Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Type 6

[Riysa]

The main thing I'm seeing with LOSAT is that its pretty heavy and bulky - 80 kilos, 2.85 meters long - so you wouldn't be deploying it outside a dedicated carrier. CKEM is a lot shorter at 1.5 meters, but its still extremely heavy - as much as a Khrizantema without its launch tube, and again you'd need a dedicated platform for it. MRM-KE is probably what you're thinking of, but it seems that MRM-CE was preferred in the XM1111 project.

I can't seem to find much information about performance, but every KK missile attempt has been cancelled at one point or another. I'd say stick to HEAT; its proven, more versatile, and more compact than any KK prototype we have out there.

[The Kievan People]

I have to run so I can't comment fully. But I will mention that I find it amusing that while I have stated a few times outright that I am looking at a vehicle developed in the 1980s and fielded no later then 1991, there seems to be this assumption from the three of you now specifically debating me that the frame of reference is 2014. It is not, more like 1984-85. We are talking about a timeframe where ultramodern means Leopard 2A4. As I have said I will be making the multi-decades jump later when this is hashed out.

I felt I was clear enough on the time period when I specifically said it but I guess not.

Making it a contemporary of the Merkava III, M1A1, Leclerc and Type-90. All of which were armed with 120mm guns. This is not a coincidence, looking forward from the beginning of the 1980s it looked like a gun larger than 105mm was a necessity to defeat the tanks the Soviets were pumping out by thousands for both domestic and foreign use. APFSDS development moved extremely fast during the 1980s and this continued into the 1990s; it was so fast that it is clear in hindsight that the growth potential of existing guns was underestimated.

With the IWS the technology that was developed during the 1980s primarily for 120mm APFSDS was turned around to produce a weapon that was considerably more capable than what had existed a decade before it. But how would a designer or a planner producing a new tank design in the early 1980s or planning it in the late 1970s know this?

[The Kievan People]

I am not sure how fast LOSAT/CKEM can acquire firing solution, but I'd imagine as "last ditch" attempt were short reaction times are/might be most important, run-of-the-mill KEP might be best bet.

In the long run it is entirely possible they will replace dumb APFSDS.

But there are a couple of practical limitations:
1. The weight is prohibitive for infantry use and excluding a radical advance in chemical rockets this is unlikely to get much better in the future.
2. The back blast is also prohibitive for infantry use. These are strictly vehicular weapons.
3. Under 2km they don't really offer any benefit over APFSDS. NS wank tanks possibly excepted.
4. Under 1km they can be less effective because even the very high thrust single-stage motors take a few hundred meters to burn out and two-pulse (CKEM) or boost-sustain (LOSAT) motors may not even be able to burn out completely. So there is a small tradeoff between minimum and maximum range.
5. The launch signature is rather epic and a concern (which to be fair has never actually been tested on the battlefield) is that a KEM launcher would be immediately counter-attacked by everything in the area after opening fire. For light tank destroyers that are not designed to absorb return fire this could be especially problematic.
6. There is no consensus on the best form of guidance. The LOSAT used a optical automatic command line of sight system that seemed to work rather well. It is likely susceptible to countermeasures though. The CKEM was supposed to use an unusual form of beamriding guidance with side-looking laser receivers which may have been more susceptible to countermeasures than conventional beamriders. Khirzantema-style MMW command guidance should work, but that requires a spare MMW radar. Mounting a seeker would be an uphill battle, though it has been considered.

[Riysa]

Another question, does anyone have any information about the Leclerc and Oplot-M's level of protection? Fprado has information about the T-80U and T-84 derivatives but I'm not sure how accurate it is.

[Questers]

You know that Arjun's gun has a muzzle velocity in excess of 1.5km/s right? In fact DRDO states it as 1.67. http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfoc ... /arjun.htm

I think the point is not that rifled has this magic cap at 1.5, but that to get greater muzzle velocities you need to be pushing progressively (maybe exponentially) more propellent down that tube b/c of the gas leak. I don't think we're going to be seeing tanks shooting 2kms KEPs any time soon for a variety of reasons, so...

I think I said practical limit

I wasn't actually aware of the Arjun's ammunition. The highest velocity APFSDS for a rifled gun I knew of were the British L23 (1531m/s) and the Israeli M413 (1495m/s).

It's what I was getting at in any case.

So how did Indians embarrass Brits and Jews, world's best tankists?

[Questers]

Another question, does anyone have any information about the Leclerc and Oplot-M's level of protection? Fprado has information about the T-80U and T-84 derivatives but I'm not sure how accurate it is.

