±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 605
Total: 605
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Photo Gallery
02: Member Screenshots
03: Photo Gallery
04: Member Screenshots
05: Photo Gallery
06: Community Forums
07: Photo Gallery
08: Home
09: Community Forums
10: Community Forums
11: Photo Gallery
12: Home
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Your Account
16: Home
17: Downloads
18: Community Forums
19: Statistics
20: Downloads
21: Downloads
22: Photo Gallery
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Your Account
26: Home
27: Community Forums
28: Downloads
29: Photo Gallery
30: Community Forums
31: Home
32: Photo Gallery
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Home
38: Home
39: Community Forums
40: Home
41: Community Forums
42: Downloads
43: Downloads
44: Community Forums
45: Home
46: Photo Gallery
47: Community Forums
48: Statistics
49: Home
50: Community Forums
51: Photo Gallery
52: Community Forums
53: Home
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Member Screenshots
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Downloads
60: Home
61: Statistics
62: Member Screenshots
63: Home
64: Community Forums
65: Downloads
66: Community Forums
67: Downloads
68: Community Forums
69: News
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Member Screenshots
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: News Archive
76: Member Screenshots
77: Member Screenshots
78: Community Forums
79: Home
80: Member Screenshots
81: Home
82: Member Screenshots
83: Member Screenshots
84: Downloads
85: Member Screenshots
86: Photo Gallery
87: Member Screenshots
88: Statistics
89: Photo Gallery
90: Member Screenshots
91: Home
92: Community Forums
93: Community Forums
94: Downloads
95: Home
96: Home
97: Photo Gallery
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Photo Gallery
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Community Forums
105: Home
106: Community Forums
107: Your Account
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: News
113: Home
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Member Screenshots
117: Community Forums
118: Home
119: Community Forums
120: Photo Gallery
121: News Archive
122: Community Forums
123: Home
124: Community Forums
125: Home
126: Photo Gallery
127: Community Forums
128: Home
129: Downloads
130: Home
131: Home
132: Home
133: Home
134: Home
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Community Forums
138: Downloads
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Member Screenshots
143: Member Screenshots
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Community Forums
148: Home
149: Community Forums
150: Photo Gallery
151: Community Forums
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Community Forums
155: Downloads
156: Downloads
157: Photo Gallery
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Photo Gallery
161: Community Forums
162: Downloads
163: Community Forums
164: Statistics
165: Community Forums
166: Downloads
167: Community Forums
168: Home
169: Community Forums
170: Photo Gallery
171: Community Forums
172: Member Screenshots
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Downloads
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Home
183: Home
184: Community Forums
185: Photo Gallery
186: News
187: Community Forums
188: Community Forums
189: Photo Gallery
190: Photo Gallery
191: Community Forums
192: Photo Gallery
193: Home
194: Home
195: Photo Gallery
196: Home
197: Community Forums
198: Your Account
199: Community Forums
200: Community Forums
201: Community Forums
202: Photo Gallery
203: Photo Gallery
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Community Forums
207: Photo Gallery
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: Home
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Home
214: Home
215: Home
216: Home
217: Home
218: Home
219: Home
220: Home
221: Home
222: Community Forums
223: Home
224: Photo Gallery
225: Member Screenshots
226: Statistics
227: Community Forums
228: Home
229: Community Forums
230: Member Screenshots
231: Member Screenshots
232: Member Screenshots
233: Member Screenshots
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Downloads
238: Member Screenshots
239: Member Screenshots
240: Community Forums
241: Member Screenshots
242: Downloads
243: Photo Gallery
244: Community Forums
245: Home
246: Community Forums
247: Statistics
248: Home
249: Community Forums
250: Home
251: Downloads
252: Community Forums
253: Home
254: Community Forums
255: Community Forums
256: Home
257: Downloads
258: Community Forums
259: Home
260: Home
261: Home
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Downloads
265: Member Screenshots
266: Member Screenshots
267: Community Forums
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Downloads
271: Community Forums
272: Community Forums
273: Community Forums
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: Member Screenshots
277: Community Forums
278: Community Forums
279: Community Forums
280: Photo Gallery
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Community Forums
285: Community Forums
286: Downloads
287: Community Forums
288: Community Forums
289: Home
290: Home
291: Member Screenshots
292: Community Forums
293: Home
294: Home
295: Home
296: Community Forums
297: Photo Gallery
298: Photo Gallery
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Member Screenshots
304: Home
305: Community Forums
306: Community Forums
307: Community Forums
308: Photo Gallery
309: Photo Gallery
310: Member Screenshots
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Photo Gallery
314: Community Forums
