±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 679
Total: 679
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Downloads
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Home
05: Home
06: Home
07: Community Forums
08: Community Forums
09: Photo Gallery
10: Home
11: Community Forums
12: Home
13: Your Account
14: Photo Gallery
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Your Account
19: Community Forums
20: Home
21: Home
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Community Forums
26: Community Forums
27: Photo Gallery
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: CPGlang
31: Community Forums
32: Downloads
33: Community Forums
34: Home
35: Community Forums
36: Home
37: Search
38: Community Forums
39: Community Forums
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Photo Gallery
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Community Forums
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Photo Gallery
54: Photo Gallery
55: Home
56: Community Forums
57: Downloads
58: CPGlang
59: Photo Gallery
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Photo Gallery
63: Community Forums
64: Photo Gallery
65: Home
66: Downloads
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Home
70: Home
71: Photo Gallery
72: Photo Gallery
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Community Forums
79: Home
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Photo Gallery
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: CPGlang
87: Community Forums
88: News Archive
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Downloads
93: Your Account
94: Home
95: Home
96: Photo Gallery
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Photo Gallery
100: Downloads
101: Community Forums
102: Contact
103: Photo Gallery
104: Community Forums
105: Home
106: Downloads
107: Community Forums
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: Member Screenshots
113: Your Account
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Community Forums
117: Photo Gallery
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: CPGlang
121: Home
122: Community Forums
123: Photo Gallery
124: CPGlang
125: Community Forums
126: Community Forums
127: CPGlang
128: Community Forums
129: Downloads
130: Home
131: Community Forums
132: Home
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Community Forums
138: Photo Gallery
139: News
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Home
143: Photo Gallery
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Photo Gallery
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Community Forums
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Community Forums
155: Community Forums
156: Photo Gallery
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Photo Gallery
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Photo Gallery
163: Member Screenshots
164: Community Forums
165: Community Forums
166: Home
167: Community Forums
168: Downloads
169: Photo Gallery
170: Photo Gallery
171: Community Forums
172: Community Forums
173: Photo Gallery
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Home
179: Home
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Your Account
183: Your Account
184: Home
185: Photo Gallery
186: Downloads
187: Photo Gallery
188: Community Forums
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Your Account
192: Community Forums
193: Photo Gallery
194: Downloads
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Photo Gallery
198: Photo Gallery
199: Home
200: Community Forums
201: Home
202: Community Forums
203: Community Forums
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Community Forums
207: Your Account
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Photo Gallery
214: Photo Gallery
215: Community Forums
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Community Forums
223: Photo Gallery
224: Community Forums
225: Your Account
226: News
227: Community Forums
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Community Forums
231: Home
232: Photo Gallery
233: Photo Gallery
234: Photo Gallery
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Home
244: Community Forums
245: Photo Gallery
246: Photo Gallery
247: Community Forums
248: Community Forums
249: Photo Gallery
250: Community Forums
251: Community Forums
252: Contact
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Community Forums
256: Photo Gallery
257: Community Forums
258: Your Account
259: Community Forums
260: Community Forums
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: CPGlang
264: Community Forums
265: Photo Gallery
266: Community Forums
267: Community Forums
268: Downloads
269: Community Forums
270: Community Forums
271: Community Forums
272: Community Forums
273: Member Screenshots
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: Downloads
278: Community Forums
279: Photo Gallery
280: Community Forums
281: Photo Gallery
282: News Archive
283: Member Screenshots
284: Home
285: Community Forums
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Community Forums
289: Community Forums
290: Home
291: Community Forums
292: Member Screenshots
293: Photo Gallery
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Home
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Photo Gallery
302: Community Forums
303: Photo Gallery
304: Photo Gallery
305: Community Forums
306: Home
307: Home
308: Community Forums
309: Photo Gallery
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Home
313: Community Forums
314: Home
315: Community Forums
316: Community Forums
317: Downloads
318: Home
319: Home
320: Photo Gallery
321: Photo Gallery
322: Community Forums
323: Community Forums
324: Community Forums
325: Community Forums
326: Community Forums
327: Community Forums
328: Member Screenshots
329: Home
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Photo Gallery
333: Your Account
334: Community Forums
335: Downloads
336: Downloads
337: Community Forums
338: Community Forums
339: Community Forums
340: Member Screenshots
341: Community Forums
342: CPGlang
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Community Forums
346: Community Forums
347: Photo Gallery
348: Community Forums
349: Photo Gallery
350: News Archive
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Community Forums
359: Community Forums
360: Home
361: Home
362: Community Forums
