Jump to content


Photo

Weird And Wonderful Afv's


  • Please log in to reply
2269 replies to this topic

#2241 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,183 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0504 AM

296d9212a322f4c9495836f676d348dc.jpg

 

I have a camera lens that looks like that...... compensation perhaps?


  • 0

#2242 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,470 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0734 AM

296d9212a322f4c9495836f676d348dc.jpg

 
I have a camera lens that looks like that...... compensation perhaps?


To shoot nuclear grenades. They were not as small as today.


 

Check out this monstrosity:


5844647008_d659ae2709_b.jpg



The 183 mm is all fun and stuff, but what ios that battelship-grey Centurion in the back? Target practice vehicle maybe? The gun looks like a dummy tube welded on adn also something was added to the top of the turret.

Edited by Panzermann, 17 August 2019 - 0737 AM.

  • 0

#2243 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,432 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0752 AM

296d9212a322f4c9495836f676d348dc.jpg

 
I have a camera lens that looks like that...... compensation perhaps?
To shoot nuclear grenades. They were not as small as today.


 

Check out this monstrosity:


5844647008_d659ae2709_b.jpg


The 183 mm is all fun and stuff, but what ios that battelship-grey Centurion in the back? Target practice vehicle maybe? The gun looks like a dummy tube welded on adn also something was added to the top of the turret.
2pdr version with upper shield?
  • 0

#2244 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,004 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 2104 PM

200 pdr in front of 2 pdr ?


Edited by KV7, 17 August 2019 - 2128 PM.

  • 0

#2245 Coldsteel

Coldsteel

    Romanes eunt domus

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,479 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 2105 PM

...

The 183 mm is all fun and stuff, but what ios that battelship-grey Centurion in the back? Target practice vehicle maybe? The gun looks like a dummy tube welded on adn also something was added to the top of the turret.

 

 

Supposed to be a mobile practice target: http://preservedtank...x?UniqueId=1377


  • 0

#2246 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,700 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 0635 AM

I suppose this is good a place as any for this video, The History Guy goes to Bovington.  Some weird and wonderful AFVs indeed.

 


Edited by DKTanker, 24 August 2019 - 0636 AM.

  • 0

#2247 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,340 posts

Posted 12 September 2019 - 1720 PM

Versuchsträger Gesamtschutz (VTGS) / Leopard I A3 ("Stealth-Leopard") @ Stahl auf der Heide 2019

 

48721846242_eb1a2ebf98.jpg

 

Versuchsträger Gesamtschutz (VTGS) / Leopard I A3 ("Stealth-Leopard") @ Stahl auf der Heide 2019 by SurfacePics, on Flickr

 

German language description on the link


  • 0

#2248 Mr King

Mr King

    Fat Body

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,418 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 1534 PM

That is a big trailer 

 

9gwa0s9pmym31.jpg​


  • 0

#2249 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,449 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 1637 PM

 

 

 

love it. Any pentration data available after all these years from that 183 mm gun ?

I don't think you can get a sensible number, as 'penetration' means breaking the armor, which will depend on the distance to welds etc.

Apparently testing against tank targets produced 2/2 effective kills (one turret torn off; one mantlet shattered and turret made inoperable).

Edit - here we go:

'The 183mm was tested in live fire trials against a Centurion and a Conqueror. In 2 shots, the 183 blew the turret clean off the Centurion, and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half.'

http://www.tanks-enc...heavy-gun-tank/

 

Sounds like a sledgehammer compared to an icepick.

 

I think this is nicer though:

Object_120_(SU-152_Taran).jpg

 

 

 

120.jpg​


  • 0

#2250 Inhapi

Inhapi

    Wielder of the Unicorn Hat

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 608 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1208 PM

What is that ?


  • 0

#2251 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,693 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1618 PM

Object 120 "Taran" (Ram), 152mm L/59.5 gun armed TD. 11kg APDS @ 1720m/s.


  • 0

#2252 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,449 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1645 PM

Object 120 "Taran" (Ram), 152mm L/59.5 gun armed TD. 11kg APDS @ 1720m/s.

 

Smoothbore gun - APFSDS


  • 0

#2253 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,004 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0255 AM

 

Object 120 "Taran" (Ram), 152mm L/59.5 gun armed TD. 11kg APDS @ 1720m/s.

 

Smoothbore gun - APFSDS

 

For some reason most sources say the gun was rifled, though an interesting discussion here claims it is smoothbore:

https://www.globalse...u-152-taran.htm

Fofanov says it is rifled:

http://fofanov.armor...s/ARM/M-69.html



 


Edited by KV7, 18 September 2019 - 0448 AM.

