Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4890
    Points : 5049
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:42 pm

    GarryB wrote:I could see real problems with this sort of thing...

    Imagine a COIN operation with terrorists all over the place and no front line with good guys mixed with bad guys and friendlies and neutrals all over the place.

    An attack is mounted on a vehicle from amongst civilians and these machine guns open up trying to shoot down the rocket... how to you prevent it from hitting civlians or even friendlies?

    Much better to use short range munitions like ARENA and DROZD...

    Tank locators operating in automatic mode will detect flying ammunition. The calculating device will evaluate the parameters of its flight and decide on the use of tank armaments.

    I suspect most of the time the calculating device would choose DROZD or Afghanit munitions for the interception...

    Terrorists almost always hide behind civilians, nothing is going to change whether a cannon is fitted to a RWS for additional defense or not. From Chechnya to Syria terrorists use civilian buildings to hide in them, should that stop them from being eradicated? Why would you use Armata's in a dense population anyway? Seems a bit heavy-handed until at least most of them can be evacuated, plus foreign journals will claim it's the modern day Tienanmen Square. Besides it's just an additional layer of defense, if it's too risky to use then it won't be utilized either way.

    You don't want your soldiers to be in front of your heavy armor, you want them to be behind them...

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Maxresdefault


    Last edited by magnumcromagnon on Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:16 am; edited 1 time in total
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1521
    Points : 1701
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:24 pm

    I'd imagine that the system could be activated and deactivated. and most military equipment is designed with conventional warfare in mind and what's the most serious threat. If you are fielding tanks in a certain environment then they will be equipped for that situation that would include climate and type of warfare
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 20291
    Points : 20845
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:30 am

    Terrorists almost always hide behind civilians, nothing is going to change whether a cannon is fitted to a RWS for additional defense or not.

    Why would you use Armata's in a dense population anyway?

    Armata is designed for use in urban areas that are normally not safe for armour because the enemy can often get very close and attack from vulnerable angles... there is little point in designing armata for COIN ops though.... it is designed for any sort of war up to and including against NATO.

    Seems a bit heavy-handed until at least most of them can be evacuated, plus foreign journals will claim it's the modern day Tienanmen Square. Besides it's just an additional layer of defense, if it's too risky to use then it won't be utilized either way.

    The problem I have is that it really wont be effective at great distances, yet rifle calibre machine gun fire is lethal... to say lethally effective.... to 1.5km, and dangerous to double that range... so with this system... presumably for it to be effective it needs to be automatic and not need a command from a human that might take to long to be effective. That means you will have a 3km circle around every armata vehicle where it could open fire without warning. You have to expect the system wont be perfect... it might detect a bird, or something... have you ever been hunting with someone who is trigger happy and will just fire at any old thing without any warning? If he is in your group it is bad enough but if it is in another group then you become a potential target and it is really not nice at all... especially when he is supposed to be on your side if you know what I mean.

    Another thing is that these guns will need their own turret mechanisms to be able to point in the relevant direction too.

    Sorry... I think fixed ready to fire systems that cover all angles but launch short range munitions... especially like ARENA that was launched up and directed its fragments down into the ground was a much better idea... to deal with top attack munitions you could have another row with the fragments directed straight up so when they come down they are not lethal, but can intercept high angle top attack threats.

    You don't want your soldiers to be in front of your heavy armor, you want them to be behind them...

    In urban warfare where you can't see threats in the next street generally troops move forward and the tanks fire upon the targets they designate... tanks operate in more of a support role.

    I'd imagine that the system could be activated and deactivated. and most military equipment is designed with conventional warfare in mind and what's the most serious threat. If you are fielding tanks in a certain environment then they will be equipped for that situation that would include climate and type of warfare.

    I actually like the idea of the system but not for the reasons suggested.