363: Community Forums
364: Community Forums
365: Member Screenshots
366: Your Account
367: Community Forums
368: Community Forums
369: Community Forums
370: Your Account
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Photo Gallery
374: Community Forums
375: Community Forums
376: Community Forums
377: Community Forums
378: Photo Gallery
379: Member Screenshots
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Downloads
383: Community Forums
384: Downloads
385: Downloads
386: Downloads
387: Downloads
388: Community Forums
389: Community Forums
390: Community Forums
391: Photo Gallery
392: Community Forums
393: Photo Gallery
394: Community Forums
395: Home
396: Community Forums
397: Home
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Home
401: Member Screenshots
402: Home
403: Downloads
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: Community Forums
407: Downloads
408: Photo Gallery
409: Community Forums
410: Member Screenshots
411: Community Forums
412: Community Forums
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Home
418: Photo Gallery
419: Community Forums
420: Community Forums
421: Member Screenshots
422: Community Forums
423: Community Forums
424: Community Forums
425: Home
426: CPGlang
427: Community Forums
428: Downloads
429: CPGlang
430: CPGlang
431: Photo Gallery
432: Community Forums
433: Photo Gallery
434: Photo Gallery
435: Community Forums
436: Community Forums
437: Community Forums
438: Photo Gallery
439: Community Forums
440: Community Forums
441: Home
442: Photo Gallery
443: Home
444: Community Forums
445: Community Forums
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Photo Gallery
449: Community Forums
450: Community Forums
451: Statistics
452: Photo Gallery
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Community Forums
456: Photo Gallery
457: Photo Gallery
458: Photo Gallery
459: Community Forums
460: Community Forums
461: Community Forums
462: Your Account
463: Community Forums
464: Downloads
465: Home
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Photo Gallery
469: Community Forums
470: Community Forums
471: Community Forums
472: Community Forums
473: Home
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Downloads
477: Community Forums
478: Home
479: Community Forums
480: Search
481: Community Forums
482: Photo Gallery
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Photo Gallery
486: Home
487: Photo Gallery
488: Community Forums
489: Your Account
490: Downloads
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Community Forums
494: Community Forums
495: Home
496: Community Forums
497: Community Forums
498: Community Forums
499: Community Forums
500: Community Forums
501: Downloads
502: Community Forums
503: Home
504: Home
505: Community Forums
506: Community Forums
507: Community Forums
508: Downloads
509: Photo Gallery
510: Home
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Community Forums
514: Home
515: Downloads
516: Contact
517: Community Forums
518: Community Forums
519: Photo Gallery
520: Community Forums
521: Home
522: Photo Gallery
523: Community Forums
524: Community Forums
525: Community Forums
526: Tell a Friend
527: Community Forums
528: Photo Gallery
529: Community Forums
530: Community Forums
531: Photo Gallery
532: Community Forums
533: Your Account
534: Community Forums
535: Community Forums
536: Community Forums
537: Community Forums
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: Community Forums
541: Community Forums
542: Community Forums
543: Photo Gallery
544: Community Forums
545: Community Forums
546: Community Forums
547: Community Forums
548: Community Forums
549: Home
550: Home
551: Downloads
552: Community Forums
553: Community Forums
554: Statistics
555: Community Forums
556: Community Forums
557: Member Screenshots
558: Community Forums
559: Photo Gallery
560: Community Forums
561: Community Forums
562: Community Forums
563: Home
564: Community Forums
565: Photo Gallery
566: Photo Gallery
567: Community Forums
568: Community Forums
569: CPGlang
570: Tell a Friend
571: Home
572: Photo Gallery
573: Photo Gallery
574: Community Forums
575: Downloads
576: Community Forums
577: Community Forums
578: Community Forums
579: Community Forums
580: Photo Gallery
581: Community Forums
582: Home
583: Photo Gallery
584: Community Forums
585: Home
586: Photo Gallery
587: Photo Gallery
588: Community Forums
589: Community Forums
590: Home
591: Community Forums
592: Photo Gallery
593: Home
594: Home
595: Downloads
596: Community Forums
597: Community Forums
598: Photo Gallery
599: Home
600: Community Forums
601: Community Forums
602: Community Forums
603: Community Forums
604: Community Forums
605: Community Forums
606: Community Forums
607: Community Forums
608: Community Forums
609: Your Account
610: Community Forums
611: Community Forums
612: Home
613: Community Forums
614: Community Forums
615: Downloads
616: Community Forums
617: Community Forums
618: Community Forums
619: CPGlang
620: Photo Gallery
621: Photo Gallery
622: Community Forums
623: Downloads
624: Community Forums
625: Community Forums
626: Community Forums
627: Home
628: Community Forums
629: CPGlang
630: Photo Gallery
631: Community Forums
632: Community Forums
633: Community Forums
634: Community Forums
635: Community Forums
636: Community Forums
637: Home
638: Home
639: Community Forums
640: Community Forums
641: Community Forums
642: Community Forums
643: Community Forums
644: Community Forums
645: Community Forums
646: Member Screenshots
647: Photo Gallery
648: Community Forums
649: Downloads
650: Community Forums
651: Community Forums
652: Photo Gallery
653: Photo Gallery
654: Photo Gallery
655: Community Forums
656: Home
657: Downloads
658: Photo Gallery
659: Community Forums
660: Community Forums
661: Your Account
662: News Archive
663: Home
664: Community Forums
665: Photo Gallery
666: CPGlang
667: Community Forums
668: Community Forums
669: Community Forums
670: Community Forums
671: Community Forums
672: Community Forums
673: Community Forums
674: Community Forums
675: Photo Gallery
676: CPGlang
677: Community Forums
678: Home
679: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Skeet
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 15, 2006
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2006 7:12 pm
Post subject: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

