±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 515
Total: 515
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Home
02: Community Forums
03: Photo Gallery
04: Photo Gallery
05: Photo Gallery
06: Community Forums
07: Community Forums
08: Community Forums
09: Home
10: Photo Gallery
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Statistics
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Downloads
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Home
24: Home
25: Community Forums
26: Community Forums
27: Photo Gallery
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: Community Forums
31: Statistics
32: Home
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Photo Gallery
36: Community Forums
37: Home
38: Community Forums
39: Photo Gallery
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Photo Gallery
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Photo Gallery
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Home
54: Community Forums
55: Statistics
56: Photo Gallery
57: CPGlang
58: Photo Gallery
59: Photo Gallery
60: Photo Gallery
61: Photo Gallery
62: Community Forums
63: Home
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Home
77: Community Forums
78: Downloads
79: Downloads
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Community Forums
83: Home
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: Photo Gallery
92: Photo Gallery
93: Community Forums
94: Community Forums
95: Member Screenshots
96: Community Forums
97: Community Forums
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Downloads
104: Community Forums
105: Community Forums
106: Community Forums
107: Photo Gallery
108: Community Forums
109: Home
110: Member Screenshots
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Photo Gallery
114: Community Forums
115: Community Forums
116: Photo Gallery
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Downloads
122: Community Forums
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Community Forums
126: Home
127: Community Forums
128: Community Forums
129: Downloads
130: Downloads
131: Community Forums
132: Home
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Home
136: CPGlang
137: Community Forums
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Home
141: Photo Gallery
142: Photo Gallery
143: Community Forums
144: Home
145: Photo Gallery
146: Photo Gallery
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Your Account
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Downloads
155: Photo Gallery
156: Community Forums
157: Photo Gallery
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Downloads
162: Downloads
163: Photo Gallery
164: Photo Gallery
165: Photo Gallery
166: Photo Gallery
167: Community Forums
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Member Screenshots
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Photo Gallery
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Photo Gallery
180: Community Forums
181: Statistics
182: Community Forums
183: Community Forums
184: Home
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Community Forums
188: Community Forums
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Photo Gallery
193: Community Forums
194: Home
195: Home
196: Community Forums
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Community Forums
200: Photo Gallery
201: Photo Gallery
202: Community Forums
203: Photo Gallery
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Photo Gallery
207: Community Forums
208: Downloads
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Photo Gallery
214: CPGlang
215: Home
216: Community Forums
217: Statistics
218: Photo Gallery
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Photo Gallery
223: Community Forums
224: Community Forums
225: Community Forums
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Downloads
229: Community Forums
230: Photo Gallery
231: Photo Gallery
232: Home
233: Photo Gallery
234: Home
235: Photo Gallery
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: News
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Community Forums
242: Home
243: Home
244: Downloads
245: Home
246: Home
247: Community Forums
248: Community Forums
249: Community Forums
250: Photo Gallery
251: Photo Gallery
252: Photo Gallery
253: Community Forums
254: Photo Gallery
255: Home
256: Photo Gallery
257: Community Forums
258: Community Forums
259: Home
260: Community Forums
261: Home
262: Community Forums
263: Photo Gallery
264: Photo Gallery
265: Community Forums
266: Community Forums
267: Community Forums
268: Home
269: Community Forums
270: Community Forums
271: Community Forums
272: Photo Gallery
273: Home
274: Community Forums
275: Downloads
276: Downloads
277: Community Forums
278: Community Forums
279: Member Screenshots
280: Community Forums
281: Community Forums
282: Photo Gallery
283: Community Forums
284: Community Forums
285: Community Forums
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Community Forums
289: Community Forums
290: Community Forums
291: Community Forums
292: Community Forums
293: Your Account
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Photo Gallery
304: Downloads
305: Home
306: Community Forums
307: Home
308: Downloads
309: Photo Gallery
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Community Forums
314: Downloads
315: Downloads
316: Downloads
317: Photo Gallery
318: Photo Gallery
319: Community Forums
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Community Forums
323: Community Forums
324: Photo Gallery
325: Community Forums
326: Photo Gallery
327: Downloads
328: Community Forums
329: Community Forums
330: Community Forums
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Community Forums
334: Community Forums
335: Community Forums
336: Community Forums
337: Photo Gallery
338: Community Forums
339: Community Forums
340: Home
341: Home
342: Community Forums
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Downloads
346: Community Forums
347: Community Forums
348: Photo Gallery
349: Community Forums
350: Home
351: Member Screenshots
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Member Screenshots
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Home
359: Community Forums
360: Community Forums
361: Community Forums
362: Community Forums
363: Community Forums
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Community Forums
367: Community Forums
368: Community Forums
369: Community Forums
370: Community Forums
371: Photo Gallery
372: Community Forums
373: Downloads
374: Community Forums
375: Community Forums
376: Community Forums
377: Community Forums
378: Downloads
379: Community Forums
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Home
383: Community Forums
384: Photo Gallery
385: Community Forums
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Photo Gallery
389: Photo Gallery
390: Home
391: Home
392: CPGlang
393: Photo Gallery
394: Community Forums
395: Home
396: Community Forums
397: Community Forums
398: Community Forums
399: Home
400: Community Forums
401: Home
402: Community Forums
403: Community Forums
404: Community Forums
405: Photo Gallery
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Home
410: Community Forums
411: Home
412: News
413: Community Forums
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Community Forums
418: Community Forums
419: Community Forums
420: Statistics
421: Community Forums
422: Community Forums
423: Community Forums
424: Community Forums
425: Community Forums
426: Photo Gallery
427: Photo Gallery
428: Community Forums
429: Community Forums
430: Community Forums
431: Downloads
432: Photo Gallery
433: Community Forums
434: Community Forums
435: Member Screenshots
436: Home
437: Home
438: Home
439: Home
440: Community Forums
441: Community Forums
442: Community Forums
443: Your Account
444: Home
445: Community Forums
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Community Forums
449: Community Forums
450: Community Forums
451: Community Forums
452: Statistics
453: Community Forums
454: Community Forums
455: Community Forums
456: Photo Gallery
457: Community Forums
458: Photo Gallery
459: Community Forums
460: Photo Gallery
461: Your Account
462: Photo Gallery
463: Member Screenshots
464: Downloads
465: Community Forums
466: Community Forums
467: Community Forums
468: Community Forums
469: Community Forums
470: Photo Gallery
471: Home
472: Photo Gallery
473: Photo Gallery
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Community Forums
477: Home
478: Community Forums
479: Photo Gallery
480: Home
481: Photo Gallery
482: Community Forums
483: Community Forums
484: Home
485: Community Forums
486: Member Screenshots
487: Community Forums
488: Community Forums
489: Community Forums
490: Home
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Photo Gallery
494: Community Forums
495: Community Forums
496: Community Forums
497: Community Forums
498: Statistics
499: Community Forums
500: Your Account
501: Photo Gallery
502: Community Forums
503: Photo Gallery
504: Community Forums
505: Photo Gallery
506: Community Forums
507: Community Forums
508: Photo Gallery
509: Community Forums
510: Photo Gallery
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Community Forums
514: Community Forums
515: 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: 2066
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: 2066
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: 2066
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