Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Share
    avatar
    eehnie
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 863
    Points : 888
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:55 am

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:Is there a chance that 76mm will become extinct due to being replaced by either 100mm in the navy and 57mm in the army?

    The 76mm caliber is present in a good number of warship projects, that in some cases are recent, like the Project 11660/11661. It will not be retired in decades. Even taking your argument about the 180mm between (I imagine, because I'm not fluent with inches) the 152mm and the 203mm, the 76mm is a good compromise between the 57mm and the 100mm. Even maybe more necessary as a compromise in relative terms.

    About the 180 mm caliber, I do not think it will be a return.
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1088
    Points : 1243
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sun Dec 18, 2016 9:42 am

    eehnie wrote:
    About the 180 mm caliber, I do not think it will be a return.
    But with a 180mm you could make an MSTA with the same shell power and range as the 2S7.
    avatar
    eehnie
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 863
    Points : 888
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 18, 2016 9:48 am

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    About the 180 mm caliber, I do not think it will be a return.
    But with a 180mm you could make an MSTA with the same shell power and range as the 2S7.

    I think they will try it but with the 203 mm caliber. They have guidded ammunition and even rocket assisted projectiles if I remember well.
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1088
    Points : 1243
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sun Dec 18, 2016 10:05 am

    [quote="eehnie"]
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    About the 180 mm caliber, I do not think it will be a return.
    But with a 180mm you could make an MSTA with the same shell power and range as the 2S7.

    However a new 203mm SPG will most likely be turretless, completely unarmored, and have <10 rounds.
    avatar
    eehnie
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 863
    Points : 888
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  eehnie on Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:53 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:However a new 203mm SPG will most likely be turretless, completely unarmored, and have <10 rounds.

    The difference between the 180 mm and the 203 mm is not big in relative terms. Where it is possible to have only 10 rounds of 203mm, it is not possible to have more than 12-13 of 180mm.

    Still, I think it is possible to do better than this in a armata platform with a weapon of 203mm.

    Even I expect a new self propelled vehicle with a weapon of 240mm based on the armata platform to replace the current 2S4.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15948
    Points : 16649
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:05 am

    The difference between the 152mm calibre and the 203mm calibre is shell weight... the 152mm guns fire 40-45kg rounds, while the 203mm guns fire 100-110kg rounds.

    The old 152mm guns tended to fire from 20km to about 40km for the longest barrel models, while the 203mm guns tended to fire over very similar ranges but with a much heavier projectile that would be rather more effective against specific targets.

    The point is that the new 152mm guns have guided shells (and therefore very high accuracy which makes them rather more effective) and much improved range... up to 70km.

    The 203mm shells in a new gun would be expected to have similar improvements in range and accuracy, but the increased power and recoil would be significant.

    I agree that a 203mm gun on land would probably lose the turret and 360 degree angle of fire that a turret offers but having a limited traverse... say 10 degrees left and 10 degrees right would mean a recoil spade could be used to soak up the enormous recoil and make the gun smaller and lighter.

    The new gun would be autoloaded and the gun mount unmanned. A crew of perhaps three in the hull front with a driver, commander and gunner.

    A naval version would obviously have a proper turret as water absorbs recoil very efficiently.

    I would expect projectile weight to be 110-120kgs and gun range to be of the order of 90-100km. the enormous calibre would allow a very large and effective shaped charge arrangement and would be wide enough for a large seeker and control equipment for both gun launched UAVs and gun launched diving top attack guided missiles to be fired from the weapon.

    With guided shells perhaps even a smoothbore design for extra range...

    I have read about guidance kits that fit in the nose fuse position of existing ammo that has both the Glonass guidance system and also steerable control vanes to steer the projectile in flight... having a non spinning projectile would greatly simplify guidance and control...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1088
    Points : 1243
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:32 am

    I think the recoil problem can be solved by 180mm rounds.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15948
    Points : 16649
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Mon Dec 19, 2016 9:14 am

    The recoil problem is created by physics... shell weight multiplied by the velocity it leaves the muzzle of the gun gives you recoil.