315: Photo Gallery
316: Downloads
317: Community Forums
318: News Archive
319: Community Forums
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Photo Gallery
323: Community Forums
324: Community Forums
325: Home
326: Community Forums
327: Community Forums
328: Community Forums
329: Home
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Photo Gallery
333: Community Forums
334: Home
335: Community Forums
336: Community Forums
337: Community Forums
338: Community Forums
339: Member Screenshots
340: Home
341: Member Screenshots
342: Community Forums
343: Home
344: Home
345: Community Forums
346: Community Forums
347: Community Forums
348: Member Screenshots
349: Home
350: Home
351: Community Forums
352: Home
353: Downloads
354: Home
355: Home
356: Community Forums
357: Downloads
358: Community Forums
359: Photo Gallery
360: Community Forums
361: Home
362: Photo Gallery
363: Member Screenshots
364: Community Forums
365: Home
366: Community Forums
367: Community Forums
368: Community Forums
369: Community Forums
370: Community Forums
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Home
375: Photo Gallery
376: Community Forums
377: Community Forums
378: Photo Gallery
379: Community Forums
380: Home
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Home
385: Community Forums
386: Community Forums
387: Home
388: Downloads
389: Home
390: Photo Gallery
391: Home
392: Member Screenshots
393: Home
394: Community Forums
395: Community Forums
396: Home
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Community Forums
400: Home
401: Community Forums
402: Community Forums
403: Home
404: Downloads
405: Community Forums
406: Community Forums
407: Member Screenshots
408: Community Forums
409: Home
410: Community Forums
411: Photo Gallery
412: Photo Gallery
413: Home
414: Community Forums
415: Statistics
416: Community Forums
417: Community Forums
418: Community Forums
419: Home
420: Home
421: Photo Gallery
422: Downloads
423: Community Forums
424: Home
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Downloads
430: Community Forums
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Community Forums
434: Community Forums
435: Photo Gallery
436: Your Account
437: Community Forums
438: Community Forums
439: Photo Gallery
440: Community Forums
441: Community Forums
442: Downloads
443: Community Forums
444: Community Forums
445: Community Forums
446: Photo Gallery
447: Community Forums
448: Community Forums
449: Downloads
450: Home
451: Community Forums
452: Community Forums
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Photo Gallery
456: Photo Gallery
457: Downloads
458: Community Forums
459: Member Screenshots
460: Community Forums
461: Downloads
462: Community Forums
463: Photo Gallery
464: Home
465: Community Forums
466: Downloads
467: Member Screenshots
468: Community Forums
469: Member Screenshots
470: Community Forums
471: Community Forums
472: Photo Gallery
473: Community Forums
474: News Archive
475: Community Forums
476: Community Forums
477: Community Forums
478: Community Forums
479: Home
480: Community Forums
481: Community Forums
482: Community Forums
483: Community Forums
484: Photo Gallery
485: Community Forums
486: Downloads
487: Photo Gallery
488: Photo Gallery
489: Photo Gallery
490: Home
491: Home
492: Community Forums
493: Member Screenshots
494: Community Forums
495: Photo Gallery
496: Community Forums
497: Community Forums
498: Photo Gallery
499: Photo Gallery
500: Community Forums
501: Community Forums
502: Community Forums
503: Community Forums
504: Community Forums
505: Your Account
506: Community Forums
507: Community Forums
508: Community Forums
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Community Forums
512: Photo Gallery
513: Home
514: Community Forums
515: Community Forums
516: Community Forums
517: Photo Gallery
518: Photo Gallery
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Photo Gallery
522: Home
523: Community Forums
524: Community Forums
525: Photo Gallery
526: Photo Gallery
527: Community Forums
528: Community Forums
529: Community Forums
530: Member Screenshots
531: Member Screenshots
532: Member Screenshots
533: Downloads
534: News
535: Home
536: Home
537: Home
538: Home
539: Home
540: Community Forums
541: Community Forums
542: Home
543: Community Forums
544: Home
545: Home
546: Community Forums
547: Home
548: Home
549: Community Forums
550: Your Account
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Community Forums
554: Home
555: Home
556: Your Account
557: Statistics
558: Community Forums
559: Photo Gallery
560: Photo Gallery
561: Your Account
562: Photo Gallery
563: Community Forums
564: Home
565: Community Forums
566: Community Forums
567: Community Forums
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Community Forums
571: Community Forums
572: Photo Gallery
573: Community Forums
574: Community Forums
575: Community Forums
576: Community Forums
577: Community Forums
578: Community Forums
579: Photo Gallery
580: Community Forums
581: Community Forums
582: Home
583: Photo Gallery
584: Community Forums
585: Community Forums
586: Home
587: Home
588: Member Screenshots
589: Member Screenshots
590: Home
591: Photo Gallery
592: Community Forums
593: Home
594: Photo Gallery
595: Member Screenshots
596: Community Forums
597: Home
598: Community Forums
599: Community Forums
600: Downloads
601: Community Forums
602: Home
603: Community Forums
604: Home
605: 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: 2068
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: 2068
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: 2068
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