    If I am in a tank and an RPG is rapidly approaching my position I want Afghanist to intercept and neutralise the incoming threat so it doesn't even scratch the paint, but I would like the system that detected the incoming round to turn my rifle calibre machine gun turret and commanders sight to where the RPG rocket came from because if I see a guy holding an RPG launcher I am going to shoot him... but just firing willy nilly in directions where enemy fire comes from is not practical or sensible in my view... imagine the enemy is the KLA who don't give a shit about the local population and in fact want you to kill some civies so they can film it and send play it to westerners who will be shocked and horrified to see people dying in war (their weapons don't kill anyone but nazis, then communists, and now terrorists) and they must act to stop this brutal oppression of the freedom to what the fuck ever...

    Guy with RPG disposable launch tube steps between a bus full of children and takes a potshot at an Armata vehicle and then ducks down while the return fire hits the bus with kids or priests or an ambulance or something.

    You know the story... 50 round burst from the armata... rpg rocket shot down, but three schools, two churches and one childrens hospital destroyed...
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1521
    Points : 1701
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:28 am

    GarryB wrote:

    I'd imagine that the system could be activated and deactivated. and most military equipment is designed with conventional warfare in mind and what's the most serious threat. If you are fielding tanks in a certain environment then they will be equipped for that situation that would include climate and type of warfare.

    I actually like the idea of the system but not for the reasons suggested.

    If I am in a tank and an RPG is rapidly approaching my position I want Afghanist to intercept and neutralise the incoming threat so it doesn't even scratch the paint, but I would like the system that detected the incoming round to turn my rifle calibre machine gun turret and commanders sight to where the RPG rocket came from because if I see a guy holding an RPG launcher I am going to shoot him... but just firing willy nilly in directions where enemy fire comes from is not practical or sensible in my view... imagine the enemy is the KLA who don't give a shit about the local population and in fact want you to kill some civies so they can film it and send play it to westerners who will be shocked and horrified to see people dying in war (their weapons don't kill anyone but nazis, then communists, and now terrorists) and they must act to stop this brutal oppression of the freedom to what the fuck ever...

    Guy with RPG disposable launch tube steps between a bus full of children and takes a potshot at an Armata vehicle and then ducks down while the return fire hits the bus with kids or priests or an ambulance or something.

    You know the story... 50 round burst from the armata... rpg rocket shot down, but three schools, two churches and one childrens hospital destroyed...
    I think the reason for such a gun system or the potential usefulnessof it is that it can be reloaded easily and possibly from little or no exposure where as other systems would take time to reload like afghanit etc and I'd imagine that both system would be employed together. 

    In terms of type of warfare urban environment would likely see additional side skirts or cages added as it would be fairly easy for afghanit system munitions to be used up quickly with multiple rpg firing all over the place and having use of caged armour would help. But it would be up to the commander to access the situation to active or deactivate the gun system based on Intel or threat like in the situation you mentioned of a terrorist amongst children unfortunately even the west doesn't have a solution for such tactics. what would be better in my eyes is to have three modes the gun could be switched to. 
    1, automatic defence of incoming projectiles 
    2, automatic detection of source of projectlies  (this could have a sub mode of 1, once detected gun aims at target automatic firing at target 2, once detected it guns aims at target then require manual firing by crew)
    3, automatic systems deactivated and manual operation only. 

    so effectively you have a defensive and offensive role and offensive manual modes. just my opinion

    one other thing is this gun separate from a gun used for air defence or part of the same system hopefully it's separate. In terms of air defence for armata is using a gun or will it have manpads(verba) system? I actually think the manpad system is good although it would be too costly to have on each tank so likely better to have on a handful of tanks in each unit.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 20291
    Points : 20845
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:46 am

    An armata division will have Pantsir and TOR vehicles operating with it and it will be operating under BUK and S-400V4 systems.

    There will be armata based IFVs with 57mm guns with airburst and guided rounds to deal with small air threats like drones, and also like dedicated armata gun platforms with the air defence platoon armed with 57mm guns dedicated to air defence.

    In normal current motor rifle and tank divisions one of the BMP-2 units is often got a gripstock for MANPADS and 3-4 missiles in the vehicle for air defence duties too so I would expect a few armata IFVs with Verba gripstocks and missiles inside too.

