Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/08/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ask B.D., he taught me all I know :-$ Adam Bridge wrote: > Isn't it embarassing to drool like this in public, Walt? > > The whole issue of depleted uranium is that there ISN'T any U235 in it > - it's been extracted to make reactor fuel (mostly) and weapons (a > little). What's left is U238 and a few other nuclides. > > Adam > > On 8/8/06, Walt Johnson <walt@waltjohnson.com> wrote: > >> And since I was a kid in the 50's I been worried about Dr. Strangelove. >> If I'd only know U235 was so harmless I coulda been putting it on my >> cereal. >> >> Adam Bridge wrote: >> >> > Sigh - not BILLION years. Geesh. Come on guys at least TRY to get some >> > half-life information correct. >> > >> > Here's a Wikipedia article on Deplete Uranium. You can search for more >> > inflammatory or more sanguine articles with Google or your search >> > engine of choice. >> > >> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium> >> > >> > As a beta emitter U-238's decay chain isn't too bad since, as long as >> > it's external to the body your skin will block the high-energy >> > electrons emitted. Taken internally, however, it's more problamatical >> > but not nearly as nasty as the alpha-emitters whose high-energy helium >> > nuclii can do serious damage. (The most common source of alpha >> > emission is radon gas which is a naturally occuring decay product >> > found from a variety of natural sources, not to mention the decay >> > chains of fission products. In areas with lots of granite, for >> > instance, having a radon detector in your home would make a lot of >> > sense.) >> > >> > Adam >> > >> > On 8/8/06, G Hopkinson <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au> wrote: >> > >> >> Hang on Don. >> >> This projectile has no magic burning through properties. It's all >> about >> >> density vs cross section. Add that to high velocity and you have >> >> enormous >> >> kinetic energy in the penetrator. The projectile will shed mass after >> >> penetrating, plus the armour itself will add to the stream. It is >> also >> >> pyrophoric so you would expect catastrophic heat along with the >> >> shrapnel and >> >> spalled armour. An extremely lethal shower of very hot sharp >> material. >> >> Regarding the radiation, it may be relatively benign to handle as you >> >> noted, >> >> but the dust particles from a round impact are VERY bad juju >> should you >> >> inhale them. That would be the least of your problems if you were >> >> sitting >> >> within the target. Visiting it later would not be recommended either. >> >> It may >> >> well be very toxic within the next few billion years or so. >> >> Regarding the chain gun, it is a different but allied design to the >> >> rotary >> >> barrel "gatling" designs. The principle benefits are simplicity and >> >> extreme >> >> reliability. >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Hoppy Gunny and M9 Guy >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org >> >> [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On >> >> Behalf Of >> >> Don Dory >> >> Sent: Tuesday, 8 August 2006 12:59 >> >> To: Leica Users Group >> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] [was] Another Altered Photo / now WAY OT >> >> >> >> Jerry, >> >> >From a military perspective, depleted uranium is almost irresistable >> >> as an >> >> anti-amour round. The uranium literally burns through armour without >> >> the >> >> extreme kinetic energy generally required. Thus a 30mm chain gun can >> >> become >> >> a heavy tank killer. The military will not stop using it as it works >> >> too >> >> well. As I understand the spent rounds are primarily a Beta emitter >> >> so not >> >> that hazardous as radioactive things go. >> >> >> >> Don >> >> don.dory@gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> On 8/7/06, Haussler, Gerald R - San Mateo, CA >> >> <gerald.r.haussler@usps.gov> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Gents; >> >> > isn't Depleted Uranium (DU) nuclear waste ? >> >> > seems to me the Pentagon found a use for that stuff >> >> > about 15 years ago. i thought they stopped using it, >> >> > but i now understand it continues. >> >> > regards >> >> > jerry >> >> > >> >> > *************************************************** >> >> > used nuclear waste ;-) >> >> > >> >> > Lottermoser George wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Shipping? ; ^ ) >> >> > > >> >> > > Regards, >> >> > > George Lottermoser >> >> > > george@imagist.com >> >> > > On Aug 7, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Walt Johnson wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > >> Sell it to the Saudis >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Leica Users Group. >> >> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >> information >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Leica Users Group. >> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Leica Users Group. >> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Leica Users Group. >> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >