Jump to content


Photo

Main Gun Ammo - Revisited


  • Please log in to reply
1040 replies to this topic

#981 Davin

Davin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 854 posts

Posted 06 February 2019 - 2034 PM

Very interesting,thanks!
Where can I find this video?
  • 0

#982 John_Ford

John_Ford

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,731 posts

Posted 23 February 2019 - 0128 AM

Question for the group,   Was there ever a full bore AP/APCBC round for the L7/M68 Cannon?

 


  • 0

#983 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,791 posts

Posted 23 February 2019 - 2043 PM

Question for the group,   Was there ever a full bore AP/APCBC round for the L7/M68 Cannon?

 

Not for the M68 and I'm quite comfortable stating the Brits didn't have one either, though they did have an APCBC for their 20 pounder.


  • 0

#984 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,818 posts

Posted 24 February 2019 - 0839 AM

Since whole reason for 105mm was better APDS performance than 20pdr there was no point in developing one.

There was however early experimental SAP (really just base fused HE - not HESH!), since there was idea, fortunately binned to use 105mm L7 as a naval gun for a light coastal boats.


  • 0

#985 JW Collins

JW Collins

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,327 posts

Posted 24 February 2019 - 2125 PM

Could anybody give me a run down on why the UK decided to go to two piece ammunition with bag charges with the L11 120mm cannon? After the outstanding success of the 105mm L7 with its single piece ammo it is a change that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to somebody viewing from the outside.

I know at some point a 110mm gun was developed by the UK and actually considered by the US for the M1 Abrams, how does that fit into the picture.
  • 0

#986 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,601 posts

Posted 25 February 2019 - 0457 AM

Since whole reason for 105mm was better APDS performance than 20pdr there was no point in developing one.

There was however early experimental SAP (really just base fused HE - not HESH!), since there was idea, fortunately binned to use 105mm L7 as a naval gun for a light coastal boats.

 

Are you sure that wasnt a 20pdr? I recall someone here on tanknet telling me they were was a 20pdr fitted with an autoloader and experiments were conducted on a patrol boat.

 

Of course, a 105 is just a barrel change away from a 20pder, so there is no reason they didnt try both.


  • 0

#987 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,818 posts

Posted 25 February 2019 - 0634 AM

...

Are you sure that wasnt a 20pdr? I recall someone here on tanknet telling me they were was a 20pdr fitted with an autoloader and experiments were conducted on a patrol boat.

 

Of course, a 105 is just a barrel change away from a 20pder, so there is no reason they didnt try both.

 

It was a long time ago, but I am pretty sure it was 105mm and that idea was abandoned before that base fused HE/SAP was even developed in trial quantities.


  • 0

#988 Przezdzieblo

Przezdzieblo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,903 posts

Posted 05 March 2019 - 1921 PM

Could anybody give me a run down on why the UK decided to go to two piece ammunition with bag charges with the L11 120mm cannon? After the outstanding success of the 105mm L7 with its single piece ammo it is a change that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to somebody viewing from the outside.

I know at some point a 110mm gun was developed by the UK and actually considered by the US for the M1 Abrams, how does that fit into the picture.

 

 

L11 ammunition is already three-piece, remember about vent tubes.

 

In short?

In late 1950s 105 mm KE ammo was found as powerful as 120 mm KE for Conqueror. Thus UK wanted something even more powerful, to cope with future Soviet heavy tanks. L1 gun ammo of Conqueror was cumbersome, long and heavy. Bag charges were much lighter, could be easily stowed and kept under turret ring, deep in hull, in enclosed wet containers. There was no problem with empty cases coz bags were combustible. This last feature almost eliminated fumes after firing. During trials it was found that bags are less susceptible to catch fire from adjacent bag which was on fire.

 

OTOH L7 was seen as quite efficent but obsolete gun system. Good for upgunning old tanks, but not a weapon of the future. But a bit later it was found that what was done with 20-pounder - reboring to 105 mm - could be also done with L7, hence 110 mm guns. Guns made this way were almost as good in terms of KE potential as 120 mm L11 gun. And 110 mm guns made in new technology - at the start with two-piece, with semi-combistible case and metal stub, but three-piece was planned as ultimate goal - were even better. But then 1970s came, FMBT and XM1 programmes, trilateral guns evaluation etc. and UK kept L11 gun and ammo as standard.


  • 0

#989 Wiedzmin

Wiedzmin

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,374 posts

Posted 02 May 2019 - 1454 PM

ZptieHltZR4.jpg

"svinets"(plumbum/lead) DU version


  • 0

#990 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,150 posts

Posted 02 May 2019 - 1703 PM

Svinets-1 to be exact.


  • 0

#991 Wiedzmin

Wiedzmin

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,374 posts

Posted 12 May 2019 - 0403 AM

Y4wziDY8xyQ.jpg​

 

presumably the first authentic photo of 115mm 3BM21M APFSDS(maybe for export)


Edited by Wiedzmin, 12 May 2019 - 1610 PM.

  • 0

#992 Davin

Davin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 854 posts

Posted 13 May 2019 - 2022 PM

 presumably the first authentic photo of 115mm 3BM21M APFSDS(maybe for export)


It looks very similar to the Belgian M1150 APFDDS round.
  • 0

#993 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,462 posts

Posted 14 May 2019 - 1243 PM

2276751_original.jpg


  • 0

#994 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,150 posts

Posted 14 May 2019 - 1525 PM

2276751_original.jpg

http://www.tank-net....12714&p=1426629

?


  • 0

#995 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,000 posts

Posted 14 May 2019 - 1526 PM

 

...

Are you sure that wasnt a 20pdr? I recall someone here on tanknet telling me they were was a 20pdr fitted with an autoloader and experiments were conducted on a patrol boat.

 

Of course, a 105 is just a barrel change away from a 20pder, so there is no reason they didnt try both.

 

It was a long time ago, but I am pretty sure it was 105mm and that idea was abandoned before that base fused HE/SAP was even developed in trial quantities.

 

 

That may also have existed, but the stillborn stabilised mount for the patrol boat was definitely a 20 pr - I've seen photos of it somewhere and it is sometimes referenced as a 3.3 inch gun, which is about 84mm. The UK FAC force died as a result of the 1957 defence review, only two of the Brave class it was intended for were purchased, and there would have been no impetus to make a 105mm version.


  • 0

#996 Sovngard

Sovngard

    Honorary staff member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 686 posts

Posted 25 May 2019 - 1513 PM

presumably the first authentic photo of 115mm 3BM21M APFSDS(maybe for export)

 
What an odd designation. This sounds like the old 3BM21 Zastup.


  • 0

#997 Wiedzmin

Wiedzmin

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,374 posts

Posted 26 May 2019 - 0331 AM

 

What an odd designation. This sounds like the old 3BM21 Zastup.

 

 

this is all that was on data plate


  • 0

#998 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,462 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 1107 AM

3bm26

m26.jpg​


  • 0

#999 Interlinked

Interlinked

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 332 posts

Posted 04 June 2019 - 1634 PM

Very nice. Did you publish an article to go along with this photo?


  • 0

#1000 Wiedzmin

Wiedzmin

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,374 posts

Posted 26 June 2019 - 0125 AM

BT4d1iE957Q.jpg

34ldMJBIKyg.jpgMango-M(BM44-2) for export 280/60 2km

Svinets-2 300mm/60 2km 


Edited by Wiedzmin, 26 June 2019 - 0152 AM.

  • 0