    Unlike western armies the Russian Army does not expect to operate with air control.

    I would expect the Afghanit APS system will be modular and seem to consist of a combination of box type systems with what looks like 20-30 mini launch tubes, plus the larger tubes of a DROZD type system. I suspect the small boxes of munitions would likely be replaced to reload and new munitions loaded into the larger DROZD like tubes.... they might even carry reloads with them if they are going to be sitting somewhere for a long period.

    I would disagree that they would face large numbers of attacks just based on the fact that anybody pokes their heads up to fire at them will likely get shot so after a while fewer and fewer people will risk doing that.

    They can also position their vehicles to restrict the angles and distances they can be fired upon from.

    Sitting in fixed locations would allow chain barriers and sandbags to be used to improve protection as well... with just the turret sticking up... remember the turret is unmanned... so they can hit that all day long if they like...
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1521
    Points : 1701
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:40 am

    GarryB wrote:An armata division will have Pantsir and TOR vehicles operating with it and it will be operating under BUK and S-400V4 systems.

    There will be armata based IFVs with 57mm guns with airburst and guided rounds to deal with small air threats like drones, and also like dedicated armata gun platforms with the air defence platoon armed with 57mm guns dedicated to air defence.

    In normal current motor rifle and tank divisions one of the BMP-2 units is often got a gripstock for MANPADS and 3-4 missiles in the vehicle for air defence duties too so I would expect a few armata IFVs with Verba gripstocks and missiles inside too.

    Unlike western armies the Russian Army does not expect to operate with air control.

    I would expect the Afghanit APS system will be modular and seem to consist of a combination of box type systems with what looks like 20-30 mini launch tubes, plus the larger tubes of a DROZD type system. I suspect the small boxes of munitions would likely be replaced to reload and new munitions loaded into the larger DROZD like tubes.... they might even carry reloads with them if they are going to be sitting somewhere for a long period.

    I would disagree that they would face large numbers of attacks just based on the fact that anybody pokes their heads up to fire at them will likely get shot so after a while fewer and fewer people will risk doing that.

    They can also position their vehicles to restrict the angles and distances they can be fired upon from.

    Sitting in fixed locations would allow chain barriers and sandbags to be used to improve protection as well... with just the turret sticking up... remember the turret is unmanned... so they can hit that all day long if they like...
    I get the air defence element you mentioned I suppose the only time a tank would want a manpads system if it were to be used in a recce role like the 2T stalker. 

    I suppose in terms bmp-2/bmp-3 instead of a gripstock type configuration they could have a bmp-2/3 armed with a dedicated strelets systems no body is exposed then. 

    As for the point where you disagree with multiple rpg firing all over the place then it's clear that you haven't spoken to guys in Afghanistan or iraq. friends of mine in MRAP vehicles in afghan with caged armour were ambushed and had over 50 rpgs fired at the small convoy with enemy popping up all over the place nobody fires an rpg and stands there waiting to fire again they fire it and run and change position that's a basic military tactic. you cant always pick when and where ur engagement. what ur talking about is in an ideal situation and let's face it no situation in war is ideal. on the situation my friends had experienced they stated that one of the reasons they made it put alive was that they believed the enemy had run out of rpgs. Thats one of the advantages of rpgs there cheap and numerous.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 20291
    Points : 20845
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 12, 2018 8:21 am

    I get the air defence element you mentioned I suppose the only time a tank would want a manpads system if it were to be used in a recce role like the 2T stalker.

    To be honest if a Russian tank spots an air threat it is more likely than not to load up a guided main calibre round and shoot with that... or if the target is a helicopter then an Aniet round would do the job quite nicely.

    Having a gripstock for a MANPADS as well as a few missiles in a tank would be cumbersome... first of all who would use it?

    The commander should be looking for ground threats to the vehicle, while the driver will be driving the vehicle to behind cover or concealment from the detected threat, and do you really want your gunner to be opening his hatch and pulling out the gripstock and missile tube and attaching them together and then aiming and firing at an air threat?

