Form 710 Instructions: Fill & Download for Free

This answer is based on detailed trials data. Just read the short answer if you don’t like detail!Short AnswerA tank with “conventional” armour - such as a Centurion, or IS-3- would probably suffer a kill if hit with this weapon, and would probably be beyond economic repair. Hits on the running gear would cause a mobility kill.A tank with more advanced armour such as an M1, T72, Challenger etc would suffer damage which would impair its fighting ability:Hits on exposed running gear would have a good chance of immobilising the tank.Crew fatalities would be unlikely.Some crew injuries would be likelyVisual equipment, smoke dischargers etc would be rendered inoperable.Hits on the base of turret could jam the same.Hits on the mantlet/gun shield could render the gun inoperable.Hits just below the gun could kill the driver.Shock effects could cause equipment failure inside the tank.Very Long Answer, with Trials Data, Photos and ReferencesHigh Explosive Squash Head-Introduction and HistoryFirstly, a quick reminder of how high explosive squash head works.When the shell hits the target, the nose (which is normally a special padding material) is crushed and the explosive charge will spread against the target, forming a flattened cone.The base fuse initiates the explosive charge a few tenths of a millisecond later causing a compressive shockwave owing to the large surface area and direct contact with the target. This is how HESH differs from conventional HE, where the air-gap between the projectile causes much greater blast reflection owing to the impedance mismatch between air and armour.The shock wave from the explosion is transmitted through the armour. When it reached the armour-air interface at the back face of the armour, the incident compressive shockwave is reflected as a tensile wave, again, owing to the impedance mismatch. At the point where the compressive and tensile waves intersect is a high-stress zone causing local failure and fragmentation of the armour.The fuse delay is an important performance parameter, as is the speed of the shell impact. Too fast an impact may cause the shell to disintegrate mechanically or deflagrate.The HESH round performance thus depends on a range of factors. The target material- cast armour or RHA etc [Ref 1] and temperature [Ref 2] as armour become more brittle in the cold.HESH was first developed by the British in World War II. The British were also the first to consider countermeasures to HESH [ Ref 3] and recognised that spaced armour, spiked armour and spall liners would defeat, or at least mitigate the effects of, HESH attack.HESH was favoured by the British (some say to the point of fetishism!) because the round is versatile. It can kill tanks, is very effective against masonry targets, bunkers etc and about 90% as effective as HE against enemy troops. [Ref 4]. One round to serve all purposes is logistically efficient as well as needing one set of ticks on the sight reticule!2. How HESH Causes DamageThe HESH round is designed to cause damage primarily as a result of the scab of armour that flies into the tank after impact. This will clearly cause trauma to any persons in its path and damage to equipment.Secondary effects will occur from:Spall fragments in addition to the main scab. These may occur without the scab detaching. A spall liner would mitigate this.The shell also produces air blast. This can enter the tank via openings.Airblast can also be generated inside the tank by the unreflected part of the blast wave passing through the armour discussed in section 1 above.Airblast generally results in burst eardrums (which act as an indicator of its presence) and can cause injury and death through lung damage. Pressure sensors to measure blast were included in the trials below and the rabbits’ ears were tested for rupturing.Hits by large high explosive rounds can cause damage by impulsive loading also known as a shock (terms can be used in a vague way that is prejudicial to clear understanding). This means the tank is shaken up and crew are injured. Bar mines and buried IEDs can kill the crew by throwing the whole vehicle in the air and causing trauma to them. Very large explosions can tip the tank over. Accelerometers were used to measure this in the trials below.The explosion generates heat and light flash that can cause thermal and optical injury. Thermal flash was indicated by the rabbits’ fur in the tests below.The explosion will generate fragments (aka splinters) both from the casing and objects kicked up by the blast.The magnitude of all the above is clearly a function of the size of the explosion. However, the effects are also a function of impact location and vehicle design.3. Size of HESH RoundsThe 165 mm round is a big one, with an explosive content about 4 times that of a 120 mm HESH.The approximate content of a range of ammunition types