Jeep-portable Atomic Gun when you need another Jeep and trailer to
hold all the paperwork?

One of the oft-mentioned concerns raised was supposedly the reluctance to
give some E-5 the power to unleash a nuclear strike. But that really could
nopt have been much of a concern; firstly, odds are that an LT or CPT would
have been detailed to control the firing party, and we were already letting
1LT's loose with real live nuclear weapons under thier wings in F-84's and
the like at that time. I doubt any of the lower level firing units were too
concerned about excessive paperwork, either; the weapons' custodians had
that share of the formula to worry about, and IIRC this would have probably
been before the PRP (Personnel Reliability Program) for nuclear armed units
got into full swing. The availability of the W-48 155mm tac nuke round
probably had more to do with retiring the critter early than anything else.

Brooks


--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster