Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New 130mm MBT gun

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Nadhim

    Welcome to the WAB.

    We ask all user go this this thread and introduce themselves. Tell us where you are from and a little about yourself.

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...61571&page=134

    When you are done there, go to this thread for how to be a participant here.

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=46580

    Leave a comment:


  • nadhim
    replied
    New 130mm MBT gun

    To complement the new weapon, Rheinmetall is developing new 130 mm armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) round with elongated rod penetrator, which is supposed to be made of new tungsten alloy. The new APFSDS round also features semi-combustible cartridge case and new propellant. Plex Kodi Lucky Patcher

    Leave a comment:


  • Tankersteve
    replied
    I believe gunner's quadrants went away with the M1. However, I have also been told that the British version of what we call the Master Gunner's Course was still teaching indirect fire techniques for tanks, as recently as the mid 90s. I'd like to hear if anyone could confirm or deny that.

    The problem with doing this has been mentioned - very different roles and mindsets/cultures. When needed/in extremis, it has been done in the past. Our modern ammunition would not work well nowadays. Other bits are too specialized as well.

    A better mix would be a turreted mortar system employed when needed in a direct fire mode as a breaching system. A 120mm turreted mortar in a company-level Stryker formation, with a coax 7.62 and CROWS up top, would be much more useful than the MGS ever was. But you probably can't load it into a C-130.

    Tankersteve

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by Stitch View Post
    Don't forget the volleyball court and the bar.
    I prefer to get professionals in for the important stuff!

    Leave a comment:


  • jlvfr
    replied
    Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    That is in the past. They even prepared firing tables and plotting boards. Hell, we had the M10 Plotting Board at one time for indirect fire of the M2 .50 Caliber when set on a tripod.
    If I remember correctly, the british did this in WWI, with their Vickers Mk 1.

    Leave a comment:


  • citanon
    replied
    Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    Yes, I know they did it in Korea...and again in Viet Nam on a very small scale. And they played with it on the M48s. From the M60A3s onward it was dropped.

    That is in the past. They even prepared firing tables and plotting boards. Hell, we had the M10 Plotting Board at one time for indirect fire of the M2 .50 Caliber when set on a tripod.

    That said with todays weapons it is not operationally...trajectory is flatter and there are no firing tables and plotting boards.
    Couldn't you just get the kids to make an app for that today? :D

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by zraver View Post
    Negative, wit some prep work like building ramps to get the right elevation, tanks can do artillery barrages. The last time the US did so on a wide scale was Korea. We even trained to do so on the Patton as a 19E. Don't know if the 19k guys did or not.
    Yes, I know they did it in Korea...and again in Viet Nam on a very small scale. And they played with it on the M48s. From the M60A3s onward it was dropped.

    That is in the past. They even prepared firing tables and plotting boards. Hell, we had the M10 Plotting Board at one time for indirect fire of the M2 .50 Caliber when set on a tripod.

    That said with todays weapons it is not operationally...trajectory is flatter and there are no firing tables and plotting boards.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stitch
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post
    I thought that's what a combat engineer's job was. In order of importance, first install the latrines, then the showers and then barbecue pits, portable freezers, lighting and other combat essentials. I mean what else do they do??
    Don't forget the volleyball court and the bar.

    Leave a comment:


  • citanon
    replied
    The army doesn't look to be going that route but IS considering how to get fires from more platforms using a concept called cross domain fires. I've been looking around for details. Best I can tell, it seems to mean any pgm on any target, blurring the roles between mortars, guns and missiles.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    On a more serious note.

    Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Not to mention the specialized equipment need to be added to those tanks for accurate indirect fire. Or the support elements required to allow them to shoot accurate fire. And the cost of redesigning those PGMs so that they fire out of a high velocity system.
    Sir, all of your points are quite valid and I'm not suggesting anyone could wave a magic wand and introduce such a vehicle now. My thoughts were leaning more towards what could be done given the (ever increasing) levels of computerization in the field of artillery. If there is serious debate now about taking manned aircraft out of air to air combat scenarios why couldn't the same processes simplify the mechanics of setting up static firing positions for mechanized artillery to the point where an armored fighting vehicle could handle both roles?

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    I thought that's what a combat engineer's job was. In order of importance, first install the latrines, then the showers and then barbecue pits, portable freezers, lighting and other combat essentials. I mean what else do they do??
    Last edited by Monash; 28 Jun 16,, 14:10.

    Leave a comment:


  • S2
    replied
    Latrines first, please?

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    I'm building you your dugouts, now you want ramps?

    Leave a comment:


  • S2
    replied
    "Wiki says they could see the muzzle flash of the enemy arty..."

    Ummm...correct.

    "...Muzzle glow could be observed from the friendly post...", however, may or may not have included this particular firing line. Wiki also says something about a co-located FDC and spotter aircraft available.

    And aiming posts.

    And gunner's quadrant.

    Again...just sayin'...it's been done recently. Definitely a non-standard mission for tankers. Absolutely would need lots of help to make it happen and very questionable as to any effectiveness regardless.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gun Grape
    replied
    Originally posted by S2 View Post
    Again...it's been done in SVN by B Co. 1-69 Armor at Ben Het. I don't believe they had LOS from the firing positions. Orienting for direction wouldn't be particularly difficult essentially using SAM and then (literally) boresighting along two aiming posts staked on the LOF. Orienting for elevation would have been the kicker. Assuming ramps built along ONE direction of fire, known projo weight and weapon MV you might be able to extrapolate an elevation setting applied with a gunner's quadrant and then execute an "untrained observer" mission with a TRAINED F.O. shooting W.P. as a spotting round.

    Once impact was observed (absolutely no guarantee IMV short of an aerial observer) it'd be possible to adjust fire laterally only within very narrow limits. Range could only be adjusted by adjusting elevation, again using a gunner's quadrant probably applied directly to the barrel.

    Now, mind you...this adjustment would take for fcukin' ever to get steel on target and would likely prove a huge waste of engineer and A.O. assets.

    Just sayin'.
    Wiki says they could see the muzzle flash of the enemy arty.

    Until the first of March, the camp had received intensive fires from heavy artillery pieces located in reinforced, dug in positions well inside Cambodia. At times as much as one round every 45 seconds had been rained on the Allied camp for protracted periods. However, the enemy guns were so located that their muzzle glow could be observed from the friendly post thus allowing the Allies to predict the incoming artillery in sufficient time to preclude heavy casualties. In an effort to penetrate the barriers protecting these enemy artillery pieces, the tanks were employed in an indirect fire role, using concrete piercing fuzes. The collocated artillery battery's fire direction center and spotter aircraft assisted with fire adjustment. This met with only limited success since the 90mm ammunition was unable to penetrate the Red defensive positions.
    Are aimming post and gunners quadrants part of a tanks T/E?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X