an analysis of the utility of depleted uranium in kinetic energy penetrators 187
DESCRIPTION
An Analysis of the Utility of Depleted Uranium in Kinetic Energy Penetrators 187 in tank gun ammunition.TRANSCRIPT
-
1ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
Overstatingthecase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorsDavidCullen,Researcher,ICBUW
ExecutiveSummaryIntroductionInspiteoflongstandingconcernsovertheirtoxicandradioactiveproperties,depleteduranium(DU)weaponsareretainedbyaround20countriesworldwide,primarilyaskineticenergyweapons.GovernmentsthatuseDUasapenetratormaterialoftendefendthischoicebystatingthatitsabilitytopenetratearmourissignificantlygreaterthanalternativematerials.ICBUW,andothers,havequestionedthelegalityofDUweapons,butinthepastthisdebatehasgenerallybeenrestrictedtothehumanitarianandenvironmentaleffectsofDU,ratherthanthemilitaryutilityofDUweapons.Thispaperisintendedtoaddresstheothersideofthedebate,tocriticallyassessandtogivesomecontexttoclaimsaboutthemilitaryutilityofweaponscontainingDU.WhileDUweaponsdoconfersomemilitaryadvantage,thisadvantagecanalsobegainedthroughothermeans:DUdoesnotthereforeconferauniquemilitaryadvantage.Thus,greateremphasisshouldbeplacedonhumanitarianandenvironmentalconcernswhenexaminingDUsacceptability.
Howeffectiveisdepleteduraniumatpiercingarmour?ThereasonthatDUisconsideredtobesoeffectiveasapenetratormaterialisthatitcombineshighstrengthanddensitywithatypeofdeformationonimpactknownas'adiabaticsheer'.Whileotherpenetratormaterials(chieflydifferentalloysoftungsten)areofacomparabledensitytoDU,theyexhibitdifferentdeformationandfracturebehaviours.ItisdifficulttofindinformationinthepublicdomainabouttheeffectivenessofDUandinformationthatmakesanexactcomparisonwithothermaterialsisevenmoredifficulttoaccess.However,internalUKgovernmentdocumentsciteanimprovementofabout15%inperformance.AUSgovernmentdocumentsuggeststhatDUofferedanaverageofa52%increaseinpenetrationabovethatofthetungstenalloys.Thesefigureswillnotnecessarilyholdtrueformoderntungstenalloys,orindeedmoderntypesofarmour.Nevertheless,itseemsreasonabletotreatthemasindicativeandconcludethatonastrictmaterialtomaterialcomparison,DUisbetteratpenetratingarmourthanpresentlyavailablealternatives.HoweveritseemslikelythatDU'sadvantagesasamaterialwillbematchedatsomestagebynewcompounds.A2009reviewofalternativematerialsbystafffromtheUSArmyResearchLaboratoryidentifiednanocrystallinetungstenandbulkmetallicglasses(BMG)asshowingpromiseinkeyareas.OthervariablesdeterminingeffectivenessofkineticenergyroundsPenetratormaterialisonlyoneamongmanyvariableswhichdeterminetheeffectivenessofakineticenergyround.AlthoughDUappearstobethemosteffectivematerial,itisquitepossibletoachievesimilarimprovementsinperformancebyothermeans.Othersignificantvariablesthatcanbeadjustedtoincreasetheeffectivenessofarmourpiercingroundsincludethedimensionsandshapeofthepenetrator.Reducingtheweightorotherperformanceimprovingchangestothesabotcanincreasevelocity,ascanmodificationstothebarrelorimprovementstotheexplosivecharge.
-
2ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
Itappearsthatmodificationstotheround,gunorotherfactors,whichareunconnectedtothechoiceofpenetratormaterial,willoftengivemoresignificantimprovementstoperformancethanchangingpenetratormaterial.WiderdeterminantsoftankwarfareeffectivenessTheantiarmourcapabilityoftanksisdependentonnumerousvariablesbesidesthebasicengineeringcharacteristicsoftheammunitionandgun.Theaccuracyofashot,thespeedatwhichitcanbefiredinresponsetosightinganenemyandtherateoffirecanallplayacriticalroleintankontankconfrontations.Few,ifany,ofthecriteriawhichcontributetotheantiarmourcapabilityoftanksaresosignificantthatanycomparativedisadvantagesinthatfieldcannotbeoffsetbygainsinanother.Certainlythisisnotthecasewhenselectingpenetratormaterial.
