CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

You really are clueless aren’t you.
I see once more basic maths eludes you.

36 rounds of Smoothbore goes in a space @ 65” x 24” x 40” in the bustle.

you may post a picture of a 3 round charge bin to deminstrate how much space it wastes.
 
Im somewhat lost
Don't worry its Photex imagining things as far as I can tell.

Q1) Does 1 piece ammunition not require wet storage - logically it would seem to - I can see how the Bustle could perhaps do away with this, opting for venting a blast (blow out panels) rather than preventing it. but i would have thought hull storage (where applicable) would be wet.
There's two ways of protecting ammo. Wet storage, and armoured ammo bins. The latter has been tried and tested since WWII. In one variant of the Panzer IV they removed them to save production costs, Fires went up. The bins went back in fires went down. Equally Wet storage was only in Chieftain (and possibly Cr1) If memory serves Cr2 is armoured ammo bins.
We're also looking at different solutions to different stages of the problem
1: Armoured ammo bins: Stops the ammo getting set on fire.
2: Wet storage: retards the fire once it starts burning.
3: Blow off panels: Prevents the explosion caused by burning ammo from killing the crew.

It's pretty easy from a design standpoint to implement 1 and 3. Less to include 2.

Q2) How does 1 piece ammo take up less room - that seems counter intuitive - I would have thought the ability to cram smaller pieces in odd corners and the fact things like the kinetic darts are inert so dont need armoured bins, etc would be more space freindly.
It doesn't take up less space, its turps o'clock in the Photex design establishment.

You can add to that When you have circa 50 rounds of 2 piece ammunition and you enlarge the bustle significantly and have space for 40 rounds of 1 piece - that doesnt seem to be making the space saving case for 1 piece
Correct, however, I think in the case of the Cr2 RHM turret, you've gotten a little misled. I believe the turret has the same ammo storage, or at least very similar to the Leopard 2. So 15 fighting rounds behind the loader. With the rest secreted in the hull. I do not think that the entire bustle is ammo. My speculation is that most of the stuff in the enlarged bustle is small items moved from the hull to make room for the ammo.

Edit Q3 Could blow out panels replace wet storage n the hull?
Engineering wise its perfectly doable. However, there's a price you pay, as with all things in armoured design. You are sacrificing armour integrity by cutting whopping great big holes in it. In roof mounted blow off panels, that's not to bad, as most things hitting you on the turret roof are going through no matter what you do, and its quite hard to hit the roof without a big chunk of technology.
Side of the tank hull is a very different matter. Of course you can likely solve this by paying huge weight penalties, in a compromise. Why pay a massive weight cost to achieve current levels of protection, for rounds that are going to be out of the Line of fire anyway?
 
Last edited:
I see once more basic maths eludes you.

36 rounds of Smoothbore goes in a space @ 65” x 24” x 40” in the bustle.

you may post a picture of a 3 round charge bin to deminstrate how much space it wastes.
Question... well I have lots of them, but...
What do you have to prove that there's 36 rounds in the turret?

This still is from about 1min 10 seconds in the video posted earlier:


What does that look like to you? Well it looks a lot like the leopard 2 bustle rack:


Edit:
Curious, doesn't seem to be a door on the Cr2 RHM rack like one would expect. That seems to be a very simple and easy thing to include. So it maybe that they removed/didn't install it from the prototype for trials, or they've got something else in mind.
 
Last edited:
If you have bag charges you can fit two into the space that one unitary charge would take for HESH/HE, hence why they are semi-circular. There is no real protection for the propellant in the German/US/Israeli rounds, that's why they are either in an armoured bustle or in huge protective cases.
 
Question... well I have lots of them, but...
What do you have to prove that there's 36 rounds in the turret?

This still is from about 1min 10 seconds in the video posted earlier:


What does that look like to you? Well it looks a lot like the leopard 2 bustle rack:


Edit:
Curious, doesn't seem to be a door on the Cr2 RHM rack like one would expect. That seems to be a very simple and easy thing to include. So it maybe that they removed/didn't install it from the prototype for trials, or they've got something else in mind.
Pretty sure that is almost exactly what Leo 2 has, the edge of the door is visible-the red plate is on it's edge, it slides sideways on a track inside the bustle.
 
Question... well I have lots of them, but...
What do you have to prove that there's 36 rounds in the turret?

This still is from about 1min 10 seconds in the video posted earlier:


What does that look like to you? Well it looks a lot like the leopard 2 bustle rack:


Edit:
Curious, doesn't seem to be a door on the Cr2 RHM rack like one would expect. That seems to be a very simple and easy thing to include. So it maybe that they removed/didn't install it from the prototype for trials, or they've got something else in mind.
Rheinmetall have a line of business doing upgrades to Leopard 2 tanks. It would not be surprising if they were to base their proposals for the CR2 as closely as possible on what they already know about Leopard 2 tanks. Anything else would involve more R&D, testing, time, and money, all of which are in limited supply in this instance.
 
I see once more basic maths eludes you.

