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