Thebestmaterialforthejob?AhistoricalcasestudyofthedevelopmentoftheBritishCHARMroundsandChallenger1tankWhileasimpleconceptionofammunitiondevelopmentmightstatethatthemosteffectivematerialshouldalwaysbechosen,inreality,procurementanddevelopmentdecisionsaremorecomplicated.ThisiswellillustratedbythecasestudyoftheBritishChallenger1tankandtheDUroundsdevelopedforit.Antiarmourtankammunitionisdesignedtodefeatspecificarmourconfigurations.Itisjudgedagainstitsabilitytodefeatarangeofarmourfieldedbypotentialenemiesandonpredictionsoffutureenemyarmourdevelopments.Inthelate1970s,effortstodevelopacommonUS,UKandGermantankgunfailedandtheUKplannedtodevelopanewtankonitsownwitha120mmrifledgun.However,duetoacombinationofexternalcircumstances,itwasdecidedthattheUKwouldpurchaseaderivativeoftheChieftaintank,tobeknownasChallenger1.ADUroundandanewhighpressuregunwereplannedfollowingprojectionsofthetypeofarmourexpectedinthesuccessortotheSovietT80tank,butthegunwouldstillbecompatiblewiththeChieftainammunitionalreadyinservice.UKDUammunitionwasdevelopedbecauseitwasdeemednecessaryfordefeatingaparticulartypeofarmourandcircumstanceshadlimitedthepossibilitiesforadjustingothercharacteristicsoftheweaponssystemwithoutaconsiderableinvestmentoftimeandmoney.ConsequencesforpresentdayUKtankammunitionProblemswiththeChallenger1tanknecessitatedanupgradetothewholeUKtankfleet.Theupdatedtank,knownastheChallenger2,featuredthehighpressuregun,andahighpressureDUround,knownasCHARM3.Thisroundfinallybecameavailablein1999andremainstheUKsmainantiarmourtankammunition.Ratherthanthebrandnewtankenvisagedbymilitaryplannersintheearly70s,theUKisfieldingatankwithagunthatistheresultofevolutionaryadaptationsfromtheChieftain,wherebackwardscompatibility
hasbeenaconsiderationateachstage.Asaresult,designoftheCHARM3roundisdeterminedinpartbydecisionstakenforatankwhichfirstcameintoservicein1965.ThelimitationsofthisroundandthelackofanexportmarkethavepreventedanyfurtherdevelopmentofUKarmourpiercingammunition.LessonsfromtheCHARMcasestudyRatherthanstartingwithablankslateandchoosingthebestmaterialforthejob,ammunitionandprocurementdecisionsaretakenwithinawiderpoliticalandeconomiccontext,whichmaybeconsiderablymoreimportantindeterminingroundcharacteristics.Sincearound2002,UKplannershaverecognisedthatforreasonsofcostandcompatibility,futureBritish
-
3ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
tankammunitionshouldbecompatiblewithotherNATOcountries.However,aplannedimprovementinvolvingnonDUammunition,whichhasapparentlyproventobemoreeffectivethanCHARM3ammunition,hasnotbeenimplementedforreasonsofcost.TheUKsswitchtoDUammunitionallowedthemaoneoffincreaseinpenetration,meaningthatotherprocurementdecisionscouldbetakenforreasonsofbackwardscompatibilityandtosupporttheBritishdefenceindustry,ratherthanmaximisingeffectiveness.However,inthelongrun,thishasnotpreventedtheroundfrombecominglesseffectivethanthenonDUsystemusedbyGermany.ConclusionThefactorsaffectingammunitiondesignandpenetratormaterialchoicearefarremovedfromasimplecaseofchoosingtheammunitionwiththegreatestpossiblemilitaryutility.Althoughstraightforwardengineeringprincipleswillinformthedecision,widerconsiderationsmaybemuchmoresignificant.ItistechnicallypossibletodesignweaponsystemsthatareequallyaseffectiveasDUusingalternativematerials.ThisisparticularlytrueinthepostColdWarerawhenthearmsracebetweendifferentarmoursandpenetratorshaslargelyceased.Allthatisrequiredisthepoliticalwillforchangewithinuserstates.AlthoughDUmay,onconsiderationofpenetratormaterialalone,bebetteratpenetratingarmour,thisadvantageisnotsogreatthatotheradaptationscannotbesubstituted.WhenconsideredinlightofthenumerousdisadvantagesofusingDU,ICBUWbelievestheperceivedbenefitswelloutweighthecosts.TherearesomeindicationsthatthispointofviewisspreadingfromthemanycountriesthathaveneversoughttouseDUweapons,tosomeofthestateswhichwerepreviouslythemostenthusiastic,withrecentreportsthattheUSisplanningtodevelopanonDUsuccessortoitscurrent120mmDUround.WhileDUmayatpresentbethemosteffectivepenetratormaterialinastrictmaterialtomaterialcomparison,thisdoesnotmeanthatDUammunitionissomilitarilyusefulthatalternativescannotbefound,givensufficientresourcesandpoliticalwill.InlightofthenumerousproblemsregardingDUasamaterial,thecaseforuserstatestoabandontheseweaponsisunanswerable.
-
4ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
IntroductionInspiteoflongstandingconcernsovertheirtoxicandradioactiveproperties,depleteduranium(DU)weaponsareretainedbyaround20countriesworldwide,primarilyaskineticenergyweaponsusingalongdartorpenetratorforpiercingarmour.GovernmentsthatuseDUasapenetratormaterialoftendefendthischoicebystatingthatitsabilitytopenetratearmourissignificantlygreaterthanalternativematerials.Underinternationalhumanitarianlaw,theimpactofweaponsonhumanhealthandtheenvironmentmustbebalancedagainstitsmilitaryutilityoreffectiveness.Iftheweaponcausesdisproportionateharmtociviliansortheenvironmentitisnotlegal.DUhaslongbeenasuspectedcauseofhealthproblemsinthecountrieswhereithasbeendeployed.Whilethereisstilldebateabouttheextentoftheriskposedbytheseweapons,therecanbenodoubtaboutthewidespreadconcernsabouttheireffects,theenvironmentalcontaminationthatisleftbehind,andthedifficultiesthisposesforcountriesemergingfromconflict.1Becauseoftheseconcerns,ICBUWandothershavequestionedthelegalityofDUweapons.However,thisdebateisgenerallyrestrictedtothehumanitarianandenvironmentaleffectsofDU,ratherthanthemilitaryeffectivenessofweaponscontainingDU.Thispaperisintendedtoaddresstheothersideofthedebate,tocriticallyassessandtogivesomecontexttoclaimsaboutthemilitaryutilityofweaponscontainingDU.DUweaponsaredifferentfromothertypesofweaponswhichhavearousedsignificanthumanitarianconcern.Unlikeantipersonnellandminesorclustermunitions,concernisfocusedonaparticularmaterialthatisusedasacomponentofkineticenergyweapons,andnotonkineticenergyweaponsperse.Assuch,DUweaponsdonotrepresentthesoleroutetoachievingadistincttacticaleffect,suchasareadenialordefeatingdispersedtargetsrolesadvocatedforlandminesandclustermunitionsrespectively.Instead,theirperceivedmilitaryadvantagerestsupontheirclaimtobeingmoreeffectiveatperformingaparticularmilitaryrole,comparedtoalternatives.WhileDUweaponsdoconfersomemilitaryadvantageinthatrespect,andthispaperidentifieshistoricalsourceswhichquantifytheextentofthatadvantage,itisclearthatthisadvantagecanalsobegainedthroughothermeans,suchasimprovementstothedesignofammunitionorarmaments.AsDUdoesnotconferauniquemilitaryadvantage,greateremphasisoughttobeplacedonhumanitarianandenvironmentalconcernswhenassessingitsacceptability.WhileICBUWcampaignsagainsttheuseofuraniuminweapons,asanorganisationwedonotadvocatetheuseofanyweapons.WhilediscussionofalternativestousingDUnecessarilyformsasignificantpartofthispaper,itisnotICBUWsroletorecommendalternativematerialsforthemilitaryandthispapershouldnotbereadascallingfortheiradoption.WhileDUhasoccasionallybeenusedinotherroles,2inthemainitsuseisasapenetratormaterialinlargecalibrearmourpiercingroundsfiredbytanksforuseagainstothertanksandarmouredvehicles.ThisistheroleforwhichithasbeensuggestedthatDUisuniquelysuitable.Thispaper
1See:ICBUW.AQuestionofResponsibility:DepletedUraniumWeaponsintheBalkans.Manchester,UK:InternationalCoalitiontoBanUraniumWeapons,2010.
