It would not be the kinetic energy that would cause the destruction. It would be the thermal energy released by the oxidation combustion of the uranium. Sufficient overpressure (20 psi) would kill all of any number of personnel exposed to it (easy to do in a confined space). Such an overpressure would be a structural load of 2,880 lbf/sq.ft. Enough to mess things up. Infall from the overburden would finish the damage. (I worked on the design of kinetic energy weapons.)
BTW, you'll laugh at this. ChatGPT was careful to include this warning:
It's worth noting that the use of uranium in military applications has raised concerns about its potential health and environmental impacts, particularly in areas where depleted uranium rounds have been used in combat.
It's not even necessary for the uranium to be depleted, since that does not affect its physical and chemical properties. The use of some suitable warhead is implied by the Russian statements of having done it before. It is commonplace for such a weapon to have a terminal dive. That is what is done with our JDAM bombs, which don't even have propulsion. (The idea is to null out any lateral error resulting from elevation error magnified by a glide slope.) Whatever velocity may be lost in a turning maneuver would be repaid by gravity.
And it may not be uranium, but tungsten, with a delayed fuze explosive / thermobaric charge. Not a good idea to get caught up in particulars, when we know so little. Like not even the true depth of the penetration, or what the overburden was.
To be clear, I do not believe that the khinzal has a depleted uranium warhead. As you know, the uranium has to be in a "formed penetrator" shape and the weapon's attack profile would have to dive straight down, which the khinzal doesn't do
Edit:
I don't appear to be right. I asked ChatGPT:
As for the Kinzhal's target capabilities, it has been reported that the missile is capable of carrying a variety of warhead types, including conventional and nuclear options. It is possible that the missile could be configured for a bunker-busting mission profile, given its high speed and ability to penetrate deeply into targets. However, such details are not publicly available and would likely depend on the specific mission requirements and target characteristics.
Wouldn’t the softer soil of Ukraine allow better penetration to a deeper depth? I have heard many agricultural pundits say Ukraine has a very rich layer of soil that extends nearly 80’ below ground level. Without knowing the below surface materials, between ground and the bunker, I would think this may change the effectiveness of a bunker buster…. If true it is quite a feat.
It would not be the kinetic energy that would cause the destruction. It would be the thermal energy released by the oxidation combustion of the uranium. Sufficient overpressure (20 psi) would kill all of any number of personnel exposed to it (easy to do in a confined space). Such an overpressure would be a structural load of 2,880 lbf/sq.ft. Enough to mess things up. Infall from the overburden would finish the damage. (I worked on the design of kinetic energy weapons.)
BTW, you'll laugh at this. ChatGPT was careful to include this warning:
So, THAT'S what killed the dudes in that tank!
It's not even necessary for the uranium to be depleted, since that does not affect its physical and chemical properties. The use of some suitable warhead is implied by the Russian statements of having done it before. It is commonplace for such a weapon to have a terminal dive. That is what is done with our JDAM bombs, which don't even have propulsion. (The idea is to null out any lateral error resulting from elevation error magnified by a glide slope.) Whatever velocity may be lost in a turning maneuver would be repaid by gravity.
And it may not be uranium, but tungsten, with a delayed fuze explosive / thermobaric charge. Not a good idea to get caught up in particulars, when we know so little. Like not even the true depth of the penetration, or what the overburden was.
To be clear, I do not believe that the khinzal has a depleted uranium warhead. As you know, the uranium has to be in a "formed penetrator" shape and the weapon's attack profile would have to dive straight down, which the khinzal doesn't do
Edit:
I don't appear to be right. I asked ChatGPT:
Interesting
Wouldn’t the softer soil of Ukraine allow better penetration to a deeper depth? I have heard many agricultural pundits say Ukraine has a very rich layer of soil that extends nearly 80’ below ground level. Without knowing the below surface materials, between ground and the bunker, I would think this may change the effectiveness of a bunker buster…. If true it is quite a feat.