Army Rumour Service

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

HE117

LE
DM11 is however a programmable round, so you can airburst it in fancy places. Thus it's more of a controllable smaller bang, which allows more selective targeting of soft targets. Want to blow up a room, not a house? We can do that.

From RHM's website:


Also, looking at the plans on the internet, it has if not a fragmentation sleeve, then a return of the old style Shrapnel round:


So if you've got a large group of badguys out in the open which you'd usually punt a HESH at, fire one of these, set the detoantion distance -10 meters (or what ever gets the best effect) and shotgun them in the face.
Yup... that will do the job... and it has the same profile as the HEAT round..

Trust Rheinmetall - my current favourite weapon designers..

On the matter of canister/case shot.. these have been played with on numerous occasions... the problem is that they do considerable damage to the barrel, and are the equivalent of several AP shot in terms of barrel wear. The equipment managers hate them and try to stop them being used..
 
Yup... that will do the job... and it has the same profile as the HEAT round..

Trust Rheinmetall - my current favourite weapon designers..

On the matter of canister/case shot.. these have been played with on numerous occasions... the problem is that they do considerable damage to the barrel, and are the equivalent of several AP shot in terms of barrel wear. The equipment managers hate them and try to stop them being used..

It’s the gunner’s version of calling for an FPF mission. Yes
 

tiv

LE
Try the P38 too.
Purchasing comission "No handed props or turbochargers"
Lockheed "But it will affect performance and handling"
"Yes, yes, but with the right TTPs our pilots will overcome that"
Fast forward
RAF pilot "It's got piss poor handling, awful one engine performance and useless at altitude"
Purchasing commission " erm, not what we need old boy"
Lockheed " your spec, your problem, pay us."
I've heard that story many times and decided to do a search. Tis true enough but if Lockheed P-38 exports is correct a certain, possibly flawed, logic was involved rather than just a random decision.
 

HE117

LE
It’s the gunner’s version of calling for an FPF mission. Yes
I think this came from Korea when there was a danger of mass infantry getting on top of a tank.. the solution was supposedly for the tanks to use canister to clear them off other tanks..

IMHO a nice, but impractical idea.. you would strip off and pebbledash all the optics and Ariels etc leaving it deaf and blind. I would think a good hosing with an MG would be just as effective and less damaging to the tank.
 
I've heard that story many times and decided to do a search. Tis true enough but if Lockheed P-38 exports is correct a certain, possibly flawed, logic was involved rather than just a random decision.

It was flawed. The aircraft had been designed from the beginning with twin engines and turbochargers for performance at altitude. To minimise handling difficulties if an engine failed at takeoff, the props were handed.
The removal of the turbochargers screwed performance at altitude ( they were deemed too complex ) and the removal of handed props was to simplify stores holding ( one prop type , one engine - engines and gearbox were also handed I believe - for turbo manifolds etc ), which had a negative effect on handling.
The aircraft were dogs and we still ended up paying for them. They were left in the US , some used to train pilots in the USAAC and junked asap.
 

HE117

LE
The Germans did have a go at producing a multi role artillery shell during WW1.

Shrapnel shells usually have their fragmentation balls embedded in a resin matrix to stop them moving about. The resin is shattered when the shell initiated and adds to the smoke puff which aids spotting. The Germans replaced the resin with TNT and fitted a special fuze that had a detonating output when it operated in impact mode, but an igniferous output to fire the gunpowder ejection charge when it worked in airburst mode.

It was dropped eventually because although it was as good as a conventional Shrapnel shell, it was not that good an HE shell because of the low HE content. It was also expensive to make the special fuzes..

Editied to add.. any WW1 EOD/UXB bods out there need to remember this.. not all Shrapnel is low explosive!
 
Last edited:

HE117

LE
The range of rounds which was available to/carried by WWII tanks would astound most people.
If you ever get the opportunity to go and look at the range of tank rounds in the Ammunition museum at Kineton, you should do so..
 
I think this came from Korea when there was a danger of mass infantry getting on top of a tank.. the solution was supposedly for the tanks to use canister to clear them off other tanks..

IMHO a nice, but impractical idea.. you would strip off and pebbledash all the optics and Ariels etc leaving it deaf and blind. I would think a good hosing with an MG would be just as effective and less damaging to the tank.

