What makes a weapon anti-air or anti-tank? Would anti-air be effective against tanks? Could we create one weapon that covers both, or even all possible targets?
In: 864
I used to assemble/maintain bombs in my country’s Air Force, I can explain this like you’re 5. This is going to be a *very* dark conversation for a kindergartner lol.
Different targets are vulnerable to different things. People are soft, and the most efficient way to kill people is by making them bleed out (like getting shot), so shrapnel is best. A bomb blows up, and sends pieces of metal in every direction.
Planes are also vulnerable to shrapnel, because they can’t have too much armor since they have to fly and maneuver. A missile has to be fast to catch a plane, so it doesn’t have a whole lot of explosive in it, most of it is fuel. Most Air-to-air missiles (missiles fired from a jet) only have about 20 pounds of explosive in them. Which sounds like a lot, but most bombs/missiles designed for ground targets have hundreds of pounds of explosives. The missile gets close to the plane and then explodes, sending shrapnel into the body or damaging the engines (which are VERY fragile).
Tanks are very well armored though, they’re designed to laugh off shrapnel. Many are so well armored and designed that even an explosive detonating on them won’t stop them. So to stop a tank, you fire a single round at it *really freaking fast*, and make it so hard and heavy (they often use a non-radioactive uranium or tungsten round) that it goes through the tank like a bullet goes through people. When this round goes through the armor, friction makes it extremely hot, and when it passes through the can of the tank the heat, force, and shrapnel from the armor kills everyone inside.
It would be very hard to shoot down a plane with an anti-tank round, and shooting a tank with an anti-air missile won’t hurt it that much.
Latest Answers