Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Share
    avatar
    Zivo

    Posts : 1488
    Points : 1514
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Zivo on Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:21 am

    Regular wrote:
    Zivo wrote:While on the topic of tanks vs buildings, take a look at this.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=272_1383045077

    Clearly a HEAT round, and the camera survived. I doubt the guys by the camera stuck around.

    HE capability is very important.
    Great find. Not the first video where tanks are using HEAT instead of HE-frag. Why is that?
    Not sure, maybe the SAA do not have a large supply of them.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:54 am

    Zivo wrote:
    Regular wrote:
    Zivo wrote:While on the topic of tanks vs buildings, take a look at this.

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=272_1383045077

    Clearly a HEAT round, and the camera survived. I doubt the guys by the camera stuck around.

    HE capability is very important.
    Great find. Not the first video where tanks are using HEAT instead of HE-frag. Why is that?
    Not sure, maybe the SAA do not have a large supply of them.
    I think the answer is just much simplier tha that.

    The tank was just a few dozen meters from his spotted target/nest away, a HEAT round was propably already in the tube and had to be unloaded by hand than giving its position in the autoloader to load it in and than to load a HE-Frag round that all would take roughly a minute, while the "prey" could have run away, so it is much more practical just to shout the loaded round and the next round would have been a HE-Frag, a shortage of HE-Frag rounds is possible but i don't really know if they have delayed fuze in their HE-Frag rounds what would explain why they are using HEAT rounds in urban warfare.

    Without delayed fuze HE-Frag rounds are rather impractical to smoke out a covered position.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17756
    Points : 18320
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 31, 2013 11:02 am

    Most HEAT rounds have a significant anti personnel effect which makes HE Frag a little redundant.

    Carrying a mix of APFSDS rounds and HEAT rounds means plenty of anti armour capability and anti bunker capability at the same time.

    In fact some times the HE Frag round lacks forward effect as the fuse is mounted in the nose so a high velocity round entering a building most of the most effective fragments go sideways as it is the shell walls that create the most uniform even sized fragments... with a HEAT round there is still material going directly forward from the explosion.

    but i don't really know if they have delayed fuze in their HE-Frag rounds what would explain why they are using HEAT rounds in urban warfare.

    Without delayed fuze HE-Frag rounds are rather impractical to smoke out a covered position.
    The standard HE round fired by all T series tanks with a 125mm gun have a safety cap and detonator setting that allows for delayed action or impact detonation as standard.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Oct 31, 2013 11:33 am

    The standard HE round fired by all T series tanks with a 125mm gun have a safety cap and detonator setting that allows for delayed action or impact detonation as standard. wrote:
    That wasn't what i've refered too.
    I know that russian have HE-Frags with programmable fuze for airburst capability and anti-aircraft capability. AFAIK the 125mm HE-Frag rounds have no delayed fuze on Impact with its target.
    What i've meant is if some rounds have a fuze like in russian 3UOF8 / UOF84 30mm HEFI rounds with contact delayed fuze of 0.025-0.001ms that it has a slight path into its object and than detonate in it to increase the actual damage on light armored or unarmed targets rather than making "cosmetic damage" on the surface by direct impact fuzes.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17756
    Points : 18320
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 31, 2013 12:17 pm

    I know that russian have HE-Frags with programmable fuze for airburst capability and anti-aircraft capability.
    That is ANIET and is only fitted to some T-80 and most T-90 vehicles.

    It is a time based fusing system that when used in conjunction with a laser range finder and ballistics computer sets the detonator to go off after a very specific period of time.

    Here is info about ANIET:

    http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/apers/ammo.html

    AFAIK the 125mm HE-Frag rounds have no delayed fuze on Impact with its target.
    Read this:
    http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/apers/overview.html

    Specifically the bit about the HE Frag, HE, and Frag settings.

    HE Frag = 0.01 second delay before explosion which means if it impacts a wall it will pretty much detonate inside the wall.

    HE = 0.1 second delay means if it hits the outside wall of a building it will detonate inside the room... and equates to a delayed fuse detonation.