The Abrams carries a 120 mm non-rifled cannon. I understand the non-rifled cannon allows a shaped charge projectile to function better, but it also seems to be able to hit targets waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out there.

How's it do that?
Back to top
View user's profile
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2066
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2006 3:26 am
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

Skeet,
I can name two basic changes. Modern fire control systems that compensate for variables such as Range, Air Temp, Barometric pressure, Ammo temp, Cant, Lead, etc. coupled with ballistic solutions that can be calculated for individual type rounds within 1 meter using this data. All is done with the gunner pressing a lase button. The other is that almost all modern tank rounds are fin stabilized and do not need to be spun to stay accurate. Even the old 105mm rifled guns eventually fired primarily fin stabilzed rounds. Quality of production also reduces round to round dispersion within round types allowing longer more accurate engagements too. I guess that makes three. I can write pages of what has been done in the last 30 years to improve accuracy, but basically what modern electronics has done for automobiles pretty much applies to tanks.

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
mike_Duplessis
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 236

PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2006 5:21 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

I dimmly recall in the early 80s someone (the British?) held a competition to see which gun they were going to choose for their next generation tank. They used the standard 105mm gun as a baseline for comparison, firing its APFSDS round. To everyone's horror the 105mm solidly outperformed all the modern technology 120mm contenders as far as accuracy went. It seems even with driving bands a 105mm APFSDS round would still be given a slight rotation. Apparently this was enough to turn any tendency to drift into a corkscrew path as the dart flew downrange. - I hope I'm recalling this story correctly.

Rheinmetall in particular didn't like the results of those tests. It's possible this embarrassment in trials drove much of the insane standards in modern fire controls. Everything from tube wear to weather to propellant temperature is thrown into the mix.
Back to top
View user's profile
mike_Duplessis
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 236

PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

I have a dumb question.
I read somewhere how when firing the Russian 125mm gun the ballistics calculations are adjusted according to propellant temps. I also read somewhere that one flavor of Merkava or another includes temperature-controlled ammo storage to maximize performance (or more accurately, to avoid degradation). At least at one point Israeli 120mm gun ammo was quite temp-sensitive.

Here's the dumb question - What about Abrams? How do they monitor propellant temps? Is that rear turret bustle temp-controlled at all? or is it monitored by a themostat in order to automatically adjust ballistics computations? I believe for T-72s they'd simply take an air temp reading in the morning and use those calculations all day (yesterday was -8 c, today its +40 c).
Back to top
View user's profile
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2006 9:40 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

- mike_Duplessis
....Here's the dumb question - What about Abrams? How do they monitor propellant temps? Is that rear turret bustle temp-controlled at all? or is it monitored by a themostat in order to automatically adjust ballistics computations? I believe for T-72s they'd simply take an air temp reading in the morning and use those calculations all day (yesterday was -8 c, today its +40 c).