From Lakowski, T-84:
Lower hull: 240mm KE, 380mm HEAT
Glacis: 680-720mm KE, 960-1040mm HEAT
Front 1/3rd side hull: 90-140mm KE, 510-560mm HEAT
Front side turret, side turret: 420mm KE, 680mm HEAT
Upper front turret: 500-670mm, 740-1160mm HEAT
Rear turret: 110mm-130mm KE, 270-350mm HEAT

Rear hull: 60mm KE, 300-400mm HEAT
Side hull: 70-120mm KE, 210-260mm HEAT
Mantlet: 620-640mm KE, 940-1060mm HEAT
Weakened zone: 740-760mm KE, 1080-1120mm HEAT
Front turret corners: 720-740mm KE, 1040-1080mm HEAT
Side turret: 280mm KE, 340mm HEAT

"The T-84 uses the same hull as the T-80U, but features a new welded turret.
The maximum armor thickness of this turret is probably similar to the T-80U
front turret armor, which is reported to be 815mm thick and the insert is
probably similar to the T-90 with ~380mm LOS insert thickness suggested.
The turret is welded and probably similar to the T-80UM with an insert of TE
0.71 & 0.9. Based on the assumption of welded RHA plates, we get 380mm
[1.0 TE] + 435mm insert [x 0.71 Te] ÷ 815mm = 0.85 KE & 0.95 HEAT.
The angles on the T-84 seems close to the T-80 and therefore the ‘T-80UM’
K-5 numbers apply."

[Freihafen]

It should be noted that even though the engagement cycles of fire and forget missiles and hypervelocity missiles are comparable, the former still takes a good deal longer than the later to reach its target. In the meantime, the target may very well have returned fire.

MRM-KE has been test-fired but little is known of its actual performance (the details of which will undoubtedly be classified for a long time to come) prior to cancellation.

On another note, Israel was said to have developed an unguided hypervelocity LAW in the 80s called 'Picket', though the primary object was not to increase penetration but to reduce time-to-target (and thereby require little lead). Can't attest to its authenticity, though, seeing as my source is a resources page for a game.

[The Kievan People]

It should be noted that even though the engagement cycles of fire and forget missiles and hypervelocity missiles are comparable, the former still takes a good deal longer than the later to reach its target. In the meantime, the target may very well have returned fire.

MRM-KE has been test-fired but little is known of its actual performance (the details of which will undoubtedly be classified for a long time to come) prior to cancellation.

The MRM-KE overcame many challenges by only igniting the rocket motor a few hundred meters away from the target. The biggest disadvantage of this approach is the flight time is no better than conventional guided weapons.

On another note, Israel was said to have developed an unguided hypervelocity LAW in the 80s called 'Picket', though the primary object was not to increase penetration but to reduce time-to-target (and thereby require little lead). Can't attest to its authenticity, though, seeing as my source is a resources page for a game.

There is also a patent for a weapon like that floating around. Would probably burn the firers face off though.

[New Vihenia]

There is also a patent for a weapon like that floating around. Would probably burn the firers face off though.

I wonder if adopting starstreak like booster will be expedient.

[Riysa]

Another question, does anyone have any information about the Leclerc and Oplot-M's level of protection? Fprado has information about the T-80U and T-84 derivatives but I'm not sure how accurate it is.

From Lakowski, T-84:
Lower hull: 240mm KE, 380mm HEAT
Glacis: 680-720mm KE, 960-1040mm HEAT
Front 1/3rd side hull: 90-140mm KE, 510-560mm HEAT
Front side turret, side turret: 420mm KE, 680mm HEAT
Upper front turret: 500-670mm, 740-1160mm HEAT
Rear turret: 110mm-130mm KE, 270-350mm HEAT

Rear hull: 60mm KE, 300-400mm HEAT
Side hull: 70-120mm KE, 210-260mm HEAT
Mantlet: 620-640mm KE, 940-1060mm HEAT
Weakened zone: 740-760mm KE, 1080-1120mm HEAT
Front turret corners: 720-740mm KE, 1040-1080mm HEAT
Side turret: 280mm KE, 340mm HEAT

"The T-84 uses the same hull as the T-80U, but features a new welded turret.
The maximum armor thickness of this turret is probably similar to the T-80U
front turret armor, which is reported to be 815mm thick and the insert is
probably similar to the T-90 with ~380mm LOS insert thickness suggested.
The turret is welded and probably similar to the T-80UM with an insert of TE
0.71 & 0.9. Based on the assumption of welded RHA plates, we get 380mm
[1.0 TE] + 435mm insert [x 0.71 Te] ÷ 815mm = 0.85 KE & 0.95 HEAT.
The angles on the T-84 seems close to the T-80 and therefore the ‘T-80UM’
K-5 numbers apply."

Hmm, interesting; this is the Oplot with K-5, then?
Well, that's roughly equivalent to what fprado has, so that's good.

