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