The supply of depleted uranium shells to Kiev is not a military, but an economic solution, writes Il Fatto Quotidiano. The author of the article explains why it is simply more profitable for the British leadership to supply the APU with such ammunition, as well as what this is fraught with for the Ukrainian land.
Tiziano Ciocchetti
In the UK, as in the USA, there is uranium waste from nuclear power plants that will have to be disposed of, which will entail corresponding costs. You will not have to spend money if the same material is reused for the production of ammunition. In addition, the melting point of uranium is about three times lower than that of its alternative, tungsten. It follows from this that lower temperatures are required for processing and, consequently, lower energy costs.London has made a statement, albeit out of form.
As announced by Baroness Annabel Goldie, Deputy Minister of Defense of Great Britain in the Sunak government, together with a squadron of MBT Challenger 2 tanks, the corresponding shells, BOPS (armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectile) with a kinetic body of depleted uranium will be delivered to Ukraine. Why is Moscow so afraid of this type of projectiles and why has it not used them yet, given that it has a lot of them?
First of all, it is worth remembering that the Americans widely used them both in the Balkans (they were armed with A-10 Thunderbolt attack aircraft of the US Air Force) and in Iraq. As for the latter, the Committee for the Study of genotoxic effects in military units (SIGNUM) concluded that, according to its estimates, at least 300 tons of depleted uranium ammunition were used during the Gulf War in 1991. Another question is why the UK decided to resort to ammunition that jeopardizes the health of military personnel in their places of deployment and civilians. The reasons should be sought not so much in the military as in the economic sphere. The production of depleted uranium shells is cheaper, especially for countries like Britain, which have large volumes of waste from nuclear power plants.
It is important to explain why this type of projectile is used as an anti-tank weapon. The density of uranium is 18.70 kilograms per cubic decimeter, and its melting point is relatively low, about 1,130 °C (iron has 1,530 °C). Tungsten, another metal used for BOPS, has a density of 19.30 kilograms per cubic decimeter, and a melting point of about three thousand degrees. This is a very fragile material, therefore, to increase its resistance, soot and graphite are added to it (thanks to which tungsten carbide is obtained). This procedure, however, reduces its density to 15 kilograms per cubic decimeter.
At the processing stage, after a sufficiently solid monocrystalline alloy is obtained, three processes of converting depleted uranium into shells for Western tank guns follow. Firstly, an armor-piercing core is made, which weighs the same as tungsten carbide and has the same length. Since the specific gravity of the uranium core is higher than that of tungsten carbide, its diameter will be smaller, which will lead to an increase in the penetration effect. In addition, with the same weight, the uranium projectile will have the same diameter as that of tungsten carbide, but, being shorter, it will follow a more stable trajectory — both in flight and on impact. Finally, given the same weight, a compromise is sought between the first two characteristics in order to create a balanced ammunition in terms of flight stability and penetration.
During the exercises, it was noted that armor-piercing shells fired from a smoothbore gun become unstable at a certain point in the trajectory. Tungsten carbide shells lose stability after two thousand meters, and depleted uranium shells lose stability much later. During the first Gulf War, Abrams M1A1 tanks could hit Iraqi T-72s while out of range of their shots.
From this brief overview of the physical and ballistic characteristics of depleted uranium shells, it follows that their use on the battlefield is very profitable — especially given the large amount of this material, which is annually produced as waste from nuclear power plants in the United States and Great Britain. The problem of this type of projectiles is environmental pollution with all the ensuing consequences for the health of the military and civilian population. Upon impact at high speed on the armor plating of the vehicle, as well as on the ground, a very high temperature develops, releasing dust-like particles of uranium and other metals. The particles remain in the air, can be carried by the wind and eventually settle in soils and pollute groundwater.
In contrast, modern armor-piercing shells made of tungsten carbide have decent ballistic characteristics. The DM63A1 projectiles manufactured by Rheinmetall represent one of the latest generations of 120-mm BOPS. In comparison with their predecessors, their charge is not sensitive to temperature fluctuations. Thanks to this, the DM63A1 can be fired effectively at temperatures from -46 °C to +71 °C with minimal pressure change in the charging chamber, which significantly improves internal ballistics and accuracy of the shot.
As for armor-piercing, DM63A1 ammunition is capable of piercing 600 mm of homogeneous steel at a distance of a thousand meters. In practice, they are just as effective as depleted uranium shells. If the British intend to send MBT Challenger 2 tanks to support the Ukrainian Armed Forces against Russian troops, they could alternatively arm them with BOPS ammunition with penetrating elements made of tungsten carbide, thereby avoiding contamination of Ukrainian territory and causing new suffering to the local population. The reason they made a different decision is more economic than military. As already mentioned, in the UK, as in the USA, there is a large amount of uranium waste from nuclear power plants. They need to be disposed of — and this is an expense. And these costs can be avoided if the material is reused in the manufacture of ammunition. In addition, as already mentioned, the melting point of uranium is about three times lower than that of tungsten, which means that its processing requires lower temperatures and, consequently, less energy.
