GarryB wrote:I see the comments about how can be the new 57mm ammunition moved here. Makes not sense. I was not talking about the old 57mm ammunition, but about the new.
AFAIK the new 57mm gun uses the old ammo. It was the 45mm round that uses the new telescopic ammo design and it seems it lost to the 57mm ammo because the older ammo has more capacity for projectiles of a range of different types.
I doubt it. But you can include some link.
Despite it, these comments were about potential ammunition of the new 57mm weapon, and were done in the topic of the new 57mm weapon. Nothing off topic there. Only have been moved here, where are clearly off topic, because of your own interest.
Even, between the comments that you removed here from the topic of the new 57mm weapon there are comments about a new project and about the configuration of the weapon, predictiong a multiple barrel configuration, that you denied, but was later confirmed as a real project by the reality.
eehnie wrote:I tend to think that Russia would adopt this weapon only in a configuration that improves significantly the ZSU-23-4 in all the features of the verteran predeccessor.
The minimum conditions that I would see for Russia to consider to adopt this weapon would be:
- To have at least a 57-4 configuration.
- To be mounted in one of the new Russian armoured platforms (Armata, Kurganets, Bumerang or BMD-4M).
eehnie wrote:Rmf wrote:in low atmosphere nothing goes past mach 1,5-2.- 0,5km/s... not even supersonic missiles or fighters. and they would glow allot in IR.eehnie wrote:A 57-4 configuration would be able to operate both, guided and unguided ammunition. I understand that this configuration would be very helpful to reach fire saturation with unguided ammunition in units with several vehicles of this type, while also would be able to shot smaller amounts of guided ammunition. I do not think that a salve of 4 guided projectiles would be too much to assure strong damage, they are small, but even this kind of system would have a chance to fire only one, two or three, this is easy to do.
About the size, if necessary there is the chance to go to the Armata platform, but if possible I would prefer a smaller platform, I would not rule out the Kurganets platform. In the pictures with 57-1 configuration the turret looks small for the armoured vehicle.
if you detect at 12-15km you have plenty of time to respond at least 10 sec. with 2 rd/sec , thats 30 guided rounds incoming to interception at 6km. major improvement was reaction time and interception balistics solution tnx to quick computers. it would take lots of time but today its very fast.
In other countries it is possible to see attacks of low number of units, but in the case of Russia, the likely attacks would be massive attacks with dozens or even hundreds of units in fronts of limited size. In the case of Russia it would be possible to face situations where the time of reaction is significantly lower and fire saturation can be interesting as defense strategy.
If the goal is to create a successor of the SA-22 Pantsir I think the low mark would be a 57-2 configuration, but if the goal is to go to a weapon with smaller number of missiles in the mold of the ZSU-23-4 or the ZSU-57-2, I think the 57-4 configuration would be the minimum required.
This was not related with the old 57mm weapons or with the S-60. It is related with the new 57mm weapon (and other comments) with its ammunition.