Jump to content


Photo

Main Gun Ammo - Revisited


  • Please log in to reply
1080 replies to this topic

#1021 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,337 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0552 AM

It has some bursting charge.


  • 0

#1022 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0849 AM

It has some bursting charge.

Which is more than 100 gramms of healthy AX-2-X, so not far from 200 gramms of TNT equivalent. So rougthy two RGD-5 grenades for each BR... Yeap, a healthy addition to IED.


  • 0

#1023 Interlinked

Interlinked

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 451 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0951 AM


It has some bursting charge.

Which is more than 100 gramms of healthy AX-2-X, so not far from 200 gramms of TNT equivalent. So rougthy two RGD-5 grenades for each BR... Yeap, a healthy addition to IED.

I believe that it would definitely shatter the base of the shell and propel at least some of the fragments to a lethal velocity, but generally speaking, the bursting charges at the base of AP shells don't actually turn the shell into a grenade. It merely guarantees that the entire shell will be broken apart after perforating some armour, because the base often remains intact even if the nose is shattered by the interaction with the armour. Personally, I doubt that it would have made a noticeable contribution to the power of that IED.
  • 0

#1024 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,959 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 1256 PM

Durka durka's just see a shell.  S/F....Ken M


  • 0

#1025 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,211 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 1358 PM


It has some bursting charge.

Which is more than 100 gramms of healthy AX-2-X, so not far from 200 gramms of TNT equivalent. So rougthy two RGD-5 grenades for each BR... Yeap, a healthy addition to IED.
I believe that it would definitely shatter the base of the shell and propel at least some of the fragments to a lethal velocity, but generally speaking, the bursting charges at the base of AP shells don't actually turn the shell into a grenade. It merely guarantees that the entire shell will be broken apart after perforating some armour, because the base often remains intact even if the nose is shattered by the interaction with the armour. Personally, I doubt that it would have made a noticeable contribution to the power of that IED.
Won't make noticeable, but still will make a change. Esp if properly placed (to ensure correct initiation and fragmentation.
  • 0

#1026 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 2053 PM

Guided 125mm shell with large thermobaric warhead (booster is replaced with larger warhead, limiting range):

Shot_3UBK14F1_with_9M119F1_guided_missil



 


  • 0

#1027 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 2058 PM

smg5qM3.jpg


  • 0

#1028 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 2102 PM

Another guided projectile, 'Sokol-1':

8df4de2d77441680cb152bd617706ac2.jpg


  • 0

#1029 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Staff
  • PipPip
  • 11,181 posts

Posted 03 September 2019 - 1449 PM

Passive target contour-based = image recognition?


  • 0

#1030 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,716 posts

Posted 03 September 2019 - 1801 PM

Yes. Simple image processing to find edges can be called contouring. Find the edges of the thing that you're aimed at, then hit inside them, I guess.

You do simple convolution processing for edge detection. Quick and dirty provided you have contrast.
  • 0

#1031 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,474 posts

Posted 10 September 2019 - 1906 PM

No, this is actually not what is (and was) in development. Sokol-1 (Falcon-1....now it is Falcon-5, stage of development).

For that book thay took a fake image )))

....

Design borough  Tochmash (named after A. E.  Nudelman) developed in the 80s guided missile for a future Soviet tank (Molot).  The theme smoldered for decades and in a recent UVZ report popped up under the name Sokol-V (Falcon-V).  Now already trimmed for 125 mm 2A82-1M in the T-14 object (see UVZ Annual Report for 2018).

 

image001.jpg​

 

With a multispectral homing head.  The work agreement was concluded with the Design Bureau in 2013 the completion of the work was planned for 2016. Apparently, everything was delayed if, in 2018, only stage 5 was reached and “approval of the applicability of the Sokol-V product in the 2A82-1M system” (according to the report).

Details (rus) – https://btvtinfo.blo...og-post_26.html

 

 

 

 

Another guided projectile, 'Sokol-1':

8df4de2d77441680cb152bd617706ac2.jpg


Edited by Harkonnen, 10 September 2019 - 1908 PM.