GeneralinformationaboutallaspectsofDUcanalsobefoundonwww.icbuw.org
2TheseincludeaRussianHighExplosiveAntiTankround,the3BK21B,andaRussianairtoairmissile,theR60.ClaimsthatDUisusedinTomahawkcruisemissiles
donotappeartohaveanybasisinfact.
-
5ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
thereforefocusesonthistypeofweapon.DUisalsoemployedinsomeUSmediumcalibrearmourpiercingmunitionsandinstancesoftheiruseagainstnonarmouredtargetsandcivilianinfrastructurehavebeendocumented.GiventhelongstandingconcernsaboutDUweapons,DUsuseintheserolesisevenmorequestionable.
Howeffectiveisdepleteduraniumatpiercingarmour?Historically,tankarmourwascomprisedofplatesofmetalwiththemaindifferentiatingfactorbeingthethicknessofthearmour.Whileeffectivenessagainstthistypeofrolledhomogeneousarmour(RHA)isgenerallyusedasabenchmarkforpenetrators,mostmodernarmourismadeoutofaclassifiedcombinationofmaterialsincludingmetals,ceramics,emptyspaceandexplosiveplates.Theselayersarearrangedtogetherinawaythattestshaveshownoffersgoodprotectionagainstavarietyofthreats,ofwhichkineticenergypenetratorsarebutone.Whilemostammunitionwillhavebeendesignedtobeeffectiveagainstarangeofdifferenttypesofarmourandprotection,theremaybeconsiderablevariationineffectivenessbetweenthesedifferenttypesofarmour.Theeventualcharacteristicsoftheroundarenecessarilytheresultofengineeringcompromisesandassumptionsmadeaboutthetypeofarmouritwillbefiredagainst.ThereasonthatDUisconsideredtobesoeffectiveasapenetratormaterialisthatitcombineshighstrengthanddensitywithatypeofdeformationonimpactknownas'adiabaticsheer'.3Penetratorsaredesignedtodeliverthemaximumenergytotheareastruckoverthelongestpossibletime.Assuch,penetratorsaredesignedtobelongandthin(thedifferencebetweenpenetratorsinthisrespectisusuallyassessedbycomparingtheratioofthelengthanddiameterofthepenetrator).Penetratormaterialsarechosentomaximisestrengthanddensity.Howeverthebehaviourofthematerialundertheextremephysicalconditionsofanimpactalsomakesadifference.Adiabaticsheermeansthatmaterialsloughsofffromthepointofthepenetratorinsuchawaythatitselfsharpens,ratherthanbecomingblunterasitpassesthroughthearmour.Whileotherpenetratormaterials(chieflydifferentalloysoftungsten)areofacomparabledensitytoDU,theyexhibitdifferentdeformationandfracturebehaviours.4Statesaregenerallywaryofreleasinginformationintothepublicdomainabouttheperformanceoftheirweapons.Assuch,itisdifficulttofindinformationinthepublicdomainabouttheeffectivenessofDUmunitionsversusroundsmadewithalternativematerials.Informationwhereonlythepenetratormaterialisalteredandotherroundcharacteristicsremainthesame,soanexactcomparisoncanbemade,isevenmoredifficulttoaccess.DuringinternalUKgovernmentdiscussionsonwhethertobegindevelopingDUammunitionitisstatedthat:workthatbothweandtheAmericanshavecarriedoutsofarshowthatdepleteduraniumpenetratorsgiveanimprovementofabout15%inperformanceoverthebesttungsten
3DUisalsopyrophoric,meaningthatmaterialfromthepenetratorignitesduringimpact.Thisburningmaterialmayignitefuelorammunitionwithinthetargetvehicle,
causingextradamage.However,inthedocumentsexaminedforthisstudy,DUspyrophoricnatureismentionedrarely,ifatall.Itwouldappearthatformilitaryplanners,
penetrationofthetargetvehiclebyakineticenergyroundisconsideredtolikelyhaveadisablingeffectinanycase.Assuchtheextradamagecausedbyphyrophoric
effectsisofsecondaryimportanceifitismentionedatall.