Canister was widely used in the PTO. the US 37mm anti-tank gun had it, and it was rather liked for the ability to make an area of Jungle (and the Japanese) go away. Equally, when the Japanese broke and went all BANZAI! it tended to stop those shenanigans dead.
I've no data on if the round was used by Stuarts (effectively the same gun), but it wouldn't be too hard to imagine tank crews getting some from an ammo dump.

The Person you'd need to pester for an answer would be @California_Tanker He's got better info on US tanks.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Canister was widely used in the PTO. the US 37mm anti-tank gun had it, and it was rather liked for the ability to make an area of Jungle (and the Japanese) go away. Equally, when the Japanese broke and went all BANZAI! it tended to stop those shenanigans dead.
I've no data on if the round was used by Stuarts (effectively the same gun), but it wouldn't be too hard to imagine tank crews getting some from an ammo dump.

The Person you'd need to pester for an answer would be @California_Tanker He's got better info on US tanks.
Someone can jump in here with the right regiment/battle but British tanks using canister to blast Chinese troops (and other assorted external fittings) off each during a human wave attack during the Korean War.

It must have been a grisly mop-up session afterwards.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Someone can jump in here with the right regiment/battle but British tanks using canister to blast Chinese troops (and other assorted external fittings) off each during a human wave attack during the Korean War.

It must have been a grisly mop-up session afterwards.
KRIH reported hosing Chinese troops of each other’s centurion tanks with coax

eta: sorry whichever unit became QRIH, read it in the Redoubt museum in Eastbourne when they still had a Cent parked outside
 
The Germans did have a go at producing a multi role artillery shell during WW1.

Shrapnel shells usually have their fragmentation balls embedded in a resin matrix to stop them moving about. The resin is shattered when the shell initiated and adds to the smoke puff which aids spotting. The Germans replaced the resin with TNT and fitted a special fuze that had a detonating output when it operated in impact mode, but an igniferous output to fire the gunpowder ejection charge when it worked in airburst mode.

It was dropped eventually because although it was as good as a conventional Shrapnel shell, it was not that good an HE shell because of the low HE content. It was also expensive to make the special fuzes..

Editied to add.. any WW1 EOD/UXB bods out there need to remember this.. not all Shrapnel is low explosive!

Actually your last point reminded me of (comparatively) early days in Afghanistan. Apparently the Sovs decided to use it as a bit of an ammunition testing ground.

Pete Le ***** who is one of your ilk and a aficionado of all things fuse, was out there already when I first got out there in 2004 and told me of lots of things they had found that left him scratching his head.

For the non-spotters out there, there are quite a lot of countries that don’t classify bangy stuff in the same way we do. For example the French use the same word for projectile and mortar apparently...

Apologies for further thread drift...
 
The US distinguished between beehive and canister ammo. Canister, as above, is basically a huge shotgun. Beehive is fused for distance, before jettisoning. Proved rather popular in Vietnam where the opposition was found stapled to trees.

Depending on round, the 152mm on the M551 Sheridan would fire either 9,200 or 8,400 of these things.

They are stacked in layers. Note the fuse setter at the nose.

(Embedding error. Go here. https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/...ttes_360_8ad49c265a8779999bf8327c5b63dce9.jpg )

Australians were particularly happy with the 20pr canister shot in Vietnam, it removed any concealment from bunkers etc.
 
KRIH reported hosing Chinese troops of each other’s centurion tanks with coax

eta: sorry whichever unit became QRIH, read it in the Redoubt museum in Eastbourne when they still had a Cent parked outside
Same story related to me by my RTR driving instructor who was there at the time
 
US Army replacing all its 120mm secondary natures (HEAT, MPAT, Cannister etc) with single programmable APM round.



This is enabled by the new programmable breech in the latest M1A2SEP release. Apparently they could have had the German DM11, but didn’t want to pay their prices - so build one themselves...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
On an utterly unrelated matter, I found this picture while leafing through files today:


Apparently its our autoloader from waaaaay back in the 1970s or 80s when everyone nearly standardised on that bloody big 140mm.
If you had a higher resolution image, you could have a fairly good guess based on the computer in the foreground, or the labels on the frame or steps.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
If you had a higher resolution image, you could have a fairly good guess based on the computer in the foreground, or the labels on the frame or steps.

Broad estimate, late 80s / early 90s based on the PC: it's into x86 / early Pentium territory when PC-compatibles were replacing a lot of IBM-badged kit, everything was beige, mini-towers were popular, and a 14" monitor was as big as anyone ever needed.
 

Latest Threads

Top