    Frag = 0.001 second delay... which is practically no delay at all... it explodes on impact.

    rather than making "cosmetic damage" on the surface by direct impact fuzes.
    When talking about a 125mm HE shell I don't think cosmetic damage is the correct phrase... Twisted Evil 
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1807
    Points : 1958
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  TheArmenian on Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:57 pm

    Syrian tanks are probably taking with them mostly HE shells (plus a few HEAT or APFSDS shells just in case).
    It may simply be because the tank had already fired all of its HE shells.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Oct 31, 2013 6:53 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I know that russian have HE-Frags with programmable fuze for airburst capability and anti-aircraft capability.
    That is ANIET and is only fitted to some T-80 and most T-90 vehicles.

    It is a time based fusing system that when used in conjunction with a laser range finder and ballistics computer sets the detonator to go off after a very specific period of time.

    Here is info about ANIET:

    http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/apers/ammo.html

    AFAIK the 125mm HE-Frag rounds have no delayed fuze on Impact with its target.
    Read this:
    http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/apers/overview.html

    Specifically the bit about the HE Frag, HE, and Frag settings.

    HE Frag = 0.01 second delay before explosion which means if it impacts a wall it will pretty much detonate inside the wall.

    HE = 0.1 second delay means if it hits the outside wall of a building it will detonate inside the room... and equates to a delayed fuse detonation.

    Frag = 0.001 second delay... which is practically no delay at all... it explodes on impact.

    rather than making "cosmetic damage" on the surface by direct impact fuzes.
    When talking about a 125mm HE shell I don't think cosmetic damage is the correct phrase...  Twisted Evil 
    Well the last mode sounds really nasty with such a sensitive fuze, when i read it i get the image of holding a gallon of nitroglycerin on a catwalk.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17756
    Points : 18320
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    HESH rounds

    Post  GarryB on Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:00 am

    Well the last mode sounds really nasty with such a sensitive fuze, when i read it i get the image of holding a gallon of nitroglycerin on a catwalk.
    It is the setting to use for shooting down balloons... Twisted Evil  But not in the rain...

    It may simply be because the tank had already fired all of its HE shells.
    Or it might have something to do with what the gunner thought might be inside the target.

    Austin

    Posts : 6701
    Points : 7090
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Austin on Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:52 pm

    Some interesting information from this article

    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2014-03-28/1_artillery.html


    ATGM 9M119M "Invar" entered service in 1986 on the results of the GOP

    So its like 28 Years we are using Invar ? Without any major modernisation or upgrade ?


    Comparative evaluation of lesion "Abrams" missile 9M119M presented Academician Arkady Shipunov
    FeaturesEfficiency defeat tanks missile 9M119M
    M1A1M1A2
    The probability of hitting a tank missile0.470.2
    Number of missiles for secure destruction of the tank during the shelling of the most protected areas of frontal35


    IT Says it needs 5 Invar to take out M1A2 frontal protection with probabilty of hit as low as 0.2  ?



    Table 3 Estimates of defeat "Abrams" with various protected frontal zones when firing the cannon "Octopus-B" projectile "Lead"
    FeaturesM1M1A1M1A2
    The probability of hitting a tank BPS "Lead"0.300.150.09
    Number of shells for secure destruction of the tank during the shelling most protected frontal zones
    4

    7

    12


    And 9 Lead APFSDS to take out frontal protection of M1A2 ?


    Is the result so skewed in favour of M1A2 ?
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Mar 30, 2014 5:14 pm

    hmm, maybe probability of hitting is better translated as probability of penetration.
    the low efficiency of both Invar and Lead(Svinets?) against m1a2 should not come as a surprise since they are introduced before it.
    Theres newer Invar(Invar-M),Lead-2(Svinets-2?) that would do better and then theres the next gen stuff- Grifel apfsds.

    Also, T-90A has guided missiles and way more faster APFSDS- m829a3 will have a hard time touching the much smaller T-90A.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4469
    Points : 4630
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Mar 30, 2014 7:32 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:hmm, maybe probability of hitting is better translated as probability of penetration.
    the low efficiency of both Invar and Lead(Svinets?) against m1a2 should not come as a surprise since they are introduced before it.
    Theres newer Invar(Invar-M),Lead-2(Svinets-2?) that would do better and then theres the next gen stuff- Grifel apfsds.