    If they can't deal with the air target using a guided tank round it makes more sense to mark it in their digital mapping system and alert the other vehicles nearby... a vehicle with a 57mm gun would be in a much better position to deal with such a threat...

    Of course if it is a drone then an ANIET round would actually be ideal.

    I suppose in terms bmp-2/bmp-3 instead of a gripstock type configuration they could have a bmp-2/3 armed with a dedicated strelets systems no body is exposed then.

    BMP-2 and 3 both have 30mm cannons... eventually with air burst ammo, which would be ideal against light aircraft and drones, while the 100mm guided missile on the 3 would be perfect for heavier air targets...

    I would still expect a regiment to carry the MANPADS to defend themselves when they are deployed.


    As for the point where you disagree with multiple rpg firing all over the place then it's clear that you haven't spoken to guys in Afghanistan or iraq. friends of mine in MRAP vehicles in afghan with caged armour were ambushed and had over 50 rpgs fired at the small convoy with enemy popping up all over the place nobody fires an rpg and stands there waiting to fire again they fire it and run and change position that's a basic military tactic.

    Yeah, well it was the CIA and the US and UK forces that trained them in the 1980s to do that to the Soviets... of course they were freedom fighters then...

    That is why the Soviets invented APS systems like ARENA and DROZD.

    I don't think blazing away with coaxial machine gun ammo is a good way to deal with RPG attack.

    Those sound systems detecting where enemy fire is coming from, plus drones that follow the convoy and give a gods eye view of the terrain they are driving through as well as APS systems to stop anything they actually fire would be the best solutions.
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1521
    Points : 1701
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:09 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I get the air defence element you mentioned I suppose the only time a tank would want a manpads system if it were to be used in a recce role like the 2T stalker.

    To be honest if a Russian tank spots an air threat it is more likely than not to load up a guided main calibre round and shoot with that... or if the target is a helicopter then an Aniet round would do the job quite nicely.

    Having a gripstock for a MANPADS as well as a few missiles in a tank would be cumbersome... first of all who would use it?

    The commander should be looking for ground threats to the vehicle, while the driver will be driving the vehicle to behind cover or concealment from the detected threat, and do you really want your gunner to be opening his hatch and pulling out the gripstock and missile tube and attaching them together and then aiming and firing at an air threat?

    If they can't deal with the air target using a guided tank round it makes more sense to mark it in their digital mapping system and alert the other vehicles nearby... a vehicle with a 57mm gun would be in a much better position to deal with such a threat...

    Of course if it is a drone then an ANIET round would actually be ideal.

    I suppose in terms bmp-2/bmp-3 instead of a gripstock type configuration they could have a bmp-2/3 armed with a dedicated strelets systems no body is exposed then.

    BMP-2 and 3 both have 30mm cannons... eventually with air burst ammo, which would be ideal against light aircraft and drones, while the 100mm guided missile on the 3 would be perfect for heavier air targets...

    I would still expect a regiment to carry the MANPADS to defend themselves when they are deployed.


    As for the point where you disagree with multiple rpg firing all over the place then it's clear that you haven't spoken to guys in Afghanistan or iraq. friends of mine in MRAP vehicles in afghan with caged armour were ambushed and had over 50 rpgs fired at the small convoy with enemy popping up all over the place nobody fires an rpg and stands there waiting to fire again they fire it and run and change position that's a basic military tactic.

    Yeah, well it was the CIA and the US and UK forces that trained them in the 1980s to do that to the Soviets... of course they were freedom fighters then...

    That is why the Soviets invented APS systems like ARENA and DROZD.

    I don't think blazing away with coaxial machine gun ammo is a good way to deal with RPG attack.