4RobertJ.Dowding,KyuC.Cho,WilliamH.Drysdale,LaszloJ.Kecskes,MichaelA.Minnicino,andMichaelR.Staker.NewMaterialsforTankGunProjectiles:Taking
AimatFutureThreats.MilitaryTechnology33,no.9(September2009):135142.p135
-
6ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
alloypenetrators,presumablydiscussingpenetrationofrolledhomogenousarmour.5AUSgovernmentdocumentfrom1980giveshigherfiguresforadifferent,butrelated,metrictheeffectiverange.6ThesefiguressuggestthatDUofferedanaverageofa52%increaseinpenetrationabovethatofthetungstenalloys;thoughwithinthisaveragetheadvantagerangesfrom12%to157%.Italsoappearedthattheperformancegapincreasedwiththecomplexityofthearmourinthetarget,andthattungstenroundsfailedtopenetratethemostadvancedtarget.7Ofcourse,thesefigureswillnotnecessarilyholdtrueformoderntungstenalloys,orindeedmoderntypesofarmour,whicharedifferentfromthoseusedatthetimeofthesetests.Nevertheless,itseemsreasonabletotreatthesefiguresasindicativeandconcludethatonastrictmaterialtomaterialcomparisonDUisbetteratpenetratingarmourthanpresentlyavailablealternatives.ItisinterestingthattheredoesnotappeartohavebeenanychangetotheDUalloyusedbytheUSsincethe1970s,99.25%DUmixedwith0.75%titanium.8ThisalloyisalsousedbytheUKandFrance,whomanufacturetheirroundsfrommaterialprovidedbytheUS.9Conversely,differentalloysoftungstenhavebeendevelopedovertheyears.Itisperhapssignificantthatinthemid1990sthepenetratormaterialsstrandoftheUK'sprogrammeforincreasingtheperformanceofthe120mmtankgunsystemconcentratedonimprovedtungstenalloys,totheapparentexclusionofresearchonDU.10ThismayhavebeenbecauseresearchonDUwascontinuingelsewhere,butitismorelikelythatDUwasnotthoughttohavepotentialforimprovementasamaterial.TheUSgovernmentdocumentcomparingDUandtungstenpenetratorssaysthattungstenprobablyoffersmoreareasforadvancementorrefinementinmechanicalproperties.11Assuch,itseemslikelythatDU'sadvantagesasamaterialwillbematchedatsomestagebynewcompounds.A2009reviewofalternativematerialsbytheUSArmyResearchLaboratoryidentifiednanocrystallinetungstenandbulkmetallicglasses(BMG)asshowingpromiseinkeyareas,includingexhibitingadiabaticsheer,althoughaprocessforproducingpenetratorsorsimilarlysizedobjectsfromthesematerialswassaidtobestillsomewayoff.12OthervariablesdeterminingtheeffectivenessofkineticenergyroundsItisimportanttonote,however,thatthismaterialtomaterialcomparisonisfarfrombeingthe
5DEFE11/919NewWeaponTechnology,n.d.UKNationalArchives.
6Thiswouldappeartorefertothefurthestdistanceatwhichtheroundwillstillpenetratethetargetinquestion.
7Davitt,RichardP.AComparisonoftheAdvantagesandDisadvantagesofDepletedUraniumandTungstenAlloyasPenetratorMaterials.TankAmmoSectionReport.
USArmyArmyArmamentResearchandDevelopmentCommand,June1980.fhp.osd.mil/du/pdfs/1999279_0000010.pdf.
8Earlieralloys,usedinthePhalanxCloseInWeaponsSystemandtheDaveyCrocketSpottingroundweresupersededbythisalloywhichwasfirstdevelopedfor
ammunitionfortheUSA10gunship.SeePeterKJohnson.TungstenVersusDepletedUraniumforArmourPiercingPenetrators.InternationalJournalofRefractory
Metals&HardMaterials(December1983):179182andDavitt,op.cit.
9Trueman,E,S.Black,andD.Read.CharacterisationofDepletedUranium(DU)fromanUnfiredCHARM3Penetrator.ScienceofTheTotalEnvironment327,no.1
3(July2004):337340,p337ValrieChazel,PascaleHoupert,andFranoisPaquet.DepletedUraniumUsedinWeaponsandtheFrenchNuclearIndustry.InDepleted
Uranium:Properties,Uses,andHealthConsequences,editedbyAlexandraCMiller,2153.BocaRaton,FL:CRCPress,2007,p25.
10SeeRJMills.AnnualAssignmentReportArmouredFightingVehicles(LightAndHeavy)RO5A120mmStretchProgram,April26,1995.TankMuseum
Archive,Bovington.p65,whereitisstatedthatthepenetratormaterialcomponentoftheprogrammehasaparticularfocusontungstenalloys,butnomentionismadeof
DU.
11Davitt,op.cit.,p8
12Dowdinget.al,op.cit,.p135138
-
7ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
soledeterminantofthemilitaryutilityofDUweapons.Penetratormaterialisonlyoneamongmanyvariableswhichdeterminetheeffectivenessofakineticenergyround.AlthoughDUappearstobethemosteffectivematerial,itisquitepossibletoachievesimilarimprovementsinperformancebyothermeans.Othersignificantvariablesthatcanbeadjustedtoincreasetheeffectivenessofarmourpiercingroundsincludethedimensionsandshapeoftheroundparticularlyincreasingtheratioofthelengthtothediameter.Reducingtheweightorotherperformanceimprovingchangestothesabot(thepartoftheroundwhichallowsthethinsubcalibrepenetratortositwithinthelargerbarrel)canincreasevelocity,ascanmodificationstothebarrelorimprovementstotheexplosivecharge.13Forexample,thepenetrationabilityoftheUSM829roundhasbeenimprovedbyincreasingitslength,andalsobyusinglightermaterialsforthesabot.Similarly,ammunitionfortheGermanLeopard2tankhasbeenimprovedbymodificationstothepenetrator,sabotandpropellant,whichhaveincreasedthepenetratorweightbuthavealsomeantthattheroundleavesthebarrelwithincreasedkineticenergy.14LaterversionsoftheLeopard2arealsofittedwithalongergunbarrel.Thismeansthattheexplosiveforceofthechargehaslongertoactonthepenetratorasittravelsupthebarrel,increasingthevelocityoftheround.15Thissuggeststhatmodificationstotheround,gunorotherfactors,whichareunconnectedtothechoiceofpenetratormaterial,willoftengivemoresignificantimprovementstoperformancethanchangingpenetratormaterial.ThisisclearlyshowningovernmentdocumentsfromDUuserstateswhich,whendiscussingotherchangestoammunition,statethatthesechangeswillgivegreaterimprovementsinperformancethanthedifferencebetweenDUandalternativematerials.Forexample,UKgovernmentpapersdatingfrom1978whenthedecisionwasmadetodevelopafinstabilised120mmAPFSDSround,insteadofthethentraditionalAPDSround,16statethataDUAPDSroundwouldnotbeequaltotheprojectedadvancesinSovietarmour,andthereforeatungstenAPFSDSroundshouldbedevelopedinstead.17Similarly,whendiscussingthepossibilitythatpoliticalobjectionstoDUweaponscouldpreventthembeingdeployedtoNATOforcesinEurope,a1980USdocumentpredictsthatthecapabilitiesoftheDUXM774roundcouldbeexceededbyatungstenversionoftheXM833round,itssuccessor.18WiderdeterminantsoftankwarfareeffectivenessTheantiarmourcapabilityoftanks19isdependentonnumerousvariablesbesidesthebasic
13R.M.Orgorkiewicz.TransformingtheTank.JanesInternationalDefenceReview(October1997):3039.