No such thing as a dumb question....

Actually there is an ammo temp gauge in the turret. One simply input temp into FCS and the 'little hamsters in the white box' ( Shocked - Just kidding on the hamsters...) calculates the ballistic solution with all inputed info.

Ammo 'wells' seem to run much cooler than crew compartment. Ammo doors block out residual heat from turret & outside.

Many times (as am M-1, IPM-1, & M1A1 gunner) I remember temps in ammo wells running in 100-120 degree range. Ft Polk actually seemed to be the worst.

Don

_________________
"Gonna hold my breath until Armor returns home..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2006 9:48 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

- mike_Duplessis
I dimmly recall in the early 80s someone (the British?) held a competition to see which gun they were going to choose for their next generation tank. They used the standard 105mm gun as a baseline for comparison, firing its APFSDS round. To everyone's horror the 105mm solidly outperformed all the modern technology 120mm contenders as far as accuracy went. It seems even with driving bands a 105mm APFSDS round would still be given a slight rotation. Apparently this was enough to turn any tendency to drift into a corkscrew path as the dart flew downrange. - I hope I'm recalling this story correctly.

Rheinmetall in particular didn't like the results of those tests. It's possible this embarrassment in trials drove much of the insane standards in modern fire controls. Everything from tube wear to weather to propellant temperature is thrown into the mix.


Mike

In 1988 'we' had some serious problems with the 120mm ammo. Initially it was packaged, shipped, and delivered in wooden crates like the 105 ammo. This caused serious preformance reliability problems.

When 'we' were doing CAT 89 train up, we found that round to round dispersion was way off the scale. 'Our' goal was to hit a coke can at 1500m. With the first generation (training) Sabot, it was difficult to hit the Screening panels at 1500m with more than one round, let alone a coke can.

After 'much pain' it was finally determined that the ammo was at fault. This is about the time that the sealed 'catacomb' containers made their appearence.

Voila!!! We started screening and hitting a 12 inch 'bulls-eye' at 1500m, round after round.

Don

_________________
"Gonna hold my breath until Armor returns home..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2066
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2006 12:33 am
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

Hey Dontos,
Yeah, there were some issues with the old M865 anyway when it first came out. With the newer PA-116 (I think that's what they're called)containers you probably got the newer M865IP (PIP) or whatever they called it then. We used to have to ID it from the older ones by the groves cut in the petals. Both had the same ID and DODIC. I think we are on our 4th or 5th connotation of the M865 now.
Mike, gotta remember that unless you are firing service ammunition results may vary. Training ammo has to be good but the other factor is cost as opposed to service rounds where money doesn't factor in that much. I can believe the 105 was more accurate during the test just because the rounds for the 120mm were not a mature of a system at that time. My experience with 105 training APDS compared to 120 training APCSDS was that the 105 seemed more accurate. I will tell you when they screened service rounds in Kuwait prior to the war (OIF) the results we most impressive, especially the shot groups. 1st UK didn't screen, they zero'd using L29 and then switched to L27 CHARM. Fired a lot more ammo but I personally believed they had a more accurate final result. They do have some impressive long range gunnery ability.

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2006 1:04 am
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

PIP...thats it.

I believe it had a lot number of '88F' the only APCSDS-T that we were allowed to use.

In the days prior, (CAT89) we zeroed every different lot we got. 5 rounds. Fire 3 at 'bull', determine MPI, toggle adjust, then fire 2 confirmation rounds. No 'Fleet Zero' for us.

(I still have my zero data from May - June 89.... I'm NOT a 'pack-rat' damn it!!!) Laughing

Of course, that was 'E-ONS' ago.... Cool


_________________
"Gonna hold my breath until Armor returns home..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2066
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2006 2:30 am
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

Dontos,
I still think that zeroing is better than screening Smile , but of course money talks Rolling Eyes . The theory is that if all tanks were made and maintained to a equal level of quality and the ammunition was constructed within certain tolerences than one could reasonably expect the same firing results across the board. Screening just verifies that the tank and ammo meet these tolerances. It may not be the most accurate but the standard is 2 rounds within the circle of the ST-5 panel (formerly ST-4 octogon). If it can accomplish this it meets the accuracy requirements. The problem with zeroing is you can potentially hide a maintenance problem Sad . Just because you can adjust the reticle to get a bulls eye at 1500 meters doesn't mean you can do the same thing at 1000 or 2000. The FCS could be flawed and not correctly calculate the ballistic solution. All you accomplished was make it hit at 1500 meters standing still. Other factors are also mechanical. It can be very frustrating with older systems Evil or Very Mad .That's the reason why Master Gunner's look the way they do on a range. But..., if the tank is good and the ammo is good, zeroing is far more accurate Wink . All comments made are my personal opinion and do not reflect any official doctrin or procedures

Enjoy the Armor conference
Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Skeet
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: May 15, 2006
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2006 10:00 am
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

Thanks folks.