  • 0

#2254 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,449 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0749 AM

 

 

Object 120 "Taran" (Ram), 152mm L/59.5 gun armed TD. 11kg APDS @ 1720m/s.

 

Smoothbore gun - APFSDS

 

For some reason most sources say the gun was rifled, though an interesting discussion here claims it is smoothbore:

https://www.globalse...u-152-taran.htm

Fofanov says it is rifled:

http://fofanov.armor...s/ARM/M-69.html



 

 

 

OKB-3 book says no.


  • 0

#2255 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,004 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0806 AM

I think I may have found the source of the confusion. I think the 130 mm gun tested was a smoothbore, but that the 152mm was rifled. This fits the know penetration values - a long rod (APFSDS) with 18.5MJ should do much more than 290 mm. See eg:

'The most powerful anti-tank self-propelled guns, "Object 120" was also called "Taran" [Ram]. According to the muzzle energy of an armor-piercing projectile, this machine has no equal, it seems to me. 18.5MJ (12.5kg at a speed of 1720m / s) - modern tank guns are noticeably more modest. And,the modern smooth-bore guns in tanks are also less accurate, but the 152-mm M-69 gun with a rifled barrel is very lethal. However, nothing is given for free - it is not for nothing that this heavy-duty machine is only in the museum hall.'

Which seems to make sense but then:

'To create a gun with high desired characteristics, the SKB-172 team (leader M.Yu. Tsiryulnikov) together with other performers on the topic (NII-24, NII-13, TsKB-393, Uralmashzavod) in 1957, studies were conducted to identify the optimal caliber guns. It was found that with a given ultimate mass of the system of the required armor penetration, the caliber of the guns in the range from 130 to 152.4 mm was satisfied. The preliminary design of the 152.4 mm SKB-172 gun was issued to Uralmashzavod in December 1957 for preliminary assembly of the gun mount on a tank destroyer. In this advance project, the barrel length reached 10,405 mm, and the average recoil resistance force was 47 tf. In the preliminary project of a 130 mm gun with the same barrel length, the mass of the gun was 3800 kg, that is, it was 700 kg lighter. In February 1958 on the basis of the research conducted and based on real capabilities, it was decided at the GKOT Technical Council to establish the range of a direct shot at a target height of 3 m - 2500 m. The initial projectile speed of 130 mm rifled guns should have been 1800 m / s, and 152.4 mm smooth-bore - 1600-1700 m / s. The total barrel length for both guns should not exceed 8500 mm'

I think the last paragraph may be include a mistake and it should read:

'The initial projectile speed of 130 mm rifled smooth-bore guns should have been 1800 m / s, and 152.4 mm smooth-bore rifled - 1600-1700 m / s. The total barrel length for both guns should not exceed 8500 mm'

Which makes sense as the 130mm gun was the higher velocity weapon optimised for KEP, in which case smoothbore would be highly desirable:

'The M-68, in turn, was ahead of the heavier system in armor penetration at zero meeting angles, while with an increase in angle it showed less high performance. In general, from the point of view of technical characteristics, the two guns were equivalent. The most important advantage of the 152-mm gun M-69 was the proposed range of ammunition. Unlike a smaller caliber system, it could use cumulative shells. Great power, gain in some characteristics and the presence of a cumulative shot led to the fact that the M-69 was recommended for use on the "Object 120".'

All from here: https://www.globalse...u-152-taran.htm

 


Edited by KV7, 18 September 2019 - 0810 AM.

  • 0

#2256 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,449 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 1316 PM

Object 120  152 mm M69 gun was smoothbore as it is said by designers book.


Edited by Harkonnen, 18 September 2019 - 1318 PM.

  • 0

#2257 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,037 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 2117 PM

Maybe somebody can look down the barrel with a flashlight.
  • 0

#2258 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,449 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 0919 AM

You can look at the drawing and notice typical soviet smothbore gun HEAT rounds with retracting fins for stabilization.


  • 0

#2259 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,004 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 0929 AM

You can look at the drawing and notice typical soviet smothbore gun HEAT rounds with retracting fins for stabilization.

Good spot. I certainly have no reason to doubt you or your sources here, I just cannot understand why there is such conflicting information around.


  • 0

#2260 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,449 posts

Posted 19 September 2019 - 1200 PM

Such rounds can not be used in rifled gun, I suppose. What is the more informative than officiall drawing?


  • 0