14Ness,LelandS,andAnthonyGWilliams.JanesAmmunitionHandbook20102011.Coulsdon:IHSJanes,2010.pp404405418421.
15RupertPengelley.120mmSmoothboreDevelopersVieforLeadershipinLightWeightandLethality.JanesInternationalDefenceReview(May1,2004).
16Priortotheadventof120mmguns,mosttankgunswererifledtogivetheroundsspinastheyflew.Thespinoftheroundgivesitstabilityinflighttherebyincreasing
theaccuracyoftheshot.RifledgunsfiredArmourPiercingDiscardingSabot(APDS)rounds.ArmourPiercingFinStabilisedDiscardingSabot(APFSDS)roundsare
equippedwithfinswhichgivethemspininsteadandcanbefiredfromsmoothboreguns,whichallowsforagreatermaximummuzzlevelocity.
17R.A.R.D.ETechnicalProjectDocument22/78(Tk.Wpns)M.V.E.E.FVT35/563AnImprovedKineticEnergyRoundforChieftain.MinistryofDefence,April
1978.22/78p8
18Davitt,op.cit.,p20.
19Althoughthishashistoricallybeenthetypeofencounterthattankshaveprimarilybeendesignedfor,itisamatterofsomedebatewhetheritisasrelevantto
contemporarytankwarfare.However,asDUroundsareantiarmourroundsdesignedwiththistypeofencounterinmind,itistheappropriatecontextforjudgingtheir
effectiveness.
-
8ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
engineeringcharacteristicsoftheammunitionandgun.20Theaccuracyofashot,thespeedatwhichitcanbefiredinresponsetosightinganenemyandtherateoffirecanallplayacriticalroleintankontankconfrontations.21Significantfactorsthen,gobeyondeventechnologicalimprovementssuchastargetingsystemsandengines.Theyalsoincludefactorssuchascrewtraining,doctrineandergonomics,22allofwhichmustbeincorporatedintodecisionmakingatthedesignandprocurementstage.Assuch,itisamistaketofixateononeparticularvariable,inthiscasepenetratormaterial,andoveremphasiseitsimportancetotheexclusionofallothers.Whilemanyofthesemetricsmaybeimprovedwithoutcompromisingontheothers;anditmightbesupposedthatdesignerswillstrivetomaximiseperformanceoneachconceivablecriterion,inrealityattentionandresearchfundingcanonlybediverteddownalimitednumberofavenues.Few,ifany,ofthecriteriawhichcontributetotheantiarmourcapabilityoftanksaresosignificantthatanycomparativedisadvantagesinthatfieldcannotbeoffsetbygainsinanother.Certainlythisisnotthecasewhenselectingpenetratormaterial.
Thebestmaterialforthejob?AhistoricalcasestudyofthedevelopmentoftheBritishCHARMroundsandChallenger1tankWhileasimpleconceptionofammunitiondevelopmentmightstatethatthemosteffectivematerialshouldalwaysbechosen,inreality,procurementanddevelopmentdecisionsaremorecomplicated.ThisisbestillustratedusingacasestudyoftheBritishChallenger1tankandtheDUroundsdevelopedforit,andthecontextwhichinformedthesedevelopmentchoices.Ratherthanaimingforanabstractmaximumeffectiveness,antiarmourtankammunitionisdesignedtodefeatspecificarmourconfigurations.Itisjudgedagainstitsabilitytodefeatarangeofarmourfieldedbypotentialenemiesandonpredictionsoffutureenemyarmourdevelopments.AtthetimewhentheChallengeranditsammunitionwerebeingdeveloped,thisspecificallymeantSoviettankarmour.Inthe1970s,atrilateralagreementexistedbetweentheUK,USandWestGermanytoequiptheirtankswithacommongun,sothattheirseparatetankshadinterchangeableammunition.23Duringtrilateraltrialsin1975,theUKfieldeda110mmrifledgunwithAPDSammunition.24ThiswasoutperformedbytwoAPFSDSroundsaGermanroundfiredfroma120mmsmoothboregunandthenewUSDUXM774round,firedfromanolderBritishgunbarrel,theL7.25Uptothistime,theUKhadbeenaleadingnationintankdevelopmentandhadbeentheoriginofanumberof
20These are much more numerous than the few key factors already discussed, and include barrelwear, gun alignment, barrel bend, barrelweight, barrel stiffness,
expansion of the barrel, temperature and barrel wear (See AFV TechnologyAide Memoire.Armour School RAC Centre, March 1979. Tank MuseumArchive,
BovingtonHDWarwick.AThirdSupplementtoMVEEReport82019AGuideToTheDesignofMainArmamentGunMountingsForArmouredFightingVehicles
(U).ProcurementExecutiveMinistryofDefence,1987.TankMuseumArchive,Bovington.)
21ReasonsfortheDevelopmentofa120mmHighPerformance,SmoothBoreGunwithFinstabilizedAmmunition,n.d.TankMuseumArchive,Bovington.p5
22ThirdsupplementtotheMVEEreport,op.cit.pD
23R.M.Orgorkiewicz.ArmouredFightingVehicles.InColdWar,HotScience:AppliedResearchinBritainsDefenceLaboratories,19451990,editedbyRobertBud
andPhilipGummett.London[England]:NMSITradingLtd.:ScienceMuseum,2002.p124125
24ThedifferencesbetweenAPDSandAPFSDSareoutlinedinfootnote5,above.
