Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Mk.V

[Imperializt Russia]

This would imply that its APFSDS cartridge was of pretty lacklustre design or was in some way constrained.

[Dostanuot Loj]

"Modern" 105mm is a trick here though.

ARES higher pressure guns would be more "modern" then any model of the L7/M68. But at the same time would be less "modern" then the 105mm Improved Weapon System, which uses a similar higher pressure design, and is just as capable. From what I have been reading, I would say IWS is superior.

ARES did make a low-velocity '75 and even a '76 for export to Latin America.

If we're making an L7/ARES high-velocity comparison here, the ARES 75 is superior to the L7 105mm in terms of HEAT penetration and performance. It is not when it comes to APFDS.

I would like to see where you get your information, as it doesn't make any sense. HEAT is dictated by materials and diameter of the cone. A larger cone, given equal materials, will always be superior. ARES could only get superior performance with different materials, which is an equally applicable aspect to the L7. Especially when you point out that the L7 has twenty years on the ARES in age, more if you want to take into account it's little more design wise then a bored-out 20 pounder, which means the weapon's design details (chamber design, and therefore pressure capabilities) are effectively a WW2 design.

On a side note, I have to find time to go back into our Ratel debate. RL caught up, and now I am playing catchup.

I'm always a bit reticent about anecdotal stories even from sources I trust. Even if they're accurate (often they're filled with conjecture), they're not a large enough sample size to really examine the overall effects. This is not to say that DU munitions are completely safe, but simply that one example probably isn't the best way to evaluate the effects of a weapon system.

I understand, but there is sufficent evidence to suggestion some sort of correlation in this case - everybody started coming down with cancer right around the same time, no previous family history of cancer, etc.

I happen to know a family of Iraqis who fought in 1991, and lived through 2003 in the fighting, and no cancer was recorded. Including one of them being a tank crewman in 1991.

Something to note regarding cancer, and all that like in Iraq, the small amounts of uranium involved in war pales in comparison to the burning of oil fields and what was put into the air, among many other things.

There is more naturally occurring uranium in the soil of Nova Scotia, Canada, that seeps into the water and food normally then you get in any part of Iraq that is not a destroyed tank graveyard. And that's a first world area with very good life expectancy.

[The Astoria]

ooh ooh i has an idea
ERA combined with spaced armor!
...
maybe?
using my extensive knowledge of snowball forts and snowball fights:
Ice-balls are effectively countered by bumps of snow on the walls.

Thus:
spikes on the front of the armor will reduce both weight and increase protection.
...
i think...?

[Lydenburg]

See the official US Defence Department report from when they tested the ARES 75 on a custom M113A3 chassis in Philadelphia. The HEAT round is superior to the L7 HEAT, and APFDS performance is about the same.

Link/book title?

http://www.geocities.com/equipmentshop

Mike Sparks, who was part of the build team for the chassis. His accounts include some of the findings from the first field tests at the Boeing site there. May have published these elsewhere but if so I'm not aware of it.

This would imply that its APFSDS cartridge was of pretty lacklustre design or was in some way constrained.

It's possible. Caseless ammo, remember? Theoretically the larger the projectile, the more inefficient it is.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

ooh ooh i has an idea
ERA combined with spaced armor!
...
maybe?
using my extensive knowledge of snowball forts and snowball fights:
Ice-balls are effectively countered by bumps of snow on the walls.

Thus:
spikes on the front of the armor will reduce both weight and increase protection.
...
i think...?

actually..

[Riysa]

ooh ooh i has an idea
ERA combined with spaced armor!
...
maybe?
using my extensive knowledge of snowball forts and snowball fights:
Ice-balls are effectively countered by bumps of snow on the walls.

Thus:
spikes on the front of the armor will reduce both weight and increase protection.
...
i think...?

1. What? Are you suggesting putting ERA in between plates of armor?

2. What?

[Novorden]

ooh ooh i has an idea
ERA combined with spaced armor!
...
maybe?
using my extensive knowledge of snowball forts and snowball fights:
Ice-balls are effectively countered by bumps of snow on the walls.

Thus:
spikes on the front of the armor will reduce both weight and increase protection.
...
i think...?

You will probably just end up with cage armour:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slat_armor

[Dostanuot Loj]

Link/book title?

http://www.geocities.com/equipmentshop

Mike Sparks, who was part of the build team for the chassis. His accounts include some of the findings from the first field tests at the Boeing site there. May have published these elsewhere but if so I'm not aware of it.

This would imply that its APFSDS cartridge was of pretty lacklustre design or was in some way constrained.

It's possible. Caseless ammo, remember? Theoretically the larger the projectile, the more inefficient it is.

You do realize that Sparky is considered a joke in the world of both military history, and the defense industry.

Citing him is like using Green Eggs and Ham as a source for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Asia, except worse because that would be funny and/or ironic.

Edit: Also, congrats, you've been the first person in this thread to use his whole name!

[Lydenburg]

http://www.geocities.com/equipmentshop

Mike Sparks, who was part of the build team for the chassis. His accounts include some of the findings from the first field tests at the Boeing site there. May have published these elsewhere but if so I'm not aware of it.



It's possible. Caseless ammo, remember? Theoretically the larger the projectile, the more inefficient it is.

You do realize that Sparky is considered a joke in the world of both military history, and the defense industry.