    Also, T-90A has guided missiles and way more faster APFSDS- m829a3 will have a hard time touching the much smaller T-90A.

    There's the T-90MS that has a better auto-loader that allows for longer perpetrators, and my guess there's room probably for even longer propellant stubs.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5569
    Points : 5581
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  TR1 on Sun Mar 30, 2014 9:11 pm

    Where are they even getting these numbers from? If the Invar hits the front armor array, you can shoot 20 of them and they will not penetrate (barring the armor falling apart inside).

    If you hit a weakened zone, one is all you need.

    If the missile comes in at any sort of angle on the front plate, the driver will be killed.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Mar 31, 2014 12:00 am

    TR1 wrote:Where are they even getting these numbers from? If the Invar hits the front armor array, you can shoot 20 of them and they will not penetrate (barring the armor falling apart inside).

    If you hit a weakened zone, one is all you need.

    If the missile comes in at any sort of angle on the front plate, the driver will be killed.

    Exactly, either it hits a zone of the tank which has less armor than the Missile can penetrate and the tank,crew and function of the tank gets damaged or even killed, and after a penetration, even if you survive that is the ultimate moral killer.

    The hit propability is BS squared and the number of missiles is only possible if this would be the amount of missiles needed to statistically hit the weak zone of the frontal arc armor of a tank, otherwise you can shoot dozens on the hard armored area without real effect.

    And the most powerfull round/missile that is used by tanks is the ZBK-31M with 800mm RHA penetration trible tandem HEAT round and Invar with 900-950mm Penetration. (ERA).

    So the turret is mostly safe except of gun mantled and optical housing area, the upper and lower hull are not really protective to withstand 950mm on any Abrams.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:55 am

    hmm, maybe its better understood as probability of hitting some spot (not necessarily weak zone) that could be penetrated.
    Discussion of current best apfsds against best armor is moot anyway- realistically and statistically they wont face each other much if not at all on the battlefield.
    Besides that, all will kneel before Armata MBTs anyway.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 787
    Points : 954
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:25 pm

    Austin wrote:Some interesting information from this article

    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2014-03-28/1_artillery.html


    ATGM 9M119M "Invar" entered service in 1986 on the results of the GOP

    So its like 28 Years we are using Invar ? Without any major modernisation or upgrade ?


    Comparative evaluation of lesion "Abrams" missile 9M119M presented Academician Arkady Shipunov
    FeaturesEfficiency defeat tanks missile 9M119M
    M1A1M1A2
    The probability of hitting a tank missile0.470.2
    Number of missiles for secure destruction of the tank during the shelling of the most protected areas of frontal35


    IT Says it needs 5 Invar to take out M1A2 frontal protection with probabilty of hit as low as 0.2  ?



    Table 3 Estimates of defeat "Abrams" with various protected frontal zones when firing the cannon "Octopus-B" projectile "Lead"
    FeaturesM1M1A1M1A2
    The probability of hitting a tank BPS "Lead"0.300.150.09
    Number of shells for secure destruction of the tank during the shelling most protected frontal zones
    4

    7

    12


    And 9 Lead APFSDS to take out frontal protection of M1A2 ?


    Is the result so skewed in favour of M1A2 ?




    Austin i am really surprised that you have cited this "article" without seeing the author.
    This "article" is from the by now infamous......Mikhail Rastopshin......and ex employed of NII Stali that was fired in 1985.

    Since then it begun to spell any sort of injury against anything related to domestic military systems (in particular in the armoured department) while, contemporaneously, to praise in a comical way any western military product very often even creating literally from nothing systems not present ,even only in the design stage, among western forces Laughing Laughing
    Naturally it belong to that crowd of formerly Soviet state employees who , in the difficult '90 years, sold its hearth and intellectual integrity for western dollars .

    Today it publish only similar laughable garbage , full of technical non senses and true comical factual inventions in controlled or foreign-funded newspapers and publications (masked even as "analytical pieces"..... Razz ) the unique aim of which is obviously not any other than to promote the most classical western russian-bashing, "counter-will" psy-op propaganda of its " puppeteers".

