Tank Guns and Ammunition

[Akim]

No, they had two piece ammunition, but both pieces were shorter than "NATO" (quadliteral) 140 mm ammo.

Leclerc with 140 mm tank gun would use the same ammo as Germany or U.S., because the UK, the U.S., Germany and France agreed to develop their 140 mm systems with a common standard.

Here the experienced shells of 90th. What is now agreed to follow a common path - it is correct. Just all the other countries except (France, Japan and South Korea) it is necessary will decide, how to accelerate firing. Will it be a new tank or puts an autoload in old machines. Then the decline of mass will happen on 5-7 tons, without the loss of level protection.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[Damian]

Currently in Poland there is performed research and development work on new 120mm smoothbore gun. It's characteristics are currently not known, but if program will be success it might be interesting alternative for Rhinemetall Rh-120, and India could purchase it as a replacement for Arjun 120mm rifled gun, of course if our 120mm smoothbore characteristics will be good enough.



Take a note that this is still experimental design, barrel might be in the end longer, and it's design might change after tests.

 

[hest]

About Svinets-1/2 rounds

In early years it used charge with designation 4Ж63, howewer it was accepted into service with T-90A with another, 4Ж96 "Озон-Т" (Ozon-T), so old statements may not correspond.

Latter uses more energic propellant and seems is only suitable for new gun 2A46M4/5 with improved ballistic performance.

Overall energy of projectile should be comparable with newest rounds DM-53 L/55 or probably better.

 

[volna]

Are the Svinets-1/2 all new design or based on the 3BM-46 Svinets round?

 

[volna]

Could somebody ID these rounds?
I can find 3BM-26 and 3BM-42 only.

 

[militarysta]

Little refresh that

mesured DM53 LKEII:

And for compare the longer known now M829A3:

And quite interesting estimatous about MJ in rounds for DM53 for L-55 and M829A3 for L-44:

muzzle MJ sabot + penetrator:
DM53 L-55 -1700m/s 13,5MJ
M829A3 L-44 -1555m/s 12,1MJ

As we can see DM53 have ~1,4MJ bigger energy.
But M829 have longer (~15-20% penetrator) and haevier, and lighter very modern composite sabot, so MJ values during fly are almoust the same:
MJ for penetrator:

DM52 L-55 5,8kg 8,8MJ
M829A3 L-44 ~7kg between 8,1 and 8,4MJ

Slighty diffrent is MJ value transfered to the target - here DM53 rod whit smaller diameter and slighty bigger V max give very simmilar value to the M829A3:
DM53 L-55 4,9kg 7,5MJ
M829A3 L-44 weight between 6 and 6,5kg so we have between 7,2 and 7,7MJ

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For compare, veluse given for Russian the longest projectiles (BM-42M, and BM-46):


Vasiliy Fofanov's page
penetrator lenght: 730mm
rod lenght: 570mm


penetartor lenght: ~730mm
rod lenght: ?


my mesurmend based on photos/draws:
total projectile lenght: ~750mm
total penetrator lenght: ~710mm
rod lenght: ~625mm (maybe 630mm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The diffrent story is how bulid is penetrator and sabot.

Without any doubt monoblock penetrator (rods) are:
DM43 (Germany)
M322 or pilprojektill95 (Israel and Sweden)
M829A1 (USA)
M829A2 (USA)
OLF F1 (France)
All of them entire service until 1995r.

For modern APFSDS all producers confirm abilities to overpass modern ERA:
M338 (israel)
M829A3 (USA)
DM53 LKEII (Gemrany - confirmed abilities to overopas "double ERA")
KEW-A3 (USA)

Propably in modern APFSDS they are to way to overpass ERA:
1) specially designed balistic cap and rod tip -able to penetrate ERA without ignit ERA tiels - this simpler method was describe in Taransenko tekst here:
Лукавая арифметика рейтингов - ВПК.name

