The USAF is looking for a 2000 lb missile replacement for its 5000+ lb guided free-fall bombs for bunker busting and the like, to quote Shrek, I think that someone is compensating:
Penetrate faster, harder with new AFRL weapon
……………An Air Force Research Laboratory fact sheet with a 2011 time-stamp for public release approval tells us that a 2,000lb-class weapon with 5,000lb-class penetration capability could be available within three years.“Future fighters will be able to deliver bunker-busting capabilities currently associated with the bomber fleet,” the fact sheet says.I found the fact sheet for the High Velocity Penetrating Weapon (HVPW) in the AFRL munitions directorate booth at the Air Warfare Symposium a few days ago. The document reveals the USAF has shifted its focus on next-generation penetrator technology on a couple of different levels.
The folks at the USAF do seem to spend a suspiciously large amount of time talking about “penetrators”, don’t they?
BTW, running the numbers, the kinetic energy of a 2500 kg system at 300 m/s (about 650 mi/h), is 112.5 MJ, so for a 1000 kg system, you would need a velocity of only (475 m/s) 1800 m/s km/h (1080 mi/hr) to get the same kinetic energy.
(added correction in red D’oh!!!)
Your calculation is off. Since energy in linear in mass and quadratic in velocity, a reduction of 2.5 in mass would require an increase of sqrt(2.5) = 1.6 in velocity to offset.
Ummmm..Ke=1/2MV^2.
It's the 2nd power, not the 4th.
Yes…
A 2.5Mg projectile as 300m/s (=671 mph) has as much kinetic energy as a 1Mg projectile at 300 * sqrt(2.5) m/s = 474.3 m/s (=1061 mph).
Not so?
Hmmm…I think that I left off a step.
Rounding
300 m/s = 1080 km/hour = about 650 mph
475 m/s = 1760 km/hour = about 1050 mph.
I see my mistake. My 1800 m/s should be 1800 km/hour. I F%$#ed up and called km/h m/s. Will correct.