    A time into a while some official take even the trouble to respond to its absurdities and inventions.........

    http://onolitegi.ru/index.php/2010-02-03-17-38-52/40-war-techinc-analyzis/116-cnii-vs-rastopshin.html#.Uzm_RE2KCUk


    Austin those "articles" by mister rastopshin are technically not worth even only the paper where them are written Wink

    avatar
    Regular

    Posts : 2046
    Points : 2042
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Regular on Tue Apr 01, 2014 2:12 am

    First I was wondering where the hell you could gather such information without blind guesswork.  Rolling Eyes 
    After seeing Mindstorm post everything started to make sense
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Tue Apr 01, 2014 2:04 pm

    nah, lets cut Austin some slack... if it werent for him finding that article Mindstorm wouldnt be able to expose it for what it is.

    Also, even if a T-90A cant reliably kill an M1A2 the opposite would also be true- esp. with Relikt ERA.
    A T-90A fighting against an M1A2 would have the advantage of first look and therefore first shot when Nakidka is used- an M1A2 wont be able to due to the huge exhause plume of its GT engine.
    Not only that, a T-90A can fire from extended ranges and reliably hit the M1A2 with the reflex- a hit on the front may not penetrate, but im sure that 120 mm gun would have extensive shrapnel damage- f-kill.
    Also, with Ainet fused HE rounds, all those bradleys/ strykers/ atgm teams/ attack helos- basically anything anti-tank that is not under heavy armor protection would be toast. esp. bradleys which are rather huge and whose armor can be penetrated by an HE round like APHE.

    Vann7

    Posts : 3781
    Points : 3885
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Apr 03, 2014 7:06 am

    collegeboy16 wrote:nah, lets cut Austin some slack... if it werent for him finding that article Mindstorm wouldnt be able to expose it for what it is.

    Also, even if a T-90A cant reliably kill an M1A2 the opposite would also be true- esp. with Relikt ERA.
    A T-90A fighting against an M1A2 would have the advantage of first look and therefore first shot when Nakidka is used- an M1A2 wont be able to due to the huge exhause plume of its GT engine.
    Not only that, a T-90A can fire from extended ranges and reliably hit the M1A2 with the reflex- a hit on the front may not penetrate, but im sure that 120 mm gun would have extensive shrapnel damage- f-kill.
    Also, with Ainet fused HE rounds, all those bradleys/ strykers/ atgm teams/ attack helos- basically anything anti-tank that is not under heavy armor protection would be toast. esp. bradleys which are rather huge and whose armor can be penetrated by an HE round like APHE.

    All Russia needs to have their tanks ,escorted by this Kornets = D

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6RDNz6dlXQ

    They can penetrate the frontal armor of M1A2/3/4 or any one they have , 1300mm penetration after ERA and 8km range is not small..
    and can fire 2 in salvo to defeat Active Protection. Simply in any land combat Russia can fire first and knock down any tank. The Kornet-D can be used against Troops or helicopters or war places flying slow up to 10km.. another anti tank missile could be the Hermes..
    with 20km/100km range.. mounted on Attack helicopters or armored cars.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:48 pm

    the problem with HEAT rounds is that with the advent of APS- they have become much easier to counter.
    Also shooting them out of a gun barrel prohibitively limits their effectiveness- you can put as much fancy
    additional warheads and exotic materials/ designs but at the end of the day what you really need is a larger
    diameter of warhead.
    The future is still with APFSDS- make em bigger, stronger and faster. IMO HEAT rounds will eventually be
    replaced by APHE rounds with electronic fuses. These two rounds would be bread and butter for MBTs-
    with the added bonus that to make both more effective in the anti-armor role- you simply put more energy
    through the barrel.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:33 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:the problem with HEAT rounds is that with the advent of APS- they have become much easier to counter.
    Also shooting them out of a gun barrel prohibitively limits their effectiveness- you can put as much fancy
    additional warheads and exotic materials/ designs but at the end of the day what you really need is a larger
    diameter of warhead.
    The future is still with APFSDS- make em bigger, stronger and faster. IMO HEAT rounds will eventually be
    replaced by APHE rounds with electronic fuses. These two rounds would be bread and butter for MBTs-
    with the added bonus that to make both more effective in the anti-armor role- you simply put more energy
    through the barrel.