25RupertPengelley.BritishTankGunDevelopment.DefenceAttach,no.1(1981),p18
-
9ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
successfulinnovations,includingAPDSrounds,thenthestandardtypeofarmourpiercingammunition.Atthetime,therewerestillquestionsovertheaccuracyofAPFSDSroundsbutthedecisiontofieldanAPDSroundwasprobablyalsodueinparttoaninstitutionalunwillingnesstoacceptthatthisBritishinventionhadbeensupplanted.26AlthoughtheUKsubsequentlydevelopedaprototype120mmAPFSDSroundforsubsequenttrials,boththeUSandWestGermanyadoptedacommonsystem,the120mmsmoothboreL44gun.27MeanwhiletheUKplannedtodevelopanewtankonitsownwithadifferent120mmrifledgun.28Thiswaspartlyjustifiedasbeingnecessarytoretaincompatibilitywithexistingammunition,includinganotherBritishinvention,theHESHround.29However,subsequentdecisionswereprimarilytheresultofexternalcircumstances.Firstly,projectionsforfutureimprovementsinSovietarmourwererevisedupwards,leadingtothedevelopmentofatungstenAPFSDSround(asmentionedaboveaDUAPDSroundwasnotdeemedsufficient).30ThenanilladvisedplannedsaleoftankstotheShahofIrandidnotgoaheadduetohisoverthrowintheIslamicRevolution.ThelossofthissalethreatenedthefutureoftheRoyalOrdnancefactoryinLeedswhichhadbeenduetoproducethem.31Thirdly,projectionsofthetypeofarmourexpectedinthesuccessortotheSovietT80tankindicatedthattheplannedtungstenAPFSDSroundwouldnotbeabletofullypenetrateit.32Asthecostsoftheprogrammeforthenewtankwerealsoincreasing,itwasdecidedthattheUKwouldtakeuptheshortfallfromthefailedIraniansale.33ThetankinquestionwasactuallyaderivativeoftheChieftaintankalreadyfieldedbytheUK,butwastobeknownasChallenger1.AstheChallengerwasequippedwiththesame120mmrifledgunastheChieftain,anewhighpressure34gunwouldbedesigned,whichcouldberetrofittedtoboththeChallengerandChieftain.ADUroundwouldbedevelopedforthisgun(knownastheL30),butitwouldbebackwardscompatiblewiththeChieftainammunitiontheninservice.35ItisquiteclearfrominternaldocumentsfromthistimethatdevelopmentwasspecificallyfocuseduponovercomingSovietarmourcapabilities.36TherewereformalagreementsbetweentheNATOcountriestodeviseaccuratesimulationsofarmourarraysfordifferenttypesofSovietvehiclestousefortesting.37ThedetailinUKammunitionprocurementdocumentsshowsthatthesecriteria
26OrgorkiewiczArmouredFightingVehicles,op.cit.,p125
27Pengelley.120mmSmoothboreDevelopersVieforLeadership,op.cit.
28ThiswasknownastheMBT80,presumablyareferenceto1980,thensometimeinthefuture.Priortothat,theUKhadbeenplanningtojointlydevelopatankwith
WestGermany,butthatprojectappearstohavesouredduringthetimeofthetrilateraltrials,presumablyasaresultofthefailuretoagreeonacommonbarrelforthethree
nations.ThetanktheGermansthendevelopedalonebecamethehighlysuccessfulLeopard2
29HighExplosiveSquashHead(HESH).ThistypeofroundwasnotwidelyadoptedbynationsotherthantheUK,andwasnotdesignedwithfins,andsorequiredthe
rifledbarreltogiveitspin.However,asOrgorkiewicz(ArmouredFightingVehicles,op.cit.,p125)pointsout,itwouldnothavebeendifficulttoaddfinstotheround
30DSABoyd.GSR(OE)3758DraftReportforPreliminaryAcceptance.ProcurementExecutiveMinistryofDefence,February8,1983.TankMuseumArchive,
BovingtonR.A.R.D.ETechnicalProjectDocument22/78,op.cit.,p8
31OrgorkiewiczArmouredFightingVehicles,op.cit.,p137
32SeeGSR3851120mmUniversalDepletedUraniumAPFSDSRound.MinistryofDefence,October1,1980.TankMuseumArchive,Bovington.Incidentally,the
additionofalongerbarreltotheGermanLeopard2tankwasintendedtocounterthearmourinanupgradetotheT80:theT80U,seePengelley.120mmSmoothbore
DevelopersVieforLeadership,op.cit.
33OrgorkiewiczArmouredFightingVehicles,op.cit.,p137
34i.e.abletowithstandfiringswithamorepowerfulexplosivechargeandthereforetofiremorepowerfulammunition
35GSR3851,op.cit.
36GSR(OE)3758,op.cit.GSR3851,op.cit.
37Package03BHeavyandLightArmouredVehiclesQuarterlyReviewDocumentReportforthePeriodAprJun94.DefenceResearchAgency.TankMuseum
Archive,Bovington
-
10ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
werebasedonprojecteddevelopmentsinSovietarmour.DuringcivilservicediscussionspriortothedevelopmentprogramforaUKDUround,itisspecificallystatedinreferencetotheneedforammunitiontocounterSovietarmourthat:DUappearstoofferthebestprospectsofsuchanimprovementfortheChieftainsmainarmamentinashorttimescale.38Inotherwords,UKDUammunitionwasdevelopedbecauseitwasdeemednecessaryfordefeatingaparticulartypeofarmourandcircumstanceshadlimitedthepossibilitiesforadjustingothercharacteristicsoftheweaponssystemwithoutaconsiderableinvestmentoftimeandmoney.39ConsequencesforpresentdayUKtankammunitionThedeploymentofthenewgunwasdelayedduetoproblemswiththeChallenger1tank,whichnecessitatedamorefundamentalupgradetothewholeUKtankfleet.Theupdatedtank,whichfeaturedthenewgun,wasknownastheChallenger2andenteredservicein1993.DUammunitioncompatiblewiththeearliergunwasproducedfortheChallenger1justbeforethestartoftheGulfWarin1991.AhighpressureDUround,knownasCHARM3,finallybecameavailablein1999,andremainstheUKsmainantiarmourtankammunition.Ratherthanthebrandnewtankenvisagedbymilitaryplannersintheearly70s,in2012theUKisfieldingatankwithagunthatistheresultofevolutionaryadaptationsfromtheChieftain,wherebackwardscompatibility40hasbeenaconsiderationateachstage.41Asaresult,designoftheCHARM3roundisdeterminedinpartbydecisionstakenforatankwhichfirstcameintoservicein1965.Theseincludearifledgunbarrel,whichmakesUKammunitionincompatiblewithotherNATOcountries,andammunitionthatiscomprisedofaseparatechargeandprojectile.ThismeansthatthereisnophysicalspaceintheroundtoaccommodatealongerpenetratorthanthatfoundinCHARM3,meaningthatthesimplestammunitionredesignoptionisnotapossibility.42AsneitherChallengermodelhasbeensuccessfulontheexportmarket,43therehasbeenlittledemandfortheammunition,resultingintheclosureofthefacilitiesusedtomanufactureCHARM3.Whencombinedwiththediminishingimportanceoftankwarfareinmilitarypriorities,thesedevelopmentshavepreventedanyfurtherdevelopmentofUKarmourpiercingammunition.Meanwhile,theGermanL44smoothboregun,adoptedbyboththeUSandGermanyafterthe1975trilateraltrialshasbecomethedefactoNATOstandard,andisusedworldwide.44
38DEFE19/267DepletedUranium:UseinConventionalArmamentResearchFirings,n.d.UKNationalArchives.Itshouldbenotedthatotherconsiderationsdoplaya
roleinthesediscussions,suchastheimplicationsforarmssalesifothernationsoffertosellDUammunitionandtheUKdoesnot,andthecostofthematerials.However
theseclearlyplayasecondaryroletotherequirementforammunitionthatcanpenetrateacertainamountofarmour(SeealsoDEFE11/919NewWeaponTechnology,op.
