Com-Central.net

MarkHolloway · Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 8:35 am Post subject: Stryker MGS at Armor Symposium

"The 105 mm cannon can also take out snipers, Rogers said, because with one shot, it can destroy the entire area where a sniper is firing from." Laughing

www4.army.mil/ocpa/pri...d_key=8979

Doug_Kibbey

- MarkHolloway

"The 105 mm cannon can also take out snipers, Rogers said, because with one shot, it can destroy the entire area where a sniper is firing from."

www4.army.mil/ocpa/pri...d_key=8979

Yep, "Davey Crockett" was also an effective counter-sniper weapon. Laughing

bsmart

- Doug_Kibbey

- MarkHolloway

"The 105 mm cannon can also take out snipers, Rogers said, because with one shot, it can destroy the entire area where a sniper is firing from." lol

http//www4.army.mil/ocpa/print.php?story_id_key=8979

Yep, "Davey Crockett" was also an effective counter-sniper weapon. lol

"We had to destroy the village in order to save it"

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

VERY cool finally seeing MGS dressed in its slat cage.

Notice they've dicarded the heavy frame used on the original design. Looks a LOT lighter, rather like the Autralian LAV cage design.

bsmart

But will they be carrying the big gray ramp with them in order to fire at low angles? (Or to absorb the recoil so it doesn't roll backwards?)

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

People have been questioning MGS's ability to take the 105mm gun's recoil. My thought is since its mostly an 'assault gun' its going to mostly be firing HE. HE usually has significantly less kick than a full-charge APFSDS KE round. So... I imagine... for 95% of its weapon use MGS should be able to handle the 105mm gun recoil with a decent margin of safety. The rare time they're compelled to fire a KE round down-range they probably might be working at the outside edge of the recoils system's capabilities.

My 2Ã‚Â¢ based burdoned by no actual information.

Dontos

The MGS was exhibited at the last Armor Conference 2 years ago. I had the occasion of getting the 'nickel' tour by one of the crewmembers.

I'll be exhibit 'sitting' this year, so I will be sure to take alot of 'cool' photos, for those of ya'll not able to make it.

Don

Joe_D

Nice picture Mike,
Trying to figure out "Why?" one would fire a vehicle on a sync ramp. Maybe they wanted to make sure the recoil system could handle high angle firing and didn't have a range that would support firing above 10 degrees. Who know's? I imagine if it's made to tank standards it's elevation range should be +30 and -10 degrees from horizontal. Seems like everything you see or hear about the MGS is kinda hokey though.

Joe D

Roy_A_Lingle

Hi Joe! Hi Folks!

- Joe_D

Trying to figure out "Why?" one would fire a vehicle on a sync ramp. Maybe they wanted to make sure the recoil system could handle high angle firing and didn't have a range that would support firing above 10 degrees.

Range limitations would be my guess.

- Joe_

if it's made to tank standards it's elevation range should be +30 and -10 degrees from horizontal.

Maybe, but I think if folks didn't think of the MGS in tank type terms, but rather along the lines of a M151 with a M40 recoilless rifle they would have a better understanding of what that vehicle is being developed for.

Yes, the old M40 RR could kill tanks, but it wasn't the best weapon system for that job. But as a direct fire heavy weapon for infantry support it was a good system for it's day. With the MGS, the crew has some armored protection where the old M151/M40RR had none. The M151/M40RR only carried four (or six)rounds. While the MGS doesn't carry as many rounds as an Abrams, it does carry alot more that the old M151/M40RR system.

As for using the 105 as an anti-sniper weapon, I recalled during some of the fighting in Iraq were an Abrams used it's 120 to take out a sniper in a hotel. While it didn't take down the building, it did put a stop to the sniping that was coming out of that location. When all the troops that are pinned down only have .223 cal rounds, a 120 or 105 is not over kill, that's just using what you have to get the job done.

My 2 cents,
Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

Hellfish6

Why wouldn't a 90mm gun or an old M101/M102 howitzer duct taped to the roof be better than the M68? I mean 18 rounds is nothing. The South African Ratel-90, the spiritual ancestor of the MGS, was able to carry something like 300 rounds of 90mm ammo if it needed to, and a 90mm is still effective against T-55s. Hell, the new Cockerill guns and ammo might be even more effective.

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

I've lost count how many time either a 90mm low pressure or 75mm high pressure light gun 'almost' made it into the U.S. inventory. But for 20+ years now the 'Holy Grail' at the Pentagon has been to 'fit a low recoil version of the standard 105mm tank gun onto a light chassis. Its been the so long, as a matter of fact, that now that the Grail quest has been reached the poor 105mm gun is now obsolscent and any remaining 105mm ammo stocks are out of date!

Neil_Baumgardner

- Hellfish6

Why wouldn't a 90mm gun or an old M101/M102 howitzer duct taped to the roof be better than the M68? I mean 18 rounds is nothing. The South African Ratel-90, the spiritual ancestor of the MGS, was able to carry something like 300 rounds of 90mm ammo if it needed to, and a 90mm is still effective against T-55s. Hell, the new Cockerill guns and ammo might be even more effective.

Two reasons:
1) Primary mission is bunker busting & anti-personnel. 90mm rounds couldnt do well enough for the former.
2) For the secondary mission of killing tanks, the threat requirement was T--62 level (this was publicly stated & known), not T-55. AFAIK, 90mm also had some difficulty with this. Dont believe a howitzer could...

Neil

Dontos

Buzzed by there today, set-up has begun. Should be a good event.

"'Elvis' Rolling Eyes

will be in the building all week..."

Anyone else planning on attending, stop by 'our' exhibit and say hi.

Don

Joe_D

Neil,
The Army has pretty much stopped buying the older HEAT round (M830) for the newer MPAT (M830A1) and HE-OR (M908) when it comes to the 120mm. I'm not to familiar with the MGS so correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the ammunition planned for it also going to be combustible cartridge similar to the what the M1 has. The above mentioned rounds actually use a lot less explosives compared to a standard HEAT round but are far more effective as both AT and bunker busting respectively (Saboted Heat Round). I would imagine the HE round for the MGS would be a 105mm version of these two rounds. The old M456,A1 and A2 are pretty old stuff design wise.

Joe D

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

I think I read somewhere the M830A1 round was to have the steel casing - the news release said they were to be steel so be more robust for handling in the autoloader, but the writer may have been confused. Old U.S. 105 rounds have had steel casings for decades. I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that the only real difference between the M830 and M830A1 rounds was the later round met modern safety standards.

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big