In reply to another question I made, this link was provided:

www.globalsecurity.org...m830a1.htm

That pretty much answers my question. I didn't know that that all the 120mm rounds were fin stabilized.

Interesting idea about using that round being used on helicopters. I wouldn't think you could bring a 120 mm to bear on such a target.
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2006 6:50 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

HI Skeet! Hi Folks!

- Skeet

Interesting idea about using that round being used on helicopters. I wouldn't think you could bring a 120 mm to bear on such a target.


That idea has been around for bit. The MPAT round makes it work a lot better.

Sometime around 1972-73, when I was stationed at Hunter Liggett Military Reservation, the unit I was in conducted a test to see if it was possible for Soviet Tanks to engage US Cobra Attack Helicopters firing Sabot ammo. The unit had five platoons of M60A1 tanks which were fitted with a Soviet type of sight retinal. Using the Great Grand Father version of the system used now days at the NTC, it was learned that Soivet's Tanks using Sabot could not hit a moving Cobra most of the time.

After the test was over, then some one asked the question, "Can US tankers using our current FCS and Sabot, hit a Soviet gunship"? Back to range with the nomal sight retianls reinstalled. It was found that our system could nail a hovering or slowly moving helo. Last I heard of that test program was they where going someplace else to try and learn how much damage a Sabot round could do to a helicopter. I wonder if somewhere in the developement of MPAT round, those old tests had anything to do with it's design?

Some of my old history.
Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
mike_Duplessis
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 236

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 12:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

I recall reading somewhere (warning, I may be remembering this all wrong) that German tanks were slated to get a 'dual-purpose' laser rangefinder for combatting helicopters. I believe the article said - and I'm really shakey on this info - that a laser reflection can give multiple range returns due to laser scatter. A standard ground combat rangefinder will, I think, discard all but the last return. This is the opposite of what you want for a helicopter which would be primary laser return followed by background clutter. So I think the article said the German rangefinders had a switch that would allow either accepting last or first laser return depending on the target type.

What this implies is a helicopter close enough to be within the APFSDS dart's flat trajectory would be dead meat, but if ballistics calculations are involved (beyond 2500m?) then hit probability may be hindered by the ground-optimized ranging equipment.

Any REAL tankers willing to help me on this?
Back to top
View user's profile
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2006 3:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Abrams, 120 mm cannon accuracy?

- mike_Duplessis
I recall reading somewhere (warning, I may be remembering this all wrong) that German tanks were slated to get a 'dual-purpose' laser rangefinder for combatting helicopters. I believe the article said - and I'm really shakey on this info - that a laser reflection can give multiple range returns due to laser scatter. A standard ground combat rangefinder will, I think, discard all but the last return. This is the opposite of what you want for a helicopter which would be primary laser return followed by background clutter. So I think the article said the German rangefinders had a switch that would allow either accepting last or first laser return depending on the target type.

What this implies is a helicopter close enough to be within the APFSDS dart's flat trajectory would be dead meat, but if ballistics calculations are involved (beyond 2500m?) then hit probability may be hindered by the ground-optimized ranging equipment.

Any REAL tankers willing to help me on this?


Mike

I 'used' to be a REAL Tanker, so I'll try to take a stab at explaining this....

The Abrams LRF has dual settings for '1st return' & 'Last return'.

If lasing on a target on a hill top (or in the air) with a limited possibility of any obstructions then this means the LRF will give a range to the actual target.

Many times multiple range returns are noted due to tree limbs, grass, (etc) that are in the line of sight between the tank and the intended target. When in 'Last Return' the indexed range should be the target you are lying the reticle on.

There is a 'multiple range return' bar in the symbology of the GPS which lets the gunner know that more than one range return has been received. Its up to him to assess if the indexed range seems appropriate.

Hope this helps,
Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum