Войти

The features of depleted uranium shells for Abrams tanks are described

1438
0
+2

Depleted uranium shells for American Abrams tanks, which can be supplied to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, have a high level of toxicity and carcinogenicity, but they are inferior to dirty bombs in terms of the degree of radioactive damage. The relevant features of RBC shells were described by experts.

According to expert Vasily Kashin, the use of such projectiles by the American side caused political problems in relations between the United States and Japan: "Demands to eliminate the environmental damage that has been noted, and speeches from the local Japanese population," the specialist recalled.

The expert noted that it is impossible to compare a projectile with depleted uranium and a classic dirty bomb, however, from a legal point of view, the former can be considered as a "subspecies of radioactive weapons".

Kashin recalled that the military using them may also suffer from depleted uranium shells. "Measures are being taken to protect the crews from the consequences of the toxic effects of this material, but nevertheless problems have arisen constantly," the specialist said.

According to expert Alexander Khramchikhin, depleted uranium shells are toxic and carcinogenic, but they are not as radioactive as dirty bombs.

Expert Alexander Koshkin admitted that if the Russian side does not start sounding the alarm about the use of depleted uranium shells by the APU, then "dirty bombs will appear."

Earlier, military expert Vasily Dandykin said that the depleted uranium shells that Britain promised to transfer to Ukraine would not be effective against new Russian tanks and would not lead to an increase in cancer among the population.

The rights to this material belong to
The material is placed by the copyright holder in the public domain
  • The news mentions
Продукция
Проекты
Do you want to leave a comment? Register and/or Log in
ПОДПИСКА НА НОВОСТИ
Ежедневная рассылка новостей ВПК на электронный почтовый ящик
  • Discussion
    Update
  • 05.01 04:13
  • 0
Ответы на "Российское небо — крепость: как НАТО противостоять A2/AD и системе ПВО России? (The National Interest, США)"
  • 05.01 03:03
  • 0
Комментарий к "В России удивились молчанию «Игл» Венесуэлы"
  • 05.01 02:34
  • 0
Комментарий к "Гарантии безопасности Трампа ненадежны, мистер Зеленский (The New York Times, США)"
  • 05.01 01:02
  • 1
К событиям в Венесуэле
  • 05.01 00:41
  • 0
Комментарий к "«Конкурент B-21 за звание лучшего бомбардировщика»: новый китайский самолёт H-20"
  • 04.01 23:59
  • 12704
Without carrot and stick. Russia has deprived America of its usual levers of influence
  • 04.01 21:17
  • 2
О современных танках, точнее, ОБТ (MBT, по-английски)
  • 04.01 21:08
  • 0
И еще о танковой теме - раз это вызвало интерес на форуме. Что такое "советская танковая школа"
  • 04.01 13:58
  • 15
  • 04.01 09:18
  • 1
The risk of self-fulfilling prophecies: what threats does the Russian senator see
  • 03.01 22:50
  • 0
И еще раз: О роли танков в современной войне.
  • 03.01 13:26
  • 1
  • 02.01 20:18
  • 0
Комментарий к "С-500: российское оружие победы или бумажный тигр? (The National Interest, США)"
  • 02.01 16:23
  • 5
  • 02.01 02:43
  • 0
Комментарий к "С развертыванием “Орешника” в Белоруссии Россия развивает передовую инфраструктуру для стратегического ядерного сдерживания (Military Watch Magazine, США)"