    Those sound systems detecting where enemy fire is coming from, plus drones that follow the convoy and give a gods eye view of the terrain they are driving through as well as APS systems to stop anything they actually fire would be the best solutions.
    I find it odd you mentioned who would want to use gripstocks of manpads on a tank yet suggest that it's ok for bmp-2/3. I wouldn't recommend either. I think the 2T stalker is was all done remote inside the tank. but as I mentioned a strelets type system gunner wouldn't be as exposed or more likely option SOSNA would be better. 

    yes indeed the west were responsible for training etc. my point was the systems you mentioned in that scenario  (ambush with rpgs flying all over the place (friend stated luckily many missed the vehicles) that these systems would soon be running out of ammo as starts to shoot them down. Hence caged armour likely in that type of warfare and this gun system they are talking could be useful in the options I mentioned earlier. This is exactly why rpg are still a feared and we'll used weapon. its cheap easy to use and because of the short range in this type of warfare allows little time to react to incoming projectiles and vehicles moving slower in urban areas makes easier target. They knew that rpg couldn't take out a tank but multiple hits could or all they really wanted to do was disable it a mobility kill is good enough the crew now trapped they would then fire bombing with petrol bombs which eventually forces the crew out believe it or not then their easy targets to kill or capture. when uk army first arrived they used snatch land rovers which were meant for Ireland they were death traps pkm rpg dshk svd etc would rip them up easily. rocket screens as they call them in uk (caged armour) was the solution as it was cheap effective and easy to replace they knew the conflict would last year's and needed a cheap effective solution to rpgs they did the same in northern ireland when I was there all the sangers  (pill box) and obs towers had rocket screens on with .50 cal proof glass although the glass was in stages first piece outer was 7.62 proof then if .50cal threat was active you would shut the inner set of windows giving you. 50cal proof but this did affect the vision through the glass.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 20291
    Points : 20845
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Dec 13, 2018 11:45 pm

    I find it odd you mentioned who would want to use gripstocks of manpads on a tank yet suggest that it's ok for bmp-2/3. I wouldn't recommend either.

    The crew of the BMP-2 or BMP-3 don't operate the gripstock of the MANPADs, it is the troops that deploy it... along with rifles and machine guns and their own anti armour weapons etc etc.

    If there is an air threat... and these days even in COIN situations that would be mainly drones and UAVs etc, then the gripstock might be deployed... if there is none or it is unlikely the gripstock might stay in the BMP and the soldier will just use a rifle.

    I think the 2T stalker is was all done remote inside the tank. but as I mentioned a strelets type system gunner wouldn't be as exposed or more likely option SOSNA would be better.

    I think the fundamental question here is... do you start making vehicles multi function...

    On the older vehicles that means adding new missile types and also new sensors and equipment for those missiels (esp for SOSNA).

    I agree SOSNA is a much better missile than any MANPADS, and with a 10km range can outrange most light aircraft launched anti armour weapons.

    However I think there is also an opportunity because the new SPAAG system uses the same 57mm gun as the new IFV, so a sensor and optics sharing, and also improved communications that comes with the new vehicles suggests that most IFVs with their 57mm guns will already have organic powerful anti air capability anyway.

    The air burst ammo so useful for use against aircraft... especially fragile little UAVs, would also be very useful against a range of ground targets, like troops in a trench with front cover but little to no top cover. Equally the ability to fire a round into the room of a building and have the round explode 2-3 metres into the room after coming through the window would be devastating...

    rocket screens as they call them in uk (caged armour) was the solution as it was cheap effective

    I remember a photo of a T-34 rolling into Berlin in 1945 that had an innersprung mattress with all the fabric gone and just the wire being used as protection from Panzer fausts... During conflicts they already fit their BMPs and BTRs with cage armour and extra armour kits, but you are talking about MRAPs and I am talking about armoured vehicles.

    When the US entered Afghanistan they had little to no MRAP type vehicles... and then they squandered billions of dollars and bought about 10-15 different types of vehicles and tried to upgrade existing types to various levels of success. Now the focus is on big boy enemies like China and Russia they are dumping the vast majority of their MRAPS and going back to normal armour...