    The problem with APS is that there are only 2 countries who have APS and only one that has standardized it for only a a couple dozen vehicles, so the claim that HEAT have lower advantage than APFSDS is nonsense. HEAT rounds are still much more capable and versitile than any existing or tomorrow APFSDS round.
    APFSDS rounds are absolutley useless against everything that is not a tank, IFV and APCs will not even be damaged by it if it doesn't hit ammunition or engine.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:01 pm

    still HEAT is no substitute for the true MP round- HE. HEAT is relatively mediocre for both anti-armor and anti-softies anyway-
    former is because it is outclassed by APFSDS and latter is because of the nature of HEAT round- focused blast.
    Oh and APS usage will spread- Its basically a computer, some sensors and interceptor- nothing special. The anti-HEAT rounds
    would be easiest to proliferate since they are the easiest of anti-armor threats to counter and well most numerous(Rpg-7)
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:13 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:still HEAT is no substitute for the true MP round- HE. HEAT is relatively mediocre for both anti-armor and anti-softies anyway-
    former is because it is outclassed by APFSDS and latter is because of the nature of HEAT round- focused blast.
    Oh and APS usage will spread- Its basically a computer, some sensors and interceptor- nothing special. The anti-HEAT rounds
    would be easiest to proliferate since they are the easiest of anti-armor threats to counter and well most numerous(Rpg-7)

    Wrong, the most powerfull HEAT round has highest penetration capability compared with any APFSDS today or tomorrow.

    BK-31M 800mm behind ERA at ALL ranges not like APFSDS which have to go at least 2km range to its target before beeing effective at all and actually even at point blank range APFSDS are incapable to penetrate tanks frontal armor.
    Invar 900-950mm behind ERA penetration capability and guided!

    APFSDS have zero capability to destroy anything else but tanks, if it hits an APC it will only make one inch hole without any real effect unless its engine or ammunition. HEAT rounds are the only allround AT weapon we have that are effective against tanks as IFV's or APC's or trucks even bunkers to a certain degree.

    APFSDS round are much easier to counter than HEAT rounds. All MBT's today are immune to frontal attacks of less than 800-850mm penetration capability and i speak about the average armor. APFSDS round regardless of how fast they are it is an absolutley different thing to hit the exact weak spot if a projectile that is only one inch thick at a static or even moving target that can engage you with much higher hit propability and more powerfull weapon than you can. And even if Invar or HEAT round wouldn't penetrate they still have potential to inflicht damage to optics, firepower or mobility kill, APFSDS rounds are useless as long they are not capable to penetrate the armor, period.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:35 pm

    Wrong, modern MBTs have more than 1m RHA (HEAT) equivalent. They have however lower values against KE (850-950) which can be remedied by newer rounds- (Grifel) and this is where APFSDS is better since you can improve more aspect of it like propellant/ sabot/ te penetrator the gun itself, etc. With HEAT, you what make it what quadruple charged- which I highly doubt is possible in the tiny confines of a 125 mm projectile.

    Also, once ETC guns are here HEAT would be even more irrelevant in anti-armor role as part of MBT loadout.

    Also, HEAT is defeinitely easier to counter than APFSDS- composite armor/ spaced armor/ and NERA/ERA and then APS- right now only ERA capable of dealing with APFSDS is Relikt, only APS capable of dealing with APFSDS is Afghanistan, and M1A1/2 have to incorporate dangerous DU layer (tungsten in case of advanced Leopard 2s) to deal with APFSDS more effectivle.

    Also APCs and IFVs could be dealth with more effectively with HE round- catastrophic kill everytime.


    Last edited by collegeboy16 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:53 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : add spaces to alsos)
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5270
    Points : 5477
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Apr 05, 2014 9:09 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:Wrong, modern MBTs have more than 1m RHA (HEAT) equivalent. They have however lower values against KE (850-950) which can be remedied by newer rounds- (Grifel) and this is where APFSDS is better since you can improve more aspect of it like propellant/ sabot/ te penetrator the gun itself, etc. With HEAT, you what make it what quadruple charged- which I highly doubt is possible in the tiny confines of a 125 mm projectile.