cit.andDEFE19/266DepletedUranium:UseinConventionalMunitionsResearchFirings,n.d.UKNationalArchives)
39Inasimilarvein,thefirstUSDUround,theXM774,grewoutofa1973projecttoimprovethelethalityoftheexistingM68gun,soextendingitslife(SeeOfficeofthe
SpecialAssistanttotheSecretaryofDefenseforGulfWarIllnesses.1991DUUseGulflinkTABEDevelopmentofDUMunitions,
n.d.http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabe.htm.)
40i.e.compatiblewithearlierversions.Inthiscasegunshavebeendesignedtobecompatiblewitholderammunitionandammunitionhasbeendesignedtobecompatible
witholderguns
41OrgorkiewiczArmouredFightingVehicles,op.cit.,p125126
42Thiswouldlikelynothavebeenconsideredaproblemin1965,notleastbecauseAPDSroundshaveanupperlimittotheirlength/diameterratio.SeeDOSWhitley.
120mmTankGuns.DefenceSales.TankMuseumArchive,Bovington.pA1
43OnlyOmanhasbroughtnewChallenger2tanks.TheUKsChallenger1fleetwastransferredtoJordanwhentheUKupgradedtoChallenger2
44Pengelley.120mmSmoothboreDevelopersVieforLeadership,op.cit.
-
11ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
LessonsfromtheCHARMcasestudyAlthoughthisexamplemaywellincludeparticularlyunfortunateprocurementdecisionsanddelays,therearecharacteristicswhichwillbecommontoallammunitiondesignandprocurementprocesses.Ratherthanstartingwithablankslateandchoosingthebestmaterialforthejob,decisionsaretakenwithinawiderpoliticalandeconomiccontext,whichmaybeconsiderablymoreimportantindeterminingroundcharacteristicsthanpureengineeringconsiderations.Thelegacyofpreviousdecisionsandissuesaroundcompatibility45standoutasbeingamongstthemostsignificantfactors,thoughitshouldbenotedthatdecisionmakingonallthesemattersiscolouredbygroupthinkandinstitutionalpreferences.ThisisbynomeansrestrictedtoBritishprocurement.AnotherexamplewouldbetherejectionofChobhamcompositearmourbytheUSMilitaryonthebasisofearlytests.46Pursuingincrementaldevelopmentsofexistingsystems,ratherthandesigningsomethingentirelynew,clearlyconveysbenefitsintermsofcost,timerequired,andreliability.Presumablythepreferredpositionforplannersintermsofammunitiondevelopmentistohaveaselectionofrelativelylowcostchangeswhichcanbefairlyquicklyimplementedinexistingammunitionaccordingtorequirements.Thesechangescanbeimplementedagainstabackdropoflongerterm,moreinvestigativeresearchintomorefundamentalchanges.Theaimofthisstanceistoensurethatwhenincrementalchangesarenolongersufficientorpractical,thecostsandbenefitsofdifferentdevelopmentoptionsarewellunderstood,andthetimescaleandcostofdevelopingprototypesintoservicecanbeestimatedwithsufficientaccuracy.TowardstheendoftheColdWar,severalsignificantstepchangesintankgunsystemswereenvisaged,withanunderstandingthatacommon140mmNATOgunwouldbedeveloped.Thiswasthenlikelytobereplacedwithagunusingelectromagneticpropulsion.47Intheevent,neitherofthesedevelopmentshasbeendeemednecessary,duetotheendoftheColdWarandtheconsiderableslowingofRussiantankdevelopment.48Instead,NATOtankammunitiondevelopmenthasrestricteditselftoimproving120mmammunition.Sincearound2002,UKplannershaverecognisedthatforreasonsofcostandcompatibility,futureBritishtankammunitionwouldhavetobesmoothboreammunitionofthetypeusedbyotherNATOcountries.49Tothisend,theChallenger2tankhasundergonetestingwithaGermanmadesmoothboregunandnonDUammunition,whichhasapparentlyproventobemoreeffectivethanCHARM3ammunition.50However,duetoreasonsofcost,thisupgradehasnotbeenimplemented.