  • 0

#1032 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,394 posts

Posted 12 September 2019 - 0513 AM

 

Modern Russian and Chinese rounds are 900mm + at point blank right ?

No, they are not. Realistic estimates put them at 600 to 700 mm at 2,000 m or at best 800 mm point blank.

vGiAoTz.jpg

Current Russian tungsten APFSDS, for the latest variants of the 125 mm D-81T gun, have a penetration of 640 to 660 mm into 60° sloped armour steel at 2,000 metres. The penetration fo the DU variant is claimed to be 740 mm under the same conditions.

 

 

Thought was interesting and just a little tid-bit but recently some screenshots of a program saying that the 125mm cannon on the Type 99A can penetrate 680mm at 2000 meters.

680at2000a.png

Three more images in the spoiler

Spoiler

  • 0

#1033 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 12 September 2019 - 0555 AM

Vacuum 1 is listed above as 450mm of 60 degrees inclined plate, or 900 mm LOS.  The path length will perhaps be somewhat less though.

I compiled some available data, they seem to agree somewhat:

080zTz4.jpg

 


Edited by KV7, 12 September 2019 - 0906 AM.

  • 0

#1034 Echo501

Echo501

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 412 posts

Posted 12 September 2019 - 1822 PM

smg5qM3.jpg

 

 

When was this put into production?

 

TIA   ---Kenny


  • 0

#1035 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,716 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1557 PM

I wonder what a beam of the optical quantum generator is. Sounds very Star Trek, but maybe just a too-literal autotranslate?.

 

Nevermind, I actually read the whole thing and it's just SAL.


Edited by DB, 17 September 2019 - 1558 PM.

  • 0

#1036 Interlinked

Interlinked

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 451 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1811 PM

I wonder what a beam of the optical quantum generator is. Sounds very Star Trek, but maybe just a too-literal autotranslate?.
 
Nevermind, I actually read the whole thing and it's just SAL.


For some reason, that's what they call laser emitter.
  • 0

#1037 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 2122 PM

'Some reason' is due to laser light being produced by stimulated emission, which is a result of discrete (quantised) electron energy levels.

Eg.  'generator of optical radiation emissions using the quantum process of stimulated emission' aka laser.


Edited by KV7, 18 September 2019 - 1255 PM.

  • 0

#1038 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 2135 PM

Methos seems to have made a trig error.

LOS thickness/plate thickness is given by 1/cos(theta) where theta is the angle of inclination, for theta=60 deg it is 2.0

Methos has it as 1.466. for some reason.

 


Edited by KV7, 18 September 2019 - 0230 AM.

  • 0

#1039 methos

methos

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 939 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0928 AM

Methos seems to have made a trig error.

LOS thickness/plate thickness is given by 1/cos(theta) where theta is the angle of inclination, for theta=60 deg it is 2.0

Methos has it as 1.466. for some reason.

 

 

Math test:

320 x 2 = ?

330 x 2 = ?

 

The current in-service tungsten round Svinets-2 with 320-330 mm penetration into 60° sloped steel at 2,000 m. Grifel and Vacuum are research topics and not proven to have entered service (specifically the latter).


  • 0

#1040 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,298 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 1305 PM

 

Methos seems to have made a trig error.

LOS thickness/plate thickness is given by 1/cos(theta) where theta is the angle of inclination, for theta=60 deg it is 2.0

Methos has it as 1.466. for some reason.

 

 

Math test:

320 x 2 = ?

330 x 2 = ?

 

The current in-service tungsten round Svinets-2 with 320-330 mm penetration into 60° sloped steel at 2,000 m. Grifel and Vacuum are research topics and not proven to have entered service (specifically the latter).

 

Sorry, I read Grifel as Svinets in the blue table, which by coincidence gives 1.466 for both cases.
 


Edited by KV7, 18 September 2019 - 1307 PM.

  • 0