    You can reduce recoil by going for a smaller lighter shell or by going for shorter range with lower muzzle velocity.

    The point is that shell weight and range are useful things with artillery so you really don't actually want to give up either of those things.

    The 180mm shell weighs under 90kgs and has a standard range of about 30km but that extends to about 44km with a further reduced HE charge and a rocket booster to extend range.

    The point is that you could easily do exactly the same to a 152mm shell and get a 30kg shell with extended range... if you reduce it down to a 5kg HE shell you could probably extend the range to hundreds of kms... but what would be the point with only a 5kg warhead?


    The 180mm gun was a specialist weapon... like the 175mm in US use... a long range counter battery round.

    It simply makes more sense to go larger in the 203mm round for the few situations you would find it useful.

    The Typhoon based units and the Kurganets and Boomerang based units are unlikely to want such weapons but for heavy use an Armata force might need some extra heavy support. 130kg shells coming in at an almost vertical angle would be ideal in terms of anti personnel use as it is the walls of the rounds that generate the fragments, meaning a dense pattern of fragments with no gaps for nose fuses or rear bodies...

    For harder fortified targets a long range 120kg HE shell would be devastating, but most of the time for most targets 120mm and 152mm rounds will be enough as long as they are accurately delivered.

    A 120mm shell hitting a target does more damage than a 110kg HE 203mm round that misses by 200m...

    Against particularly hard targets the heavier shell can be rather more effective than even repeated hits from the smaller rounds.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 863
    Points : 888
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  eehnie on Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:55 pm

    If the option would be to replace the 203mm caliber by the 180mm caliber, I do not think there is a chance. In overall terms I think the position of the 152mm, 203mm and 240mm (around 150, 200 and 250 mm) is significantly more solid in the Russian Armed Forces than the position of the 180mm caliber (around 175mm).

    In my opinion the decission about the 180mm caliber was made decades ago, in the 1960s and the 1970s, when the possible movements to design and to adopt a self propelled weapon of this caliber failed, while succeed for the 203mm and 240mm calibers. And has been reinforced since then by the following decissions. The line since the 1960s seems to be to keep the 152mm, 203mm and 240mm calibers while to go not forward with the 180mm caliber.

    Despite it, there is some point in the argument in favor of the 180mm caliber as a caliber around 175mm, between the 152mm and 203mm calibers, like Russia has the 120mm, 122mm, 125mm and 130mm as calibers around 125mm, between the 100mm and 152mm calibers. This would be one of the 5 most likely positions to see a new caliber

    Still, very difficult to see a return.

    After many years of working, almost all has been proved at this point. In overall terms it is very difficult to see new calibers. Most of the calibers that survived hold a strong position in the weapons system of the Russian Armed Forces, and only a few can be considered redundant and as consequence more likely to disappear in the future. As example, 4 of the 5 positions where it would be more likely to see a new caliber, are options that had previously some caliber that has been retired. The 180mm caliber would be in one of these positions.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15948
    Points : 16649
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:43 am

    Actually there were not a huge number of 180mm guns actually made... it was never in large scale service.

    It was a very powerful and very useful weapon for its time, but I don't see it being adopted.

    The 203mm round has the advantage that is was at one stage used by the Navy too and could be returned to service in the future as a potential heavy gun for Cruisers, but the 180 was a niche weapon.

    It would only be useful if it could be made to have an amazing feature... when it first entered production its amazing feature was its range.

    With the 152mm guns firing to 70kms then 44km with a reduced charge is no longer amazing.

    The developments that made the 152mm rounds able to reach 70km could be applied to a 180mm gun to extend its range and accuracy but it makes more sense to do the same to the 203mm as it is also a standard round and with a reduced payload and increased charge and onboard rocket propulsion you could get even more range with a better payload.

    Artillery is all about range and payload... the latter more important than the former most of the time.

    the larger shell size of the 203 would allow more variety of options like jammers, guided rounds, even UAVs and cluster payloads...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 863
    Points : 888
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  eehnie on Tue Dec 20, 2016 8:13 am

    Next question would be to see which calibers can be redundant, and can disappear.