    Do you really want me make to laugh? There is no APFSDS that can do more than 750mm RHA penetration and yes RHA already is a unifed measurement so telling me that 750mm RHA is more penetration than 900mm RHA just because one is APFSDS and the other is HEAT. That is nonsense. BK-31M HEAT 800mm (at 100m or at 5000m) vs RHA > M829A3 750mm RHA at 2km. And it also really doesn't matter what you believe about HEAT, the point is they do not use copper liners but alloys today to improve penetration capabilities. Penetrators are useless at longer distances than 2km and who has a higher chance getting killed first the tank that only has APFSDS which are useless at higher ranges then 2km or the tank that has more powerfull guided rounds which can hit up to 5km?

    It doesn't matter how the enemy tank is knocked out mobility,optical or firepower kill it all counts as a kill so the enemy crew can not continue their duty.

    collegeboy16 wrote:Also, once ETC guns are here HEAT would be even more irrelevant in anti-armor role as part of MBT loadout.

    Also, HEAT is defeinitely easier to counter than APFSDS- composite armor/ spaced armor/ and NERA/ERA and then APS- right now only ERA capable of dealing with APFSDS is Relikt, only APS capable of dealing with APFSDS is Afghanistan, and M1A1/2 have to incorporate dangerous DU layer (tungsten in case of advanced Leopard 2s) to deal with APFSDS more effectivle.

    Also APCs and IFVs could be dealth with more effectively with HE round- catastrophic kill everytime.

    Funny claim, Kontakt 5 already neutralizes M829A1/2 and that is the case only for old T-72AV not even for T-90A1 with 8 layered armor compared with the 6 layered T-90.

    APFSDS are countered so easy just through the longer arm on the battlefield that APFSDS equipped tanks wouldn't b able to enter effective range before getting smoked.

    Just because the propaganda warmachine of the US blesses the russian invention of APFSDS doesn't mean it is the ultra dupper super weapon like you think, it is actually the least usefull weapon for Anti Tank roll, tanks today can use.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1148
    Points : 1149
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat Apr 05, 2014 9:51 pm

    hah, HEAT maybe effective at any range but would it even reach the target- APFSDS is much faster and has a much flatter trajectory so there is a significant decrease in time the target could "dodge" it.

    i stand by what i said, that higher number for HEAT is equivalent to lower number for APFSDS against realistic armor- not simple RHA steel stacks ofc. Also, what you dont get with HEAT rounds is that massive lump of metal ready to do even more damage after penetrating the main armor- a shaped charge jet more likely thins out as it travels through the spaceous interior- unless it causes cookoff or fire its not as dangerous as KE rod. Also, 10mj would give a pretty huge shock to anyone inside the tank- shattering optics mirrors, loosening electronics connections etc. HEAT rounds have small HE filler and the blast is focused straight into the jet that has small mass so impact is not so severe as apfsds+ lack of shrapnel due to low amt. of HE filler

    Well, the primary murican APFSDS now is m829a3- which is supposed to defeat Kontakt-5. right now APFSDS is constrained by lack of additional energy from tank guns and propellant combo.

    Regarding long range tankfights, scramjet sabot rounds could be made available. If you are getting whacked from further away use your own scramjet sabots- the further the fcker is the more fcked he is when it reaches him.
    Werewolf wrote:
    Just because the propaganda warmachine of the US blesses the russian invention of APFSDS doesn't mean it is the ultra dupper super weapon like you think, it is actually the least usefull weapon for Anti Tank roll, tanks today can use.
    how can APFSDS be least useful for anti-tank role? Its made specifically for anti-tank role, isnt it? If its least useful how why is it the main anti-armor weapon of choice in an MBT? Heck, even the russkies recognize the need for more powerful tank guns- HEAT doesnt need one as long as the calibre sticks so I guess APFSDS(and potential APHE) would only benefit from it. Also, a nifty little feature of an APFSDS is that you can shoot through walls that would act like spaced armor if the projectile were HEAT.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Tanks guns and ammunition

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:03 pm