is shown in table 1.The HE content 165 mm round is about the same of that of the 183 mm and the Malkara missile. These comparators will be used to predict the effect of the 165 mm round in the absence of any data on that particular projectile.Examination of Table 1 shows what we are dealing with here. The Malkara was designed to “completely disrupt any tank in service or projected”, hence the large warhead.3. Effect on Different Tank TypesAgainst an older heavily armoured tank (IS-3, T62, T-54, Chieftain etc) the 165 mm round would have about 80 % chance of a kill.Against medium armoured tank such as a Leopard, AMX-30, T34 the kill probability would be 90%[In fact, these figures should be multiplied by about 0.9 to allow for blinds. That is British for duds, not Venetian blinds. Remember, for the tank hit by a 165 mm HESH shell, if it's not blind, it's probably curtains!]A kill is uncertain because the shell could fail to function in its design mode at compound angles [Ref 5]. If the HE detonated, without forming the HESH cone on the armour some damage would be likely - as per a hit on spaced armour discussed below.For around functioning correctly, the resulting scab inside the tank could weigh up to 20 kg and damage would be severe within the tank.Hits on running gear would be likely to cause a mobility kill.Against a tank with spaced or other complex armour, the effects would be more limited. These are discussed below.4. Trials DataThe British Fighting Vehicles Research and Development Establishment carried out trials of weapons against various targets. The relevant one here is Ref 6.This report is germane here because the warhead is pretty much the same as the 165 mm and the Conqueror/Super-Conqueror represents a good spectrum of relevant targets owing to its high protection.During this trial, a Conqueror tank was taken to the test range Pendine Sands in South Wales and subject to 12 Malkara missile attacks, using controlled attacks.Six were against spaced armour and six against unspaced. (The astute reader will only count 11 impacts = that is because one attack was a blind).Make no mistake, the Super Conqueror was a tough customer. It had a glacis 150 mm thick. Over the standard armour and 14–20 mm spaced armour and a 150 mm space then the standard armour. It had shrugged off attacks with 120 mm HESH and with the US Dart missile- for the tests described in my answer What happens when a tank is penetrated by HEAT? had to have the spaced armour removed!The tests were carried out with the tank in fighting condition with the engine running. The two concessions for the tests were the use of stored practice ammunition and a crew of crash-test dummies and rabbits. The tanks were fitted with blast monitors and accelerometers.Overall from the 11 attacks, there would have been just four “fatalities” amongst the crash test dummies and 3 rabbit fatalities, albeit half the impacts were on the running gear rather than crew compartments. Only two rabbits were singed, so the attacks cannot be described as hare razing.There was no live ammunition in the tank, but only one attack was expected to have caused an ammunition explosion and this round had caused severe damage anyway.The tanks were fuelled up but there were no fires.It is unclear from the reports whether the Malkara exploded on the spaced armour, or whether the missile punch through and the spaced armour functioned by prematurely triggering the fuze. I believe the former.4.1 Effects on Conventional Heavy TankThe attacks are set out in Table 2. All six hits either immobilised the tank or put the gun out of action or both.Damage is shown from impact L7 above.4.2 Attack on a Heavy Tank with Spaced ArmourThese are shown in Table 3.The tank would need repair in all cases.There were no fatalities and no serious injuriesAbove shows the effect of hit F5 on spaced armour glacis. Apart from a burst left eardrum and severe shaking, the driver was ok after this insult.4.3 Attack on Spaced Armour CenturionTrials had previously been carried out against a Centurion III tank modified to mount spaced armour. The methodology was less detailed, but it may be instructive to see the effect on a lesser opponent than the heavyweight Conqueror. Results in Table 4 below. Data from Ref 7.5. Summary5.1 Older TanksUsing a heavy HESH warhead has a high probability of at least disabling it. Hits on the turret or hull would cause substantial damage and some fatalities in most cases. The tank was not always a write-off following a hit, showing that the Malkara did not succeed in its design aim.5.2 Tanks with Spaced or other Complex ArmourAttacks on a spaced armour tank would cause some damage which might well result in a mission kill. Of course, if the tank were neutralised by a hit, it might get another in a few seconds!Fatalities on board are possible but unlikely for most impact sites.Hits on mantlet likely to kill