    First we can remember the active calibers today:

    240 mm
    203 mm
    152 mm
    130 mm
    125 mm
    122 mm
    120 mm

    100 mm
    082 mm
    076 mm
    073 mm (ammunition out of production)

    057 mm
    045 mm (ammunition out of production)
    030 mm
    025 mm
    023 mm

    014.5 mm
    012.7 mm
    009 mm
    007.62 mm
    005.45 mm

    1.- There is a group of 4 calibers that are redundant in terms of size more than use, because every use can be achieved for everyone of them:

    130mm
    125mm
    122mm
    120mm

    Until 3 of them can disappear in the long term. Today are important calibers (the 125mm caliber is the most used) and it is not clear which of them will fall.

    Between the 4, the 122mm caliber can be the first to be out of the Russian Armed Forces. This caliber likely will disappear with the total decommission of the 2S1, a veteran weapon that is modern still as combat concept. The transformation of 2S1 in 2S34 (120mm) is not fast enough to cover all the units of 2S1 before its natural decommission. The retirement of the 122mm caliber can come in the decade of the 2030s.

    2.- There is a second group of 2 calibers that are also redundant in terms of size:

    25mm
    23mm

    One of them is likely to disappear. The 23mm caliber would be in the most solid position to survive by its higher development in the past that gives a better basis for a development in the future.

    The 25mm has been less used and less developed. It is the most likely naval caliber to disappear. Only has been used in 4 of the current Russian warships commissioned after 1980 (1989, 1989, 2000 and 2008, all of them of the Project 1265). The retirement of this caliber can come also in the decade of the 2030s.

    3.- And finally, there is a third group of 3 calibers that are also redundant in terms of size:

    82mm
    76mm
    73mm (ammunition out of production)

    Until 2 of them can disappear in the long term. Today the most solid of them seems to be the 76mm caliber. Despite to be not the most used of the three, this caliber is used today in modern warship projects like the Project 22800 Karakurt or like the Project 11660/11661.

    The 82mm caliber is very used today but has a less solid position. It is a mortar caliber used only by one model of heavy warfare (2B9 Vasilek) that is likely to disappear this decade from the Russian arsenals. It will make the 82mm caliber the alone caliber over 10mm used only by man-portable warfare. It makes the replacement of this caliber far less expensive and difficult than in other cases. Also the retirement of this caliber can come in the decade of the 2030s.

    The 73mm caliber is used today only by the BMD-1 and the BMP-1, which total decommission can come in the decade of the 2020s. It would be the first caliber to disappear.

    My impression:

    1.- 73mm: The first caliber to disappear in the future, likely in the decade of the 2020s.
    2.- 82mm: The second caliber to disappear in the future, likely in the decade of the 2030s. If Russia want Russia can.
    3.- 122mm: The third caliber to disappear in the future, likely in the decade of the 2030s.
    4.- 25mm: The third caliber to disappear in the future, likely in the decade of the 2030s. Its presence in 2 young warships can delay a little the total retirement of this caliber.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15948
    Points : 16649
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 21, 2016 10:28 am

    240 mm
    203 mm
    152 mm
    130 mm
    125 mm
    122 mm
    120 mm
    100 mm
    082 mm
    076 mm
    073 mm (ammunition out of production)
    057 mm
    045 mm (ammunition out of production)
    030 mm
    025 mm
    023 mm
    014.5 mm
    012.7 mm
    009 mm
    007.62 mm
    005.45 mm

    Actually it is worse than that... there are at least three different 152mm gun systems with different ammo.

    There are also different 100mm guns... the 100mm rifled gun of the T-54/55 which is also used as a towed gun, but there is also the 100mm rifled medium pressure gun used by the BMP-3, and also a 100mm towed smoothbore gun that is used as an anti tank gun.