[Rich and Corporations]

/

You know that Arjun's gun has a muzzle velocity in excess of 1.5km/s right? In fact DRDO states it as 1.67. http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfoc ... /arjun.htm

I think the point is not that rifled has this magic cap at 1.5, but that to get greater muzzle velocities you need to be pushing progressively (maybe exponentially) more propellent down that tube b/c of the gas leak. I don't think we're going to be seeing tanks shooting 2kms KEPs any time soon for a variety of reasons, so...

Ah yes, the 1.5 km/s rule has been disproven.

Edit: also, the faster a round goes, the less efficient the propellant is

Well, that's roughly equivalent to what fprado has, so that's good.

???? not a scientific source

besides, most wargamers seems to be using a P_k of 30% or something.

From Lakowski, T-84:

ugh, Lakowski

. Under 2km they don't really offer any benefit over APFSDS. NS wank tanks possibly excepted.

NS wank armor included however...

[Questers]

Lakowski strong.

[Anemos Major]

I can't seem to find much information about performance, but every KK missile attempt has been cancelled at one point or another. I'd say stick to HEAT; its proven, more versatile, and more compact than any KK prototype we have out there.

It's purdy hellishly expensive as well, fellas, let's please not forget this. Expensive and bulky to the point where it's been suggested in the past that LOSAT itself was more of a quiet excuse to develop technology that could be transferred over for use in somewhat higher-cost materiel like the terminal stages of a prospective missile-kill system, while CKEM was supposed to be the more practical foray into the realm of kinetic energy missiles.

Which means that, at the end of the day, unless your guided KEP has a significantly higher penetration value, engagement range or potentially angle of engagement to your conventional stuff, it probably won't be replacing the rounds you fire from guns in tank platforms anytime soon on simple cost grounds. I'd say there's a niche for weapons like CKEM/LOSAT on lighter 'expeditionary' platforms straddling the line between FSVs and the heavier end of light tanks, but go on higher up and there's no need to splash big money on marginal improvements. Tanks expend a fair bit of ammunition during engagements, there's no need to add to the associated costs.

Comparing HEAT v. KEMs is a little bit difficult, on the other hand, because it's arguably not quite as straightforward as we make it out to be here. Here's my two cents - maybe our appraisal of the whole situation regarding both is undeveloped because there hasn't been a corresponding appraisal elsewhere? From the late 1980s to 90s, there's been an effort to reconfigure protective arrays to defeat KEPs (at least, on main battle tanks) - the Russians changed the explosive composition and plate configuration of Kontakt to create an ERA that actually detonated upon KEP impact, while the British came up with Challenger 2 and the US came up with M1A1(HA) and then A2 (both of which boast a very different protective configuration to their original Chobham-derived arrays). What that means is that the interaction between the composite arrays we understand to be highly effective against HEAT rounds (the earlier ones) and the latter-day ones developed to defeat KEPs are going to be interacting somewhat differently with HEAT jets. Secondly - well, I mean, HEAT is just a hell of a lot easier to pack into a small package, which means the impetus to continually improve EFP jet-based munitions exists, particularly in the modern day. I say this because there were some shifty rumours going around the JMoD some years back (reported in the digital media) about a 'new' HEAT configuration allegedly loaded into one of their new missiles, which is, for what it's worth, rigidly classified - HEAT isn't quite dead in the water yet.

You know that Arjun's gun has a muzzle velocity in excess of 1.5km/s right? In fact DRDO states it as 1.67. http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfoc ... /arjun.htm

I think the point is not that rifled has this magic cap at 1.5, but that to get greater muzzle velocities you need to be pushing progressively (maybe exponentially) more propellent down that tube b/c of the gas leak. I don't think we're going to be seeing tanks shooting 2kms KEPs any time soon for a variety of reasons, so...

Not that you're wrong or anything, but I sort-of-smell-bullshit on the part of DRDO here - mostly because they don't have the most glistening record when it comes to weapons development.

But yeah, you're right - for the record, the Type 93 APFSDS developed for the Type 74's 105mm gun was reputed to have a similar muzzle velocity to, if not higher than, the DM33 fired from a smoothbore 120mm L/44 gun. There's no magical limit per se.

Though on the other hand, in ceteris paribus terms, I guess the leak, energy expenditure that's put into spinning the round, and the additional energy loss that comes from correcting that all contribute into ensuring that any advancements you make in simple energy-to-velocity terms aren't going to see as dramatic an improvement in a rifled gun as opposed to a smoothbore one. But then, what with somewhat more sophisticated theories of kinetic energy penetration floating around (it's worth noting that there're different understandings of 'how best' to make a KEP penetrate a target), it's not as though ridiculously high impact velocities are anywhere near all that matters.

To make a dangerous prediction? I don't think we've seen the end of HEAT rounds or rifled guns, not by a long shot...

[San-Silvacian]

was HEAT ever in danger?

[Rich and Corporations]

There's no magical limit per se.

I use ETC gun with solid propellants comprising of Octanitrocubane.

