Originally posted by SteveDaPirate
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Russia claims new tank invisible to radar/IR
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by jlvfr View PostEvery time I hear someone mentioning this, my mind goes back to the M60A2 and it's massive turret...
A 155 mm cannon also brings with it the possibility of leveraging the Navy's research into subcaliber hypersonic rounds into KE penetrators that are moving so fast that they can reliably defeat active protection systems.
Comment
-
Somebody better evaluate the effect of driving off-road like M-1s are intended while toting a 155mm barrel. It'll beat the shit out of a recoil system capable of handling a 155mm barrel. You'll need a recoil system if you want your on-board data/target acq. systems to operate. Ammo supply? How much? Separate-loading or cased? Never seen a cased 155mm round before but there's always a first time. Rate of fire?
The idea is stupid."This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
Comment
-
Originally posted by S2 View PostSomebody better evaluate the effect of driving off-road like M-1s are intended while toting a 155mm barrel. It'll beat the shit out of a recoil system capable of handling a 155mm barrel. You'll need a recoil system if you want your on-board data/target acq. systems to operate. Ammo supply? How much? Separate-loading or cased? Never seen a cased 155mm round before but there's always a first time. Rate of fire?
The idea is stupid.
The increasingly widespread adoption of APS and it's quickly improving effectiveness against both HEAT and APFSDS rounds makes me think a caliber increase is going to be the only way to stay ahead of the curve if we still intend our for tanks to engage enemy armor however.
Additionally, APS adoption will likely have some significant ramifications on future armoring schemes which could help alleviate some of the ammunition storage and loading concerns. If APS is effective and reliable, you'd only need enough passive armor to deflect small caliber weapons and whatever remains after an APS engagement whether that be ATGM fragments or a shattered or unbalanced KE rod. This should allow for much lighter vehicles and ones that aren't as constrained by more conventional "tank shapes".
I'm not saying it isn't a stupid idea, but I'm spit-balling here and trying to figure out WHY it's stupid given the considerable technical progress that's been made since the 1970s when the M1 was designed.Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 16 Oct 17,, 16:39.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostI'm certianly no expert, but don't M109s and PzH 2000s go tooling around off-road on a fairly regular basis? I can't imagine MBTs needing a barrel that large and heavy even if the diameter is the same. Still, I can see where stabilizing and firing something that large on the move would be a challenge.
The increasingly widespread adoption of APS and it's quickly improving effectiveness against both HEAT and APFSDS rounds makes me think a caliber increase is going to be the only way to stay ahead of the curve if we still intend our for tanks to engage enemy armor however.
Additionally, APS adoption will likely have some significant ramifications on future armoring schemes which could help alleviate some of the ammunition storage and loading concerns. If APS is effective and reliable, you'd only need enough passive armor to deflect small caliber weapons and whatever remains after an APS engagement whether that be ATGM fragments or a shattered or unbalanced KE rod. This should allow for much lighter vehicles and ones that aren't as constrained by more conventional "tank shapes".
I'm not saying it isn't a stupid idea, but I'm spit-balling here and trying to figure out WHY it's stupid given the considerable technical progress that's been made since the 1970s when the M1 was designed.
Comment
-
Originally posted by jlvfr View PostTo be fair, most of those are paper/propaganda projects. There are some videos on some projects on Youtube that are nothing short of hilarious. But this one was actually build and displayed. I wouldn't be surprised if Russia built enough for one division, at least.
But until they go into serial production, it's just a d**k-waving exercise.
Just like the Sukhoi Su-57 (PAK FA). Lovely to look at during airshows but ultimately meaningless to their ORBAT
The Chinese seem to be serious about putting the Chengdu J-20 into production but there's still only a handful built and they've still got problems. So, same thing.“He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostI'm certianly no expert, but don't M109s and PzH 2000s go tooling around off-road on a fairly regular basis? I can't imagine MBTs needing a barrel that large and heavy even if the diameter is the same. Still, I can see where stabilizing and firing something that large on the move would be a challenge.
Tanks need to shoot on the move
Comment
-
Originally posted by S2 View PostSomebody better evaluate the effect of driving off-road like M-1s are intended while toting a 155mm barrel. It'll beat the shit out of a recoil system capable of handling a 155mm barrel. You'll need a recoil system if you want your on-board data/target acq. systems to operate. Ammo supply? How much? Separate-loading or cased? Never seen a cased 155mm round before but there's always a first time. Rate of fire?
The idea is stupid.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TopHatter View PostJust like the Sukhoi Su-57 (PAK FA). Lovely to look at during airshows but ultimately meaningless to their ORBAT
The Chinese seem to be serious about putting the Chengdu J-20 into production but there's still only a handful built and they've still got problems. So, same thing.
Originally posted by Gun Grape View PostImagine a #1 man/loader hand ramming a fixed 155 projo . The right arm needed for that would be hugeLast edited by jlvfr; 17 Oct 17,, 09:17.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Monash View PostSo how well does APS work on sabots or other types of 'dumb'/'solid' AT rounds?
Good reading on the topic here: https://below-the-turret-ring.blogsp...-overview.html
The paladin and the pzh2k have no where near m1 levels of armor protection.
This should open up a lot of flexibility to either create either lighter more maneuverable and air-transportable tanks, or use the additional weight capacity and volume to increase the level of armament.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gun Grape View PostThose 109s and 2000s have robust travel locks keeping the tube in place. You can cause a lot of damage to the elevating and traversing mech of a 109 riding without the tube in travel lock. Seen it, not pretty
Tanks need to shoot on the move
Originally posted by Gun Grape View PostImagine a #1 man/loader hand ramming a fixed 155 projo . The right arm needed for that would be huge
Comment
-
Originally posted by citanon View PostThe paladin and the pzh2k have no where near m1 levels of armor protection.
SP artillery can move off road but no where near as fast as M1s & M2s.“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
Comment
-
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostLike jlvfr, I was looking at the M60-A2 as a reference point. 152 mm cannon with a relatively stubby barrel that would avoid having a ton of mass hanging out where it's unsupported. I figure a 155 mm wouldn't be too much of a stretch from there.
The French, Russians, Koreans, and several smaller Euros seems satisfied with using auto-loaders. That seems like the solution that makes the most sense if projectile weights increase much. There are trade-offs of course, but it might be cheaper than the spinach required to grow that many huge right arms!
[ATTACH]44732[/ATTACH]
DAMMIT STEVE!!!!
Warn me before you post pictures of the Starship!!!
I still have maintenance nightmares 36 years later!!!!
Here are some specs on the M657 152mm HE round. It fired at a much lower chamber pressure as well as only being 2 feet long.
No where near the pressures of the M68 105mm gun let alone the 120mm.“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
Comment
Comment