36 rounds of Smoothbore goes in a space @ 65” x 24” x 40” in the bustle.

you may post a picture of a 3 round charge bin to deminstrate how much space it wastes.
I’m feeling charitable, and in the mood for some fruitless elucidation:
1) how many 120mm smoothbore rounds would you be able to fit where the 3 round charge bin is? I‘d suggest none because the smoothbore rounds are longer
2) what makes you think that a smoothbore round is in any less need of protection than a bag charge? (Hint, they are just as vulnerable. Any that are in the fighting compartment will need protected stowage)
3) what makes you think that the charge bins on a CR2 are wet stowage? (They aren’t.)

So once again, everything you said was wrong.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
Have to say, no surprises or shocks, but I liked the delivery and the enthusiasm. And seeing them move parked cars in Copehill Down was good for a giggle...

While I'm often cynical about such things, I thought this was actually pretty well done.

Plus, I liked seeing a variant of the Berlin Brigade camo being revived.
 
1) how many 120mm smoothbore rounds would you be able to fit where the 3 round charge bin is? I‘d suggest none because the smoothbore rounds are longer
I was thinking about that only just now. An possible idea I came up with was to slope the smoothbore rounds. That way you might be able to get a couple of smoothbore rounds in the space of a charge bin. Of course there's then the question of offering the base up to the loader to replenish his fighting rack, and the Manual handling involved there.

How many charge bins are there at current in a hull of a Cr2?

Edit: This comes up on google as the Cr2 Ammo layout... although I have my suspicion its the Cr1.


If, and I stress that word, that's accurate you could delete the charge bin directly after of the turret centre, and lay some smoothbore rounds at an angle into the same space. Same applies for the two either side of the driver. Slant the rounds down and you could get a few in the same space.

Just thinking out loud how I'd approach the problem.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about that only just now. An possible idea I came up with was to slope the smoothbore rounds. That way you might be able to get a couple of smoothbore rounds in the space of a charge bin. Of course there's then the question of offering the base up to the loader to replenish his fighting rack, and the Manual handling involved there.

How many charge bins are there at current in a hull of a Cr2?

Edit: This comes up on google as the Cr2 Ammo layout... although I have my suspicion its the Cr1.


If, and I stress that word, that's accurate you could delete the charge bin directly after of the turret centre, and lay some smoothbore rounds at an angle into the same space. Same applies for the two either side of the driver. Slant the rounds down and you could get a few in the same space.

Just thinking out loud how I'd approach the problem.
The problem is, not only do you have to squeeze the buggers in somewhere, you also have to be able to get to them in a bit of a hurry without delivering Sciatica, 120mm, AFV Crewman!

Of course, I’m sure PhotEx will respond that it’s simple just to dispense with the human loader, and let the vending machine do it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Binary liquid propellant is the way forward........oh wait a minute ,that didn't work.
Do you have the injectors opposite, or at 90 deg angles to each other?

The very earliest Chieftain's were planned to have liquid propellent guns. But after five years work, firing 2-pounder, 17-pounder and 20-pounder, and constant rebuilds of the injectors, and trying mono, Bi and bulk loaded liquid propellent we gave it up as a bad idea.
Then in about the mid 1970's (I think?) someone in the US said, "Hold on, I've got a great idea! I wonder why no one has thought of this before?!"
That project ran for quite a number of years (1990's?) and got nowhere.

The problem is consistent regulated burning, and the internal ballistics.

The problem is, not only do you have to squeeze the buggers in somewhere, you also have to be able to get to them in a bit of a hurry without delivering Sciatica, 120mm, AFV Crewman!
Its the argument of fighting Vs replenishment rounds. The Leopard 2 has fifteen fighting rounds, then when that's gone, they have to traverse their turret 90 degree's to the right (or is it left) to allow the loader to replenish his fighting rounds from the replenishment rack. Its not something you're likely to be doing when you've got fin rounds whistling around your loaders hatch. At the worst, its reverse out of your firing position to turret down, then get on with it. So the urgency and getting to the rounds is more measured, and more of the crew can assist.
Plus, looking at the schematic above, I'd venture that the loader's not going to load from the charge bins beside the driver anyway.


Ok here's a bigger question. I wonder what missile we'll be firing down the tube. LAHAT is mentioned on the Wiki page, but I'm reluctant to accept that source.
 
I was thinking about that only just now. An possible idea I came up with was to slope the smoothbore rounds. That way you might be able to get a couple of smoothbore rounds in the space of a charge bin. Of course there's then the question of offering the base up to the loader to replenish his fighting rack, and the Manual handling involved there.

How many charge bins are there at current in a hull of a Cr2?

Edit: This comes up on google as the Cr2 Ammo layout... although I have my suspicion its the Cr1.


If, and I stress that word, that's accurate you could delete the charge bin directly after of the turret centre, and lay some smoothbore rounds at an angle into the same space. Same applies for the two either side of the driver. Slant the rounds down and you could get a few in the same space.

Just thinking out loud how I'd approach the problem.
I agree its a CR1 pic. CR2 doesn't use obturators or store ammo for the SMG. Looks like an earlier mark as it hasn't got the armoured charge bins.
 
Do we shoot n scoot or do a Canute ?
 
Then in about the mid 1970's (I think?) someone in the US said, "Hold on, I've got a great idea! I wonder why no one has thought of this before?!"
That project ran for quite a number of years (1990's?) and got nowhere.
There are parallels with other ammunition technologies
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top