Citing him is like using Green Eggs and Ham as a source for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Asia, except worse because that would be funny and/or ironic.

Uh oh.

What about his credentials? Did he make his resume up?

[Imperializt Russia]

ooh ooh i has an idea
ERA combined with spaced armor!
...
maybe?
using my extensive knowledge of snowball forts and snowball fights:
Ice-balls are effectively countered by bumps of snow on the walls.

Thus:
spikes on the front of the armor will reduce both weight and increase protection.
...
i think...?

Afraid that wouldn't be especially effective. Given impact energies and modern penetrators, the spikes would probably be broadly ineffectual.
You'd be far better off with an ERA scheme.

[Imperializt Russia]

Now that "Mike Sparks" has twigged with me, he basically did IIRC.
I think he demands to be referred to by some rank he never attained and claims service with a unit he was never in.

[Dostanuot Loj]

You do realize that Sparky is considered a joke in the world of both military history, and the defense industry.

Citing him is like using Green Eggs and Ham as a source for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Asia, except worse because that would be funny and/or ironic.

Uh oh.

What about his credentials? Did he make his resume up?

He is well known for making his resume up, as well as other things.

I just searched, I should congratulate everyone, he's only been mentioned 24 times in a 496 page thread about tanks on the internet. That's one Sparky reference per almost 21 pages!

[Val Nube]

Maybe equal to a modern 105mm conventional gun, maybe a bit better. It all depends on the length of the round, projectile design, mass of propellant, barrel length, etc. Without a clear set of design parameters, it's hard to say.

"Modern" 105mm is a trick here though.

ARES higher pressure guns would be more "modern" then any model of the L7/M68. But at the same time would be less "modern" then the 105mm Improved Weapon System, which uses a similar higher pressure design, and is just as capable. From what I have been reading, I would say IWS is superior.

My Google-fu only finds some new/proposed howitzer. Does the IWS go by a different name?

[Dostanuot Loj]

"Modern" 105mm is a trick here though.

ARES higher pressure guns would be more "modern" then any model of the L7/M68. But at the same time would be less "modern" then the 105mm Improved Weapon System, which uses a similar higher pressure design, and is just as capable. From what I have been reading, I would say IWS is superior.

My Google-fu only finds some new/proposed howitzer. Does the IWS go by a different name?

Easiest link.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3633.html

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

You do realize that Sparky is considered a joke in the world of both military history, and the defense industry.

Citing him is like using Green Eggs and Ham as a source for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Asia, except worse because that would be funny and/or ironic.

Uh oh.

What about his credentials? Did he make his resume up?

Citing a dude that thinks M113's can fly and can replace everything in the US inventory, including the air force and the Abrams tank... well Lydenburg. Your credibility just crashed.

[The Kievan People]

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3633.html

[Imperializt Russia]

My Google-fu only finds some new/proposed howitzer. Does the IWS go by a different name?

Easiest link.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3633.html

Is it rifled primarily to give backwards compatibility with the older L7 ammunition?

[Dostanuot Loj]

Easiest link.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3633.html

Is it rifled primarily to give backwards compatibility with the older L7 ammunition?

Yes.
However the Brits appear to have decided that slip rings for the APFSDS are capable enough to make the switch from rifled guns not worth it.
That was until they stopped producing ammunition for rifled guns. Now economics.

[Val Nube]

My Google-fu only finds some new/proposed howitzer. Does the IWS go by a different name?

Easiest link.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3633.html

Thanks for the link. Um...I must be missing something. It says there is a recoil stroke of only 27.9 cm. So If I have a turret ring of 175cm, I'm golden, right?

[The Kievan People]

And for those who are curious, the 105mm gun used as demonstrator for RAVEN is actually the high-power 105mm MRAAS cannon developed for the FCS using technology similar to the ARES 75/90mm guns (CTA shells, swinging breech).

[Ea90]

Link/book title?

http://www.geocities.com/equipmentshop

Mike Sparks, who was part of the build team for the chassis. His accounts include some of the findings from the first field tests at the Boeing site there. May have published these elsewhere but if so I'm not aware of it.

This would imply that its APFSDS cartridge was of pretty lacklustre design or was in some way constrained.

It's possible. Caseless ammo, remember? Theoretically the larger the projectile, the more inefficient it is.

1st rule of military-ing: never, ever use sparky as a source for anything

[San-Silvacian]

Uh oh.

What about his credentials? Did he make his resume up?

Citing a dude that thinks M113's can fly and can replace everything in the US inventory, including the air force and the Abrams tank... well Lydenburg. Your credibility just crashed.

Way to be a fucking thick headed fool.

When your little 3rd world nation is being overrun by M113 Strikewitches, utterly destroying your fucking weak-ass MiG-29 strikewitches, you'll be sorry.

FOR FREEDOM-YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

[Vorkova]

People tend to hype the fuck out of WWII German tanks, so I've never gotten a proper answer about this. Aside from mechanical difficulties, how effective were the Tiger tanks?

[Imperializt Russia]

They had a powerful gun and were well protected, but suffered from poorer mobility, reliability issues aside.
Basically, it was a WWII-era heavy tank design.

[Vorkova]

They had a powerful gun and were well protected, but suffered from poorer mobility, reliability issues aside.
Basically, it was a WWII-era heavy tank design.

So strong and powerful, but poor mobility and reliability. Sounds about right for a WWII German design.