    For real armoured vehicles, NERA or ERA, plus cage armour, plus APS should be enough... adding the ability of remote weapon systems to operate like CIWS is a bit redundant to try to stop an RPG attack in my opinion... as you mention no warning, short range very short flight time... I doubt most of the time the RWS would have time to turn to the threat.

    Especially when the locals realise the RWS is attached to the commanders sight so it shows them where the commander of the vehicle is looking right now... when it points in the opposite direction is the time to attack...

    Of course with more than one vehicle and perhaps UAV support they might have seen you and are looking in the opposite direction knowing the APS system will stop your rocket attack but the vehicle up the road in the distance is looking right at you waiting for you to step out...

    The issue is situational awareness... in an urban area there are so many factors it would be hard... a high level of communication and cooperation is what is needed.
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1521
    Points : 1701
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Fri Dec 14, 2018 7:03 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I find it odd you mentioned who would want to use gripstocks of manpads on a tank yet suggest that it's ok for bmp-2/3. I wouldn't recommend either.

    The crew of the BMP-2 or BMP-3 don't operate the gripstock of the MANPADs, it is the troops that deploy it... along with rifles and machine guns and their own anti armour weapons etc etc.

    If there is an air threat... and these days even in COIN situations that would be mainly drones and UAVs etc, then the gripstock might be deployed... if there is none or it is unlikely the gripstock might stay in the BMP and the soldier will just use a rifle.

    I think the 2T stalker is was all done remote inside the tank. but as I mentioned a strelets type system gunner wouldn't be as exposed or more likely option SOSNA would be better.

    I think the fundamental question here is... do you start making vehicles multi function...

    On the older vehicles that means adding new missile types and also new sensors and equipment for those missiels (esp for SOSNA).

    I agree SOSNA is a much better missile than any MANPADS, and with a 10km range can outrange most light aircraft launched anti armour weapons.

    However I think there is also an opportunity because the new SPAAG system uses the same 57mm gun as the new IFV, so a sensor and optics sharing, and also improved communications that comes with the new vehicles suggests that most IFVs with their 57mm guns will already have organic powerful anti air capability anyway.

    The air burst ammo so useful for use against aircraft... especially fragile little UAVs, would also be very useful against a range of ground targets, like troops in a trench with front cover but little to no top cover. Equally the ability to fire a round into the room of a building and have the round explode 2-3 metres into the room after coming through the window would be devastating...

    rocket screens as they call them in uk (caged armour) was the solution as it was cheap effective

    I remember a photo of a T-34 rolling into Berlin in 1945 that had an innersprung mattress with all the fabric gone and just the wire being used as protection from Panzer fausts... During conflicts they already fit their BMPs and BTRs with cage armour and extra armour kits, but you are talking about MRAPs and I am talking about armoured vehicles.

    When the US entered Afghanistan they had little to no MRAP type vehicles... and then they squandered billions of dollars and bought about 10-15 different types of vehicles and tried to upgrade existing types to various levels of success. Now the focus is on big boy enemies like China and Russia they are dumping the vast majority of their MRAPS and going back to normal armour...

    For real armoured vehicles, NERA or ERA, plus cage armour, plus APS should be enough... adding the ability of remote weapon systems to operate like CIWS is a bit redundant to try to stop an RPG attack in my opinion... as you mention no warning, short range very short flight time... I doubt most of the time the RWS would have time to turn to the threat.

    Especially when the locals realise the RWS is attached to the commanders sight so it shows them where the commander of the vehicle is looking right now... when it points in the opposite direction is the time to attack...

    Of course with more than one vehicle and perhaps UAV support they might have seen you and are looking in the opposite direction knowing the APS system will stop your rocket attack but the vehicle up the road in the distance is looking right at you waiting for you to step out...

    The issue is situational awareness... in an urban area there are so many factors it would be hard... a high level of communication and cooperation is what is needed.
    The gripstock idea isn't great leaving people exposed having a strelets turret on a bmp -2 or 3 depending on what vehicles they are accompanying no point in mt-lb vehicle if the rest are bmp-2. sonsa obviously better but likely more expensive than strelets or u could have a mix of both. I would of course mount 7.62 gun on either for some protection against troops.  