[Anemos Major]

was HEAT ever in danger?

Look at the anti-armour munitions of any first-line Western main battle tank from 1990 or so onwards and then tell me how you somehow missed nearly 20 years of developments in tank technology.

What I'm suggesting is that HEAT in its current form isn't exactly a tank-killing munition (yes, you can be facetious about this, yes, you can suggest that non-frontal or otherwise lucky kills are achievable with a tandem HEAT warhead, but you'd be advised to look back in history and consider what happens when one military finds that they can't frontally engage the enemy's primary armoured vehicles), and that current research efforts are looking into fundamentally redefining, as opposed to simply product-improving, what HEAT warheads are in order to make them viable tank-killing munitions once again.

[Rich and Corporations]

(yes, you can be facetious about this, yes, you can suggest that non-frontal or otherwise lucky kills are achievable with a tandem HEAT warhead, but you'd be advised to look back in history and consider what happens when one military finds that they can't frontally engage the enemy's primary armoured vehicles),

except

penetration isn't binary


kiev had such a nice infographic showing the probability of penetrating various armored vehicles with HEAT

[The Akasha Colony]

was HEAT ever in danger?

Not necessarily in danger of totally disappearing, but certainly no longer having the prominence it once had as the go-to tank-killing munition.

[San-Silvacian]

I guess.

I always thought that the two types were both pretty useful and good at killing stuff, while HEAT excelled in killing everything else short of an MBT, while KEPs pretty much were only good at killing tanks.

[Anemos Major]

I use ETC gun with solid propellants comprising of Octanitrocubane.

What happens after you manage to create a stable gun, firing platform and round out of all that and successfully expend your military's procurement budget for the year on an enemy tank? ;P

[Rich and Corporations]

I use ETC gun with solid propellants comprising of Octanitrocubane.

What happens after you manage to create a stable gun, firing platform and round out of all that and successfully expend your military's procurement budget for the year on an enemy tank? ;P

with populations of billions, and a GDP/capita equal to that of the United States, the ability to concentrate military power in a single to decisively enforce your objectives is most vital

[Questers]

現在運用されているAPFSDSは93式装弾筒付翼安定徹甲弾が使用されている。この弾薬はダイキン工業が開発したもので、初速は1501m/s、装甲貫徹力は射距離2kmで414mm程度の均質圧延鋼版を貫徹可能と推定されており、これは第二世代戦車相手なら概ね正面装甲を貫徹可能なレベルである。ちなみ導入当初に運用されていたL28A1 105mmAPDS弾の装甲貫徹力は同条件で240mm程度、1984年に導入されたM735 105mmAPFSDSで318mm程度であり、当初に比べれば攻撃力は大幅に向上していると言えよう。

[Rich and Corporations]

現在運用されているAPFSDSは93式装弾筒付翼安定徹甲弾が使用されている。この弾薬はダイキン工業が開発したもので、初速は1501m/s、装甲貫徹力は射距離2kmで414mm程度の均質圧延鋼版を貫徹可能と推定されており、これは第二世代戦車相手なら概ね正面装甲を貫徹可能なレベルである。ちなみ導入当初に運用されていたL28A1 105mmAPDS弾の装甲貫徹力は同条件で240mm程度、1984年に導入されたM735 105mmAPFSDSで318mm程度であり、当初に比べれば攻撃力は大幅に向上していると言えよう。

I don't speak moon.

[The Akasha Colony]

現在運用されているAPFSDSは93式装弾筒付翼安定徹甲弾が使用されている。この弾薬はダイキン工業が開発したもので、初速は1501m/s、装甲貫徹力は射距離2kmで414mm程度の均質圧延鋼版を貫徹可能と推定されており、これは第二世代戦車相手なら概ね正面装甲を貫徹可能なレベルである。ちなみ導入当初に運用されていたL28A1 105mmAPDS弾の装甲貫徹力は同条件で240mm程度、1984年に導入されたM735 105mmAPFSDSで318mm程度であり、当初に比べれば攻撃力は大幅に向上していると言えよう。

Anime thread is thataway.

Yes, I know it has nothing to do with anime.

[Purpelia]

現在運用されているAPFSDSは93式装弾筒付翼安定徹甲弾が使用されている。この弾薬はダイキン工業が開発したもので、初速は1501m/s、装甲貫徹力は射距離2kmで414mm程度の均質圧延鋼版を貫徹可能と推定されており、これは第二世代戦車相手なら概ね正面装甲を貫徹可能なレベルである。ちなみ導入当初に運用されていたL28A1 105mmAPDS弾の装甲貫徹力は同条件で240mm程度、1984年に導入されたM735 105mmAPFSDSで318mm程度であり、当初に比べれば攻撃力は大幅に向上していると言えよう。

I do not know what you just said. But I'll buy 10 on account of it being.