Устаревшая ДЗ

Вместе с тем установленная на танках Т-90 динамическая защита (ДЗ) «Контакт-V» надежно преодолевается БПС 829А2 и DM43 благодаря остроконечной конструкции их головной части без инициирования детонации Ð’Ð’ в ЭДЗ. Это было подтверждено результатами экспериментальных исследований, проведенных в НИИстали в конце 80-Ñ… годов, но по каким-то причинам оставшимися без внимания. Тогда ведущий инженер Петр Паластров модернизировал отечественный БПС 3БМ22 путем установки в его головной части «штыря» (рисунок 1а), диаметр которого составил 13,8 мм. Предполагалось, что при взаимодействии штыря с 15-мм стальной плитой встроенной ДЗ будет образовываться слабый осколочный поток, неспособный вызвать детонацию Ð’Ð’ в ЭДЗ. Стрельба этим снарядом подтвердила упомянутое предположение – детонация Ð’Ð’ в ЭДЗ не состоялась.

НИИ стали в основном вел отработку встроенной ДЗ «Контакт-V» с помощью БПС 3БМ22 «Заколка», головная часть которого представлена на рисунке 1b. При взаимодействии БПС с 15-мм плитой после смятия баллистического наконечника (1) пробивание плиты осуществляется демпфером-локализатором (2), диаметр которого увеличивается с 24 до 39 мм. Эти размеры и определяют создание мощного осколочного потока для возбуждения детонации в ЭДЗ. Созданию мощного осколочного потока способствует также материал 15-мм плиты – броневая сталь высокой твердости, которая обладает повышенной хрупкостью.

Какой же вывод следует из этого? Принятая в 1985 году встроенная ДЗ «Контакт-V» не пригодна для защиты от зарубежных БПС, имеющих остроголовые головные части. При взаимодействии таких головных частей образуется маломощный осколочный поток, который в результате гидроудара образует зоны, свободные от ВВ в ЭДЗ, что является одной из главных причин отсутствия детонации. Таким образом, ДЗ «Контакт-V» может работать только против отечественного БПС 2БМ22 «Заколка».

Не менее интересны результаты опыта (рисунок 2), проведенного в конце 1985 года Петром Паластровым. Встроенная ДЗ в этих опытах состояла из четырех ЭДЗ. Мощный осколочный поток от 15-мм плиты, образованный от соударения с БПС 3БМ22, инициировал детонацию в ЭДЗ (1), которая передалась всем последующим (2–4) благодаря их взаимному контакту. Разгон 15-мм плиты происходил под действием удара пластин ЭДЗ и расширяющихся продуктов детонации Ð’Ð’. Воздействие 15-мм плиты на боковую поверхность БПС явилось причиной его рикошета с образованием в бронеплите воронки глубиной 50 мм. Такой результат получен при детонации 1 кг Ð’Ð’ и массе 15-мм плиты 7,6 кг. Опыты Паластрова дают представление об особенностях возбуждения детонации в ЭДЗ и об энергетических возможностях воздействия ДЗ на БПС.

Во встроенной ДЗ «Контакт-V» под одной 15-мм плитой (размеры 500х260 мм) размещаются четыре секции, в каждой из которых уложены по два ЭДЗ 4С22. Секции отделены друг от друга стальными перегородками для непередачи детонации. Сравнивая конструкцию ДЗ «Контакт-V» с условиями опыта, можно отметить ее меньшую эффективность, которая определяется детонацией только двух ЭДЗ.

Таким образом, в оценках Виктора Степанова не использованы характеристики поражающего действия зарубежных противотанковых средств, которые надежно поражают танки Т-90А и Т-90АМ, что привело к завышению оценок защищенности наших бронемашин.

Встроенная ДЗ наших танков «Контакт-V» преодолевается: с вероятностью 0,8–0,9 современными зарубежными ПТУР малой дальности с тандемной БЧ – «Eрикс»; средней дальности – «Джавелин», «Дракон-2», «Милан-2T»; большой дальности – «Хеллфайр», «Бримстоун» и другими; зарубежными гранатометными выстрелами с тандемной БЧ; зарубежными БПС Ðœ829А1, Ðœ829А2, Ðœ829А3, DÐœ43, DÐœ53, имеющими остроконечную головную часть, позволяющую преодолевать ДЗ без детонации Ð’Ð’. Другими словами, наша встроенная ДЗ может бороться только со старыми боеприпасами, имеющими один кумулятивный заряд, или с отечественными БПС.