driver through fragments of roof being blown in.Side plates protecting the running gear were quite effective in preserving mobility.The main structure tank withstood there very considerable insults very well.Hits from a large weapon would leave the tank needing repairs.6. Other Conclusions from these TrialsStatements such as:“ an HE shell from a SU-152 can blow a Tiger tank’s turret off by sheer brute force” and“If the tank were hit by a 155 mm HE shell, the blast would reduce the crew to jelly”are not supported by this data, which studies multiple hits from a larger warhead.Despite 11 direct hits with a warhead of this size, the target tank looked like a tank that had endured a very bad day. It did not look like a pile of scrap metal.Moral- if you see a picture of a totally wrecked tank, the tank was probably destroyed by an internal explosion.ReferencesWO 195/15062 (1960) The Scab Resistance of Armour Plate*Hurlich A (1951) Comparative Effectiveness of Armor-Defeating Ammunition WAL 710/930–2 p6Hurlich A (1950) Spaced Armour WAL 710/930–1 page 7WO 341/26 (1957) 120 mm HESH in HE role*WO 291/1431 (1955) Tank Effectiveness of Heavy Tank FV215*+FVRD TR65 (1965) Trials of Malkara (HESH) Against Spaced Armour Conqueror Tank*+Lush FH. (1957) FVRDE G1 F/311 Trials of 60 lb rocket, 120 mm BAT and Malkara HESH Against Spaced Armour Centurion*= Available from UK National ArchivesI have uploaded to Scribd

Enlightened self-interest.In my view, William Pitt, the elder, had a great sense of the geopolitical situation of his day. He was a player in most of Britain’s global power projection throughout the 18th Century and time after time demonstrated an understanding of the politics governing the interactions of that era’s Great Powers. Pitt gained much of his wisdom as a major British leader during the period of the Seven Years' War, also known to Americans as the French and Indian War.The substantial British territorial gains resulting from the Treaty of Paris at the conclusion of the Seven Year’s War.French and Indian War - WikipediaIt was these experiences that formed his opinion on the importance of the American colonies as a buttress against French power in North America. He had learned over a couple of decades that North America was destined to be powerful and as a true believer in the future greatness of the British Empire, he saw the relationship between the Mother Country and Colonies as symbiotic and mutually beneficial. In his view, the coming success was inevitable.Because Pitt was such a profound orator, it is instructional to hear him describe his views in his own words. Speaking before the House of Lords two years after the outbreak of military hostilities between Britain and her colonies, he would rise to introduce an amendment to legislation that was before them and in the process of advocating reconciliation with the colonies, he would deliver a good summary of his view on the matter:But, contending for independency and total disconnection from England, as an Englishman. I can not wish them success; for in a due constitutional dependency, including the ancient supremacy of this country in regulating their commerce and navigation, consists the mutual happiness and prosperity both of England and America. She derived assistance and protection from us; and we reaped from her the most important advantages. She was, indeed, the fountain of our wealth, the nerve of our strength, the nursery and basis of our naval power. It is our duty, therefore, my lords, if we wish to save our country, most seriously to endeavor the recovery of these most beneficial subjects; and in this perilous crisis, perhaps the present moment may be the only one in which we can hope for success.….My lords…to restore that favorable disposition into a permanent and powerful reunion with this country; to revive the mutual strength of the empire; again to awe the House of Bourbon, instead of meanly truckling, as our present calamities compel us, to every insult of French caprice and Spanish punctilio; to reestablish our commerce; to reassert our rights and our honor; to confirm our interests, and renew our glories for ever—a consummation most devoutly to be endeavored! and which, I trust, may yet arise from reconciliation with America—I have the honor of submitting to you the following amendment…William Pitt before the House of Lords, 1777I. (710-1777). Vol. III. Bryan, William Jennings, ed. 1906. The World's Famous OrationsSix months later, he would be back before Parliament denouncing recognition of American independence as an unwarranted dissolution of the Empire. And in the process of making his objections heard, he would an experience a seizure that would shortly lead to his death.Pitt opposed American independence for simple pragmatic reasons. And when you examine the course of the century following his death, it is hard to not consider him to be prescient.

