Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]Katarn wrote:50 caliber fire penetrates IFV's like the LAV25, a 120mm or 25/30mm round, heat or sabot wouldn't give a lick about it.

If this is true, why do they bother with armor on personal carriers?????
Might as well attach a gun to a bus or a truck. Would do the same job much cheaper..

I dont think it matters much what round a modern MBT fires at the APC. It will be toast anyway....

All true. They put armor on the APC's and IFV's to protect its occupants from small arms fire and provide some protection against mines and rockets. Also keep in mind that although rockets and small arms are easy to carry and shoot, .50 caliber weapons must be mounted on vehicles or emplaced, which is why APC's and the like don't need to be armored to withstand them. In the current theatre against an insurgency, it is unlikely that they would get ahold of these weapons nevermind use them effectively.

The Rifled Cannon of the Challenger will be gone @ 2009-2010.
Its ineffective against modern armor.
The Rifled Cannon has a good long range ability, but not enough power.

The new Cannon will be the same like the one of Abrams and Leopard 2 manufactured under License by Rheinmetall Ger.

The Heat Round in RL are very effective @ long Range distances, cause it dont needs kenetic energy to penetrate Armor.

it also depends on what kind of sabot round you're using, depleted uranium rounds, everyone is dead. and if i do recal a light AT round kills an APC no problem so if your HAT rounds arnt killing theres a problem either with your shooting or your comp.

PetetheSweet wrote:The Rifled Cannon of the Challenger will be gone @ 2009-2010.
Its ineffective against modern armor.
The Rifled Cannon has a good long range ability, but not enough power.

The new Cannon will be the same like the one of Abrams and Leopard 2 manufactured under License by Rheinmetall Ger.

The Heat Round in RL are very effective @ long Range distances, cause it dont needs kenetic energy to penetrate Armor.

actually it's not really the power thats the issue, its that since regular tank shells are no longer well...regular theres no need for an accurate shot of one. most commonly used shells these days are sabot rounds which fire better without rifling.

Bringerof_D wrote:it also depends on what kind of sabot round you're using, depleted uranium rounds, everyone is dead. and if i do recal a light AT round kills an APC no problem so if your HAT rounds arnt killing theres a problem either with your shooting or your comp.

If a SABOT round goes though a vehicle, everyone in it wont die... And im talking about HEAT rounds in tank, not the HAT kit.

So why does the Challenger with its ineffective rifled barrel have one of, if not the longest tank to tank kill in history ?

Hyper-velocity APFSDS rounds have significantly increased the leathal range of tank fires, and combined with improvements in tank gunnery this has meant that combat engagement ranges have been dramatically increased. During Operation Desert Storm a British Army Challenger tank achieve the longest range confirmed tank-to-tank kill at 5100 meters or 5.1km with an rifled 120mm APFSDS 'Charm' depleted uranium round.

SOURCE

Army Technology - APFSDS - Ammunition

Scroll down to LONG RANGE TANK GUNNERY

Answers?

The British Challenger 2 is getting a new barrel, not for lack of performance, but to simplify the supply chain, and allow use of NATO STANDARD ammunition, ie then we can scrounge it from our American Cousins, as our Governments to CHEAP to pay for our own

lord rifle wrote:If a AP Saibot round hits an armored vehicle or a tank Im pretty sure it would cause massive dustruction and shrapnel, killing or horribley wound the occupants. I am not in the military but the forces and hard materials involved would cause alot of damage even though it does not 'explode'

actually, if the sabot round is made out of Depleted uranium instead of steel (I think they're also made out of tungsten carbide), it does burn. the pyrophoric nature of Uranium and Plutonium cause it to explode when it comes in contact with oxygen. sort of like white phosphorus, but I'm pretty sure it's more flammable.

The round is not HEAT its is HEI-T (High Explosive insendary- Tracer) I think thats when the other shell is in the tanks

Im talking about tank shells here. Not APC rounds.

GR34 wrote:The round is not HEAT its is HEI-T (High Explosive insendary- Tracer) I think thats when the other shell is in the tanks

Ok NVM I just checked training mod and it is HEAT-MP-T my bad I got them confused

Feuerwaffen wrote:HEATs not anti infantry. Its another shell to be used against armor. It spins through the air and when it hits a target it sends hot molten steel in the armor. I think to the best of my knowledge?

A HEAT round is a multi staged explosive warhead used to penetrate armor. HEAT rounds don't spin they just punch through with the explosive.

IAJTHOMAS wrote:Well that would depend on whether the barrel is smooth bore or rifled I suppose?

All NATO Tanks Have a smooth bore main gun. The Challenger is still getting ported over to my knowledge but the Abrams, Challenger 2, and Leopard 2 all have the same gun.

Waaah_Wah wrote:If a SABOT round goes though a vehicle, everyone in it wont die...

If a SABOT round hit an APC the Crew would be toast even if it went threw and threw the impact of the round pushes shrapnel into the vehicle. And the kinetic heat from the impact would probably cause problems also.

IMO any tank round that hit an APC would take it out of action. If the APC was lucky the crew could live and bail. In game I've never seen an APC survive a tank hit very long. So I think the system is fine as is.

Thermis wrote: All NATO Tanks Have a smooth bore main gun. The Challenger is still getting ported over to my knowledge but the Abrams, Challenger 2, and Leopard 2 all have the same gun.

Nope, the Challenger 2 still uses the L30A1 Rifled gun as its main armament. The Abrams carries the Riemenatall L44, while the Leo 2 carries the L55 (a longer, more powerful version of the same gun)

[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:Nope, the Challenger 2 still uses the L30A1 Rifled gun as its main armament. The Abrams carries the Riemenatall L44, while the Leo 2 carries the L55 (a longer, more powerful version of the same gun)

This man is correct. Us = Rifled, everyone else = smoothbore.

bobs all ways right hes like a human Wikipedia for all things WAR

Thermis wrote:If a SABOT round hit an APC the Crew would be toast even if it went threw and threw the impact of the round pushes shrapnel into the vehicle. And the kinetic heat from the impact would probably cause problems also.

IMO any tank round that hit an APC would take it out of action. If the APC was lucky the crew could live and bail. In game I've never seen an APC survive a tank hit very long. So I think the system is fine as is.

agreed.

ahaha true that jack

[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:Nope, the Challenger 2 still uses the L30A1 Rifled gun as its main armament. The Abrams carries the Riemenatall L44, while the Leo 2 carries the L55 (a longer, more powerful version of the same gun)

It's your guy's tank so I trust you to know. I had heard down the pipe that you guys were getting a smooth version. The L30A1 is produced by Rheinmetall if I'm not mistaken.