Следует отметить, что установка тандемной ДЗ «Реликт» на «крыше» танка Т-90АМ не спасает его от поражения авиационной ПТУР PARS 3LR (ФРГ), имеющей бронепробиваемость основного заряда тандемной БЧ 1200 мм и возможность атаки бронемашины сверху с углом встречи близким к 90 град.

and here:
Andrei-bt - Ситуация с защитой лобовой проекции танков Т-72/Т-90

2. Second and more sophisticated way is using segmented penetartion mehanism when penetartor is made by 3-6 shoreter parts made from diffrent material and whit diffrent lenght. In that theory the penetrator is no longer monolit becouse it works on more sophisticated way then only "moving foward" in to longer and longer penetrator. In Germany&France, USA, Korea, and....Poland studies have been conducted on the phenomenon " forced segmented penetration". Ironnicly we know the most about less advanced (money...) research in Poland. Couple of quite good pdf made in WITU are avaible in the internet. In rest countres we have only patent sheets and numbers.
We know that on RHA plates penetartor using "orced segmented penetration" have 10% better perforamce then monolithic penetrator. During penetration multi-layerd target and active targets the profit is even bigger. In theory there is no limits how many parts should have penetrator. The shortest part should have lenght enought to overcome thickest RHA plate used in tank armour. The bigest advantages of segmented penetrators is possibility to overcome modern ERA and multilayer targets in Burlinghton style.
And using that kind of penetrator is the logical answer for the question" Why Germnas and Francht don't increased length in newest penetrator?" In DM53 and DM63 there was obvious option to do the same as Americans in M829A3 - put the longest possible penetrator passing through the entire cartridge. In all 120mm NATo rounds is the same lengh (max 1000mm) or like in M829A3: ~980mm, so penetrator can have 920-940mm lenght. While Russian have obvious limits in dual parts ammo (750mm lenght) then there is no sucht limit in Germany, France, Korea, etc.. But DM53 and DM63 have "only" 745mm lenght penetrator (and about 650-660mm lon rod) .
So there is other way to incarese penetration on modern targets. Forced segmented penetration is logical answer for that and other questions.
In that mehanism way of working looks more or less that:

they are two otpion -both poor for ERA:

1) as on draw - first one-two segments made hole in first ERA plate and becouse they are solid metal parts (~6-10cm eacht one) -like 30mm cannon FAPTS slug so they are moving foward and hit second ERA plate and made some damage too. Of course those segments will be heave damage after hit first plate, but V drop equal to ~1650m/s and fact they can by heavy must give them ability to hit whit quite bige energy in second moving ERA plate.
Its first option.

2) soecond -if ERA must heave anti-dual warhed abylities then there is need some time interval between first plate and strat moving second plate -yes? In that scenario second plate will be hit by two first segments before it will start moving. So in fact nothing is changed and secodn plate will be damage even before action.

In both scenarios ERA abilities just must be drastically reduced.



And here is USA Kinetic energy penetrator patent able to defeted ERA, and base on segmented penetration mehanism:
Patent US6662726 - Kinetic energy penetrator - Patenty Google
In that patent is expleind the simplest idea about segmented penetration mehanism vs ERA.

 

[methos]

I am still under the impression based on official American documents and values given by the American ammunition manufacturers that U.S. ammunition reach the stated velocities at 21° C. In case of the KEW-A2 APFSDS (which uses the propellant, primer and catridge from M829A2) the velocity difference between 15° and 21° C is about 20 to 30 m/s.