The i5 6500 is more than enough for happy gaming for 2+ years. However if you do not want to upgrade your cpu in the long run for about 4+ years you may want to opt for i7 6700. Though games may not benefit from hyper threading at this point, but it will ensure that the cpu doesn't get bottlenecked in the future titles. An i5 6500’s cpu consumption gets upto 100% playing titles like battlefield 1. But this is significantly low using an i7 6700. This is due to its advantages using hyper threading. This means that i5 6500 has more chances of getting bottlenecked in the coming years.Some details regarding the 2 aforementioned CPUs in the question-The i5 6500 is a quad core 3.2ghz intel 6th generation SKYLAKE cpu with a tdp of 65w. It boosts upto 3.5ghz. It comes with a stock cooler.The i7 6700 is a non over clockable version of the flagship 6700k, of the same generation of intel cpu. It has a base clock of 3.4ghz. It boosts upto 4.0ghz. It has the advantage of hyper threading. Meaning 2 threads(instructions in common language) per single physical core. So it has 4 physical cores and 4x2= 8 virtual cores. It also comes with a stock cooler.Both the CPUs are able to operate keeping the temperature limit upto 65°C on average.Both the CPUs feature the HD 530 igpu or integrated graphics processing unit which is quite capable. It gives twice the performance of an nvidia gt 710 to put it in a more practical sense. You can play titles such as gta v, counter strike global offensive, call of duty world at war, elder scrolls skyrim, hitman absolution, crysis, far cry 3, etc. Needless to elaborate its capabilities any further.People only care about the fps it gives, but never takes the cpu usage % into acount. This also has an impact on your overall health of the setup. I had an incident back in 2012 when I was using a Pentium D 3ghz dual core cpu to play call of duty black ops 2 paired with a gt 210. As a result the atx power socket got burnt due to high cpu usage. The cpu also got destroyed in the process.Im pretty sure having seeing many cpus for about 10 years, that the i5 6500 will do just fine for 2–3 years form now on without significant bottlenecking. But the i7 can also be reliable for gaming even in the era of intel 9/10th generation cpu-ice lake.For better understanding you can check my youtube video to see the benchmarking of cpu consumption while gaming, temperature and fps.Links-Need for speed 2016-Battlefield 1-Rise of the tomb raider-Witcher 3 the wild hunt-Need for speed most wanted 2012-Hitman 2016-The elder scrolls V skyrim-Battlefield 4-Grand theft auto V-Call of duty 4 remastered(2016)-Assassins creed syndicate-The division-Medal of honor-Please check the top corner of these videos for detailed feed on real time updates on hardware usage details. These videos are done by me on the same nachine. The sole purpose was to demonstrate the real time hardware usage statistics which is not easily found elsehwere especially in the case of CPU.My test rig:Intel i7 6700(non K) cpuKingston hyperx fury 2133 16gb ram(8gb x2)Asus gtx 650ti boost/zotac gtx 970 gpuGigabyte b150m d3h motherboard1tb wd blue hard driveXfx pro gaming 650 watt psuCooler master n300 caseThe question is what is your priority, do u plan to build something decent and more mainstream or do you want to do some heavy gaming as well as content creation and programming as well as plan not to replace you cpu for some years. I always recommend i5 6500/6600 for any decent gaming PC as most customers are of a mind to use CPUs for a maximum of 2–3 years. Also it fits perfectly with a decent budget of 50k build. But by all means, why not the i7 6700 if your budget fits right? Hope this answers your question.