±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: 428
Total: 428
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Downloads
03: Home
04: Community Forums
05: Home
06: Photo Gallery
07: Community Forums
08: Home
09: Home
10: Community Forums
11: Home
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Home
15: Community Forums
16: Home
17: Member Screenshots
18: Community Forums
19: Home
20: Home
21: Member Screenshots
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Photo Gallery
26: Photo Gallery
27: Downloads
28: Home
29: Home
30: Home
31: Photo Gallery
32: Community Forums
33: Photo Gallery
34: Home
35: Member Screenshots
36: Member Screenshots
37: Home
38: Home
39: Home
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Photo Gallery
43: Home
44: News Archive
45: Downloads
46: Member Screenshots
47: Home
48: Community Forums
49: Member Screenshots
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Home
54: Member Screenshots
55: Community Forums
56: Member Screenshots
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Your Account
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Downloads
63: Home
64: Home
65: Home
66: Home
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Photo Gallery
70: Community Forums
71: Member Screenshots
72: Member Screenshots
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Photo Gallery
79: Community Forums
80: Home
81: Photo Gallery
82: Community Forums
83: Home
84: Home
85: Home
86: Community Forums
87: Photo Gallery
88: Home
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Home
93: Downloads
94: Community Forums
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Home
105: Community Forums
106: Community Forums
107: Home
108: Community Forums
109: Member Screenshots
110: Community Forums
111: Home
112: Community Forums
113: Member Screenshots
114: Home
115: Photo Gallery
116: Home
117: Community Forums
118: Home
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Home
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: Community Forums
125: Community Forums
126: News Archive
127: News Archive
128: Community Forums
129: Home
130: Home
131: Home
132: Member Screenshots
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Community Forums
136: Photo Gallery
137: Community Forums
138: Community Forums
139: Home
140: Home
141: Home
142: Downloads
143: Photo Gallery
144: Home
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Home
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Home
151: Home
152: Photo Gallery
153: Home
154: Community Forums
155: Home
156: Home
157: Home
158: News Archive
159: Home
160: Member Screenshots
161: Home
162: Home
163: Home
164: Home
165: Home
166: Member Screenshots
167: Community Forums
168: Home
169: Home
170: News Archive
171: Photo Gallery
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: News Archive
176: Home
177: Home
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Photo Gallery
181: Community Forums
182: Member Screenshots
183: Community Forums
184: Member Screenshots
185: Photo Gallery
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: Photo Gallery
189: Your Account
190: Community Forums
191: Home
192: Home
193: Home
194: Community Forums
195: Downloads
196: Home
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Community Forums
200: Member Screenshots
201: Downloads
202: Member Screenshots
203: Photo Gallery
204: Home
205: Home
206: Photo Gallery
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Member Screenshots
210: Home
211: Home
212: Photo Gallery
213: Member Screenshots
214: News Archive
215: Home
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Home
223: Community Forums
224: Home
225: Home
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Member Screenshots
229: News Archive
230: Photo Gallery
231: Community Forums
232: Home
233: Home
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: Home
239: Community Forums
240: News Archive
241: Downloads
242: Downloads
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Downloads
247: Community Forums
248: Photo Gallery
249: News Archive
250: Home
251: Home
252: Community Forums
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Home
256: News
257: Community Forums
258: Home
259: Statistics
260: Community Forums
261: Home
262: Community Forums
263: Home
264: Community Forums
265: Home
266: Community Forums
267: Community Forums
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Community Forums
271: Home
272: Home
273: Home
274: Community Forums
275: Home
276: Home
277: Community Forums
278: Photo Gallery
279: Home
280: News Archive
281: Home
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Home
285: Community Forums
286: News Archive
287: Community Forums
288: Photo Gallery
289: Community Forums
290: Home
291: Home
292: Community Forums
293: Home
294: Home
295: Community Forums
296: Home
297: Photo Gallery
298: Community Forums
299: Home
300: Downloads
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Photo Gallery
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Home
307: Home
308: Community Forums
309: Member Screenshots
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Member Screenshots
313: Home
314: Home
315: Home
316: Photo Gallery
317: Community Forums
318: Home
319: Member Screenshots
320: Member Screenshots
321: Home
322: Community Forums
323: Member Screenshots
324: Home
325: Community Forums
326: Community Forums
327: Home
328: Community Forums
329: Photo Gallery
330: Photo Gallery
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Community Forums
334: Community Forums
335: Home
336: Member Screenshots
337: Photo Gallery
338: Home
339: Community Forums
340: Home
341: Community Forums
342: Photo Gallery
343: News Archive
344: Photo Gallery
345: Community Forums
346: Home
347: News Archive
348: News Archive
349: Member Screenshots
350: Photo Gallery
351: Home
352: Photo Gallery
353: News Archive
354: Member Screenshots
355: Photo Gallery
356: Home
357: Home
358: Home
359: Photo Gallery
360: Home
361: Home
362: Community Forums
363: Member Screenshots
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Downloads
367: Home
368: Community Forums
369: Photo Gallery
370: Home
371: Home
372: News Archive
373: Community Forums
374: Community Forums
375: News
376: Community Forums
377: Community Forums
378: Home
379: Member Screenshots
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: News Archive
383: Member Screenshots
384: Home
385: Community Forums
386: Community Forums
387: Downloads
388: News Archive
389: Community Forums
390: Home
391: News Archive
392: Community Forums
393: Downloads
394: Member Screenshots
395: Community Forums
396: Member Screenshots
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Downloads
400: Community Forums
401: Home
402: Community Forums
403: Home
404: Community Forums
405: Community Forums
406: News Archive
407: Community Forums
408: Photo Gallery
409: Home
410: Contact
411: Home
412: Home
413: Home
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Downloads
417: Community Forums
418: News Archive
419: Community Forums
420: Home
421: Home
422: Photo Gallery
423: Home
424: Member Screenshots
425: Community Forums
426: Home
427: Community Forums
428: 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