 

[militarysta]

Few screenshots from those video about amunition in SU/Russian
this is nothing new:

but here we have very interesting 3D model and few very interesting sabots:


this penetrator is circa about DM53 diameters

 

[militarysta]

Thanks to STGN we have mesured those strange 3D penetrator model:



And now good question is - what the hell is that?
It's to long to be fit in autoloader in Ob.188A2 and Ob.188M (T-90A, and T-90MS)- max lenght there is 740-750mm for projectile.
This what we can see in the 3D model is to long, so if this exist in "metal" then it can be only:
a) experimental APFSDS projectile for armour test
b) new APFSDS for Armata 2A82 gun, but in some surces (120mm and 125mm Main Guns) there is mentionetd that "These include a complex of deep modernization measures utilising an increased-power 125mm 2A82 gun, new ammunition with 740mm battle parts, and redesigned autoloader to accomodate those. " So it can be wrong, or...Armata autoloader can hold not 740 but circa 860mm long projectile.
c) it's only 3D model without bigger sense -just typical Russian maskirowka or disinformation

btw: it's important that only in two countries there is ready composite sabot technology: USA and Russia, but for unkown reson in visible Sniviets prototype photos there is still metal alloy sabot - like in Dm53 and Dm63.

 

[militarysta]

It's seems that thiose 3D model can present smth.found in Kubinka in 2012 -sabot seems to be the same.

"Kubinka 2012 monster":

So propably (we haven't confirm yet) this APFSDs is exist in metal and it's using on Kubinke for some tests.

 

[STGN]

New HE-FRAG-T for Danish leopard 2 tanks, in Danish but includes video of demonstration round.
STGN

 

[Akim]

@STGN;675015
Can you briefly saying what he said in the video?

 

[STGN]

@STGN;675015
Can you briefly saying what he said in the video?

They are testing the new round, which is more effective against a verity of targets such as houses and other soft targets.
The ammunition is fin stabilized. The warhead contains approximately 6000 tungsten balls and the grenade body is very thick, 1cm, as to allow pressure too build up when the warhead hits its target and project the balls forward.
STGN

 

[militarysta]

They are testing the new round, which is more effective against a verity of targets such as houses and other soft targets.
The ammunition is fin stabilized. The warhead contains approximately 6000 tungsten balls and the grenade body is very thick, 1cm, as to allow pressure too build up when the warhead hits its target and project the balls forward.
STGN

Oh, it's good DM-11 Greate round!
here more about this round:

and very good pdf about it:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2012armaments/Tuesday14105ewert.pdf

 

[militarysta]

And this is known but really interesting.
If this image is not photoshoped then we have confirm Chineese longer then 3BM42 round...

 

[Dazzler]

And this is known but really interesting.
If this image is not photoshoped then we have confirm Chineese longer then 3BM42 round...

Also check these out....

 

[Damian]

Also check these out....

These are nothing special, standard 105mm and 125mm APFSDS ammunition, it was discussed some time ago on TankNet forums.

As for that new round Militarysta found, if it is really that long, it might be experimental ammunition for bustle autoloaders. Ukraine informed that they are preparing for example improved version of BM "Yatagan" with improvements from BM "Oplot", perhaps Ukrainian bustle autoloader is offered to Pakistan, perhaps Chinese works on their own bustle autoloader, who knows.

 

[Dazzler]

These are nothing special, standard 105mm and 125mm APFSDS ammunition, it was discussed some time ago on TankNet forums.

As for that new round Militarysta found, if it is really that long, it might be experimental ammunition for bustle autoloaders. Ukraine informed that they are preparing for example improved version of BM "Yatagan" with improvements from BM "Oplot", perhaps Ukrainian bustle autoloader is offered to Pakistan, perhaps Chinese works on their own bustle autoloader, who knows.

That round which militarysta measured, was found by me and is in service with AK in Pak Army as we speak, i also had the previlidge to have seen this round @ IDEAS 2008 expo. This is also marketed by China on their MBT 2000 series so i believe its based on Chinese technology, AK's autoloader has been modified which is not even a news any more here in pakistan. there are atleast two undisclosed DU rounds but thats about it. No other info on new Naiza -2 DU round. All i know is its developed by NDC instead of Pakistan Ordinance Factory.