    As for the multi role the reasons that 2T stalker had manpad was it was meant to be recce vehicle working alone or in pairs so they might have been out of range of unit short range air defence and also that they could effectively be used at sniping role using ATGW against vehicles and manpads against helicopters or aircraft. of course this would firstly be a defensive weapon secondary as a opportunistic weapon. 

    MRAP was for the type of warfare yes and at the start very ill prepared. And they weren't exactly complex vehicles. countries like South Africa always had them. Just like the 57mm gun (s-60 type) being deployed in turrets isn't new for Russia back in 2005-06 they mounted it on the PT-76 upgrade. not sure if the marines still use it or not. and let's face it the zsh-57-2 likely saw more use as direct fire than AA over its life span. Russia now seems modern and have a vehicle or weapon for almost any type of warfare. I never actually agreed that the this remote weapon system was good but just trying to think of what they could use it for and a solution to what you saw was a problem  (shooting civvies). soft kill and hard kill are the future once that field is 100% excellent and reliable armour can then become lighter and will only serve as protection against small cannon fire. There was a time in the west they were questioning the need for tanks or even massively reducing number of tank units because of ATGW advancements.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 20291
    Points : 20845
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  GarryB on Sun Dec 16, 2018 2:43 am

    The gripstock idea isn't great leaving people exposed having a strelets turret on a bmp -2 or 3 depending on what vehicles they are accompanying no point in mt-lb vehicle if the rest are bmp-2. sonsa obviously better but likely more expensive than strelets or u could have a mix of both. I would of course mount 7.62 gun on either for some protection against troops.

    But why?

    The chances of a BMP-2 coming across an enemy aircraft that their air defence forces have not already dealt with would be pretty low, but lets say they did anyway... the upgraded BMP-2 has externally mounted Kornet launch tubes which would destroy air targets out to 10km... which is better than any MANPAD.

    BMP-3 has gun tube launched guided missiles with a range of 5.5km so why bother with a MANPADS launch system there too?

    And the new IFVs will have 57mm guns, which again makes MANPADS redundant.

    Troops can't stay in troop carriers all the time... otherwise there would be no point in having them, and when they are deployed they need to be able to defend themselves and a gripstock for Verba or Igla-S will be part of that.

    It will mean that a large group of infantry can be dropped off to a position which they can defend along with 3-4 BMPs and then the other BMPs can be used as a mobile reserve support unit with serious fire power.


    As for the multi role the reasons that 2T stalker had manpad was it was meant to be recce vehicle working alone or in pairs so they might have been out of range of unit short range air defence and also that they could effectively be used at sniping role using ATGW against vehicles and manpads against helicopters or aircraft. of course this would firstly be a defensive weapon secondary as a opportunistic weapon.

    It looked like an interesting idea but has never actually been tested in combat and might just be silly.

    I remember reading british military magazines in the late 1980s an early 1990s that were talking about the BMP-3... I remember one comment that with having a 100mm gun and a 30mm cannon and coaxial machine guns that the commander will get confused in combat not knowing which weapon to use... pretty ridiculous to think about now, but there you go...

    Personally I think getting rid of the MANPADS and replacing it with a dual use ATGM that could be used against surface and aerial targets would mean carrying more ready to use rounds that could be used against either target...

    Putting air defence systems on every vehicle in my view makes it less capable in its original role except if you are smart.

    The example I gave where instead of having an ATGM with say 8 rounds and a MANPADS system with 8 rounds, and a 30mm gun turret... having a BMP-3 turret with a 30mm cannon, plus a 100mm gun with 40 rounds of HE effective out to 7km, plus 8 missiles would actually be a better solution as those 8 missiles could be used against air or ground targets. In the troop compartment you could have another 20 odd missiles if you wanted...

    Sponsored content

    Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns) - Page 5 Empty Re: Heavy calibre ammo (Artillliery-IFV-Tank-AA-Naval guns)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:12 pm