45ThoughitshouldbenotedthatthisexampleisunusualinhavingtwoconflictingcompatibilityimperativescompatibilitywithNATOallies,andbackwards
compatibilitywiththeChieftaintank
46ItseemsthattheUSsawanearlyprototypeofthiskindofarmour,anddismisseditspotential,possiblybecauseearlyversionswerelesseffectiveagainstkineticenergy
rounds.ItwassubsequentlyadoptedasthearmourfortheAbrams,butonlyduetothevociferouscampaigningonthepartofafewindividualsagainstthesettled
institutionalopinion.Forafulldescriptionofthisturnofevents,seeKelly,Orr.KingoftheKillingZone.NewYork:W.W.Norton,1989
47M.J.Wright,ProjectsDirector.MemorandumFutureGunSystems.RoyalOrdnance,August16,1988.TankMuseumArchive,Bovington.p12
48Thisisaptlyillustratedbythe2010cancellationoftheRussianT95tank,whichwastohavebeenarevolutionarynewdesign(seeJamesMWarford.TheSovietFST2
andtheRussianT95:TheNewRussianTankGenerationComingintoFocus.AfricanArmedForcesJournal(September2010):1821),butwhichbecameobsoleteduring
twodecadesofdevelopment(seeRussianTankFallsVictimtoIntriguesRusBizNews.com,n.d.http://www.rusbiznews.com/news/n795.html).Asaresult,itcouldbe
arguedthatfrontlineRussiantankshavenotundergoneanymajorchangessincethegenerationofvehiclesthattheUKsoriginalCHARMammunitionwasdesignedfor
49Thefactthatthisinevitabledevelopmentwasonlyinternallyadmittedatsuchalatestage,followingthedecisionbyGreecenottoadopttheChallenger2tank,
illustratestheroleinstitutionalintransigenceplayedinthiscase(seeRupertPengelley.TransitionofChallenger2toSmoothboreArmamentReachesSignificant
Landmark.InternationalDefenceReview(March1,2006))
50ThiswasfirstreportedbythewellconnecteddefencejournalJanesInternationalDefenceReview,followingtrailsinFebruary2006,Ibid.Althoughtheresultsofthe
trialswereofficiallyclassified,JaneswasinformedofftherecordthatthetestconfigurationoutperformedaCHARM3roundfiredfromtheexistinggun.
-
12ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
ItissomewhatironicthatBritishgovernmentministersoftendefendtheircurrentDUammunitionasbeingthebestmaterialforthejob,havingfailedtobringinamoreeffectivenonDUalternative.Theclearimplicationisthat,whileonastrictmaterialtomaterialcomparisonDUmaybemoreeffectiveatpiercingarmourthancurrentalternatives,thiseffectivenessdoesnotequatetoanabsolutemilitaryadvantage.Thesameeffectivenesscanbeachievedthroughothermeans.TheUKsswitchtoDUammunitionallowedthemaoneoffincreaseinpenetration,meaningthatotherprocurementdecisionscouldbetakenforreasonsofbackwardscompatibilityandtosupporttheBritishdefenceindustry,ratherthanmaximisingeffectiveness.However,inthelongrun,thishasnotpreventedtheroundfrombecominglesseffectivethanthenonDUsystemusedbyGermany.
ConclusionAsthecasestudyshows,thefactorsaffectingammunitiondesign,andpenetratormaterialchoice,arefarremovedfromasimplecaseofchoosingtheammunitionwiththegreatestpossiblemilitaryutility.Althoughstraightforwardengineeringprincipleswillinformthedecision,widerconsiderationsmaybemuchmoresignificant.ItistechnicallypossibletodesignweaponsystemsthatareequallyaseffectiveasDUusingalternativematerials.ThisisparticularlytrueinthepostColdWarerawhenthearmsracebetweendifferentarmoursandpenetratorshaslargelyceased,oratleastconsiderablysloweddown.AllthatisrequiredisthepoliticalwillforchangewithinuserstatestodiscontinueusingDUand,iftheywishtodeveloptheirownbespokerangeofammunitionsystems,tospendthenecessarysumsondevelopment.AlthoughDUmay,onconsiderationofpenetratormaterialalone,bebetteratpenetratingarmour,thisadvantageisnotsogreatthatotheradaptationscannotbesubstituted.Furthermore,whenconsideredinlightofthenumerousdisadvantagesofusingDUthepotentialhealthandpsychologicalimpactonciviliansandmilitarypersonnel,theenvironmentalcontamination,handlingissues,thecostofdecontamination(i.e.cleaningupdomesticrangesandproductionfacilities),potentialliabilitiesfordecontaminationoverseasandthepoliticalunacceptabilityinmanyquarters,ICBUWbelievesthecostswelloutweightheperceivedbenefits.TherearesomeindicationsthatthispointofviewisspreadingfromthemanycountriesthathaveneversoughttouseDUweapons,tosomeofthestateswhichwerepreviouslythemostenthusiastic.TheUnitedStateshastakenalongtermdecisiontodiscontinueusingDUinmediumcalibrerounds.Strikingly,whentenderingthecontractfortheammunitionfortheF35JointStrikeFighter,theUSlistedthepresenceoftoxicmaterialssuchasCobalt,Nickel,BerylliumordepletedUraniumasbeingnondesirablecriteriaforpotentialbidders.51TheylaterpurchasedatungstenbasedroundfromtheGermanmanufacturerRheinmetall,astheyweretheonlysuppliertosatisfyalltherequirements.AlthoughtheycurrentlyretaintheA10gunshipinservice,whichfiresa30mmDUround,during2011sOperationUnifiedProtectorinLibyaitappearsthatadecisionwastakennottousetheDUammunition,presumablybecauseofitspoliticalunacceptability.52
51U.S.AirForceAirArmamentCenter.DualPurposeAmmunitionfortheF35AircraftGunSystem(GAU22A)FinalRequirementsList,April24,2008.Federal
BusinessOpportunitiesSolicitationNumberAAC685ARSS080424.https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=f934399b74944eb51de1ec687f89bba8
52USdeniesdepleteduraniumuseinLibya,butrefusestoruleoutfutureuse:http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/402.html
-
13ICBUWOverstatingtheCase:ananalysisoftheutilityofdepleteduraniuminkineticenergypenetratorswww.bandepleteduranium.org
RecentreportssuggestingthattheUSisalsoplanningtodevelopanonDUsuccessortoitscurrent120mmDUroundappeartoconfirmthispicture.53WhileDUmayatpresentbethemosteffectivepenetratormaterialinastrictmaterialtomaterialcomparison,thisdoesnotmeanthatDUammunitionissomilitarilyusefulthatalternativescannotbefound,givensufficientresourcesandpoliticalwill.GiventhenumerousproblemsregardingDUasamaterial,thecaseforuserstatestoabandontheseweaponsisunanswerable.
53NATOTanksAimatWiderTargetSetwithSmoothboreAmmunition.InternationalDefenceReview(January19,2012)