home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.military
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!ncrhub2!ciss!law7!military
- From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
- Subject: Re: Anti-aircraft
- Message-ID: <C17w37.FLI@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>
- Sender: military@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (Sci.Military Login)
- Organization: Indiana University
- References: <C124wI.7op@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:45:06 GMT
- Approved: military@law7.daytonoh.ncr.com
- Lines: 30
-
-
- From ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
-
- In article <C124wI.7op@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> "John M. Wu" <johnwu@netcom.com> writes:
-
- >1) When anti-aircraft shells go up, they have to eventually come
- >back down. With a gun shooting 90 deg., the bullet will go up to
- >around 9000 ft. and then start coming down up to terminal
- >velocity (300 fps?). At terminal velocity, the bullet can still kill a
- >person. Do anti-aircraft weapons like those in Iraq cause large
- >ground damage and numerous casualties due to what eventually
- >happens to fired shells (eg. the Baghdad hotel damage)? Seems
- >like a terribly inefficient way to defend a city from damage.
- >Wouldn't not firing anything cause less damage to Baghdad?
-
- I always thought that AA shells were fused to explode at a given al-
- titude. Remember all those movies about B-17s over Germany, and all
- that flak?
-
-
-
-
-
-
- --
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Iskandar Taib | The only thing worse than Peach ala
- Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU | Frog is Frog ala Peach
- Bitnet: NTAIB@IUBACS !
-
-