    There are also other calibres... 9x18mm is for the Makarov pistol and Stechkin machine pistol, but the 9 x 19mm round is also used with the new PYa pistol and some new SMGs. There is also the 9 x 21mm round used in the SR-1 pistol and SR-2 SMG. And again there is the 9x39mm round used in the AS and VSS suppressed weapons used in recon units and the new 12.7 x 55mm round used in the larger heavier equivalents.

    there are also specialist rounds too for special small arms including suppressed grenade launchers...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Varyag
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 3
    Points : 5
    Join date : 2015-10-09
    Age : 20
    Location : France

    Unified Small Calibers Ammunition Project

    Post  Varyag on Thu Dec 29, 2016 7:10 pm

    As I am not a native speaker of the English language, I feel a preventive empathy for those who are and read this.

    Considering the basic elementary knowledges of the physics and mechanics principes applied to the "confined auto-propulsion inert projectile"  Small Caliber Weapon System, a naive idea come to my mind.

    The primar (internal) and intermediate (external) ballistics are the two main variables which govern the efficiency of the Terminal (lesionnal) ballistics. Considering the first two steps, we can put on a methodologic perspective those empirical rules :

    Velocity is mainly given by : the relation of powder to barrel length
    Inertia is mainly given by : Weight

    The spatial and temporal extension of the quoted properties can be assured by : aerodynamic shape


    • A decent barrel length will alow enough time for the speed acquisition,



    • A decent weight will assure a good inertia (temporal storage of energy), as the "temporal energy storage used in industry"




    • And a very-low drag will reduce to the optimum, the frictional surface offers by the bullet, to limit the kinetic energy destruction by the "air" gas from thermal transfer.


    If we apply this to the project of "Unified Small Calibers Ammunition Project", the limiting factor of the efficiency of USCAP is the upper limit extension of the range, it mean that if we limit the Small Calibers Weapons System (Assault Rifle, MG, DMR) to decent ranges (0 to 750m), we can "easily" define a "6mm pattern" caliber which will safely satisfy the three criteria, sin equa none ballistics conditions to achieve the "upper limit" exigences range of the USCAP Project. (750m Terminal effects)

    As I say, the prototype design and technical solution are already here, some resist to the operationnal exam, some do not  : 6mm Creedmoor, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6x49 Experimental, prhps 6 mm SAW..

    Only the barrel length will dispatch different prerogatives to the same ballistic, which again, assure by itself at least the two main criteria of energy retention : decent inertia (weight), very low drag design.

    Assault rifle : 17 " barrel
    MG : 23" barrel  attack
    Precision Rifle : 25 " barrel  sniper

    By the implementation of an Unified Family, all the logistics and bio-mechanics criteria will be easily improved and positively affect on  : interoperability, mutual supports, weight, ammo volume, accuracy, recoil for the price of :

    - a lower barrel life due to higher pressures and velocities.

    for a "same terminal effect  upper range limit".

    Here is my modest, naive and un-scientific contribution to the technical aspects of the "USCAP" utopia that any infantry man will pursue for his Small Calibers Weapons System.

    The decisional and prospective aspects are Politics, so money, so Benefits <==> Costs ratio, so global incidence of Small Calibers Weapons Systems in Modern Warfares (close to nothing) so, unbalanced Benefits <==> Costs ratio, so waiting for a Technlogic rupture wich will push the Benefits <==> Costs ratio to a strategic point that will destroy any financial barrier..


    Off Topic  ?
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15948
    Points : 16649
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:01 am

    In terms of small arms it seems the Russian military is happy with the 5.45mm calibre.

    It seems to be exploring with other calibres for longer range use like a 9mm version of the 338LM round, but there are other variables involved.

    In terms of small arms there is the compromise between performance down range and performance on target... in other words you could simply introduce a flechette round as was done with a Steyr entry in the US rifle competition... but accuracy is an issue and terminal effects was another problem.

    It doesn't matter how high velocity and flat shooting you make a round it still needs to be able to kill effectively.

    The future potential of EM guns suggests the days of conventional propellent might be numbered...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:20 pm