Advertisement
by Imperializt Russia » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:51 pm
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Dostanuot Loj » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:52 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Dostanuot Loj wrote:
"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.
Riysa wrote:The Akasha Colony wrote:
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.
by The Astoria » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:58 pm
by Lydenburg » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:02 pm
Imperializt Russia wrote:This would imply that its APFSDS cartridge was of pretty lacklustre design or was in some way constrained.
by DnalweN acilbupeR » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:04 pm
The Astoria wrote: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...?
The Emerald Dawn wrote:I award you no points, and have sent people to make sure your parents refrain from further breeding.
Lyttenburgh wrote:all this is a damning enough evidence to proove you of being an edgy butthurt 'murican teenager with the sole agenda of prooving to the uncaring bitch Web, that "You Have A Point!"
Lyttenburgh wrote:Either that, or, you were gang-raped by commi-nazi russian Spetznaz kill team, who then painted all walls in your house in hammer and sickles, and then viped their asses with the stars and stripes banner in your yard. That's the only logical explanation.
by Riysa » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:04 pm
The Astoria wrote: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...?
by Novorden » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:06 pm
The Astoria wrote: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...?
Lineart
Old designs
Newer Designs
by Dostanuot Loj » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:07 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Aqizithiuda wrote:
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.Imperializt Russia wrote: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.
by Lydenburg » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:08 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:Lydenburg wrote:
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.
by Imperializt Russia » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:10 pm
The Astoria wrote: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...?
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Imperializt Russia » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:11 pm
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Dostanuot Loj » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:12 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Dostanuot Loj wrote:
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?
by Val Nube » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:20 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:Aqizithiuda wrote:
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.
by Dostanuot Loj » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:36 pm
Val Nube wrote:Dostanuot Loj wrote:
"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?
by Austria-Bohemia-Hungary » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:42 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Dostanuot Loj wrote:
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?
by The Kievan People » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:43 pm
by Imperializt Russia » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:45 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:Val Nube wrote:
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
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Dostanuot Loj » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:49 pm
Imperializt Russia wrote:
Is it rifled primarily to give backwards compatibility with the older L7 ammunition?
by Val Nube » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:09 pm
Dostanuot Loj wrote:Val Nube wrote:
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
by The Kievan People » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:15 pm
by Ea90 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:32 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Aqizithiuda wrote:
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.Imperializt Russia wrote: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.
by San-Silvacian » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:33 pm
by Imperializt Russia » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:42 pm
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Vorkova » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:50 pm
Imperializt Russia wrote: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.
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: Raxperion, Thermodolia
Advertisement