• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

The problem is, it’s not like belly-attack devices (be they improvised or conventional) aren’t prolific either, and a top-attack device like an EFP is more than capable of dumping enough energy into the lower hull to set off ammunition stored there.

Hull stowage made perfect sense when our principle CONOPS was to sit hull down in a scrape, and pump as many rounds as possible into the advancing hordes, whilst they flung back KE and CE in the same direction. I think those advantages have now been eroded, especially when considering the lethality advantage that the smoothbore gives us (if used with the right ammunition).
It is a probability game, Its impossible to protect against everything. I imagine that airbust HE fuzed Ammo a la 40 CTA would be high up on every tankies wish list, ideal for getting rid of pesky AT teams at distance. Regretful that the fall of the Soviet Union led to the effective dismantling of UK armoured development capability, peace dividend is coming back to haunt now.

Also consider the other key factor is battlefield survivability - i.e. which option is likely to get you putting rounds into targets most promptly - and consistently - during a battlefield mission...
That is definately a good option!
 
In chally - correct me if I'm wrong, guys, the apfsds rounds are stowed in the turret - easier and might be quicker to get to than hesh stowed below the turret ring. M1 chaps can reckon on 7-8 seconds to load, fire, wait for gun to come back into battery and repeat. With chally, you're probably 3-4 seconds more than that. Rates may vary according to crew tiredness etc.
 
Last edited:
In chally - correct me if I'm wrong, guys, the apfsds rounds are stowed in the turret - easier and might be quicker to get to than hesh stowed below the turret ring. M1 chaps can reckon on 7-8 seconds to load, fire, wait for gun to come back into battery and repeat. With chally, you're probably 3-4 seconds off that. Rates may vary according to crew tiredness etc.
Not terrible, but a tad bit slower. I assume the HESH rounds would be a bit more of a pain to get to? Sorry for the ignorance never been inside CR2.
 
You can do it in 4 seconds apparently, however thats not sustainable.
Iirc, there are stowage bins below the turret ring that you can store propellant and hesh in. I've seen practice rounds stored in turret racks, but I don't think this is operational practice as it should be.
I'm.hoping there's a chally guru who will step forward on this !
 
You can do it in 4 seconds apparently, however thats not sustainable.
Iirc, there are stowage bins below the turret ring that you can store propellant and hesh in. I've seen practice rounds stored in turret racks, but I don't think this is operational practice as it should be.
I'm.hoping there's a chally guru who will step forward on this !
Hardly a guru, but 4 seconds seems possible without being naughty with propellant handling.

One thing to note is that the loader can collect a KE projectile while the gunner is laying on target, which you shouldn’t do with a one-piece round, as that would involve exposed propellant in the fighting compartment.
A further consideration is that each piece is lighter than a complete round, so less fatiguing to move around.
 
Challenger 2 crews can fire roughly 3 times as fast as a Chieftain crew........on my commanders course we were in Chieftains due to a lack of Ch1. CH2 prototypes were firing next to us and were getting off three rounds for our one. Bear in mind that out tanks were crewed by experienced Corporals.
 
What made the difference?
Without wishing to put words in OJG’s mouth, I’d guess the crew were quicker because the ‘hunter-killer’ capability built into the tank enabled the commander and gunner to integrate their actions much closer than before, and allow the commander to tee up the next target while all that ”Firing now...boom...woosh...bang...target stop” pish was happening...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hardly a guru, but 4 seconds seems possible without being naughty with propellant handling.

One thing to note is that the loader can collect a KE projectile while the gunner is laying on target, which you shouldn’t do with a one-piece round, as that would involve exposed propellant in the fighting compartment.
A further consideration is that each piece is lighter than a complete round, so less fatiguing to move around.

The automatic magazine posited for a CR2 smoothbore upgrade can feed rounds at 15 rpm.
 
Without wishing to put words in OJG’s mouth, I’d guess the crew were quicker because the ‘hunter-killer’ capability built into the tank enabled the commander and gunner to integrate their actions much closer than before, and allow the commander to tee up the next target while all that ”Firing now...boom...woosh...bang...target stop” pish was happening...
Wait? the cheiftian didn't have Hunter-killer? I thought every tank had that since we invented it on the Conqueror?

The automatic magazine posited for a CR2 smoothbore upgrade can feed rounds at 15 rpm.
Go on then, where will you put this rack?
 
Without wishing to put words in OJG’s mouth, I’d guess the crew were quicker because the ‘hunter-killer’ capability built into the tank enabled the commander and gunner to integrate their actions much closer than before, and allow the commander to tee up the next target while all that ”Firing now...boom...woosh...bang...target stop” pish was happening.
Thank you. I’d misunderstood as the speed of loading, and couldn’t see why there’d be such a big difference.
 
How many rounds are " enough" for a tank to carry?
Back in the mists of time I recall being told that the average lifespan of a tank in contact was about 4 minutes, if it was lucky.
Is that what determines the ammunition quantity, or is the quantity just a random number based on stowage space?
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
How many rounds are " enough" for a tank to carry?
Back in the mists of time I recall being told that the average lifespan of a tank in contact was about 4 minutes, if it was lucky.
Is that what determines the ammunition quantity, or is the quantity just a random number based on stowage space?
Depends on where, how and who you're fighting. One of the design drivers for Merkava was (a) more ammunition than M60 or Centurion, (b) fast replen with as little vulnerability as possible. Hence the large number of rounds carried in the rear, accessed by the double doors to make refilling the racks as rapid as possible.

Now that, as with many other features of the Merkava, are very specific to Israeli experience, but in the limited data set of large-scale armoured warfare it's rare to find tankies complaining about having "too much ammunition", and stories circulate about crews using (sometimes hazardous) expedients to carry more than the official load of rounds.

The other factor is the types of ammunition available: if as well as fin and HEAT you've got interesting natures like airburst HE-FRAG, canister, GLATGM, smoke et cetera... how many of each do you need, and do you carry less APFSDS to make room?,
 

Latest Threads

Top