End of line for rifled gun on Challey2?

#2
Its a step backwards and waste of money ,next they will be developing automatic loaders for the one piece ammo just to further complicate an all ready complicated turret.
 
#3
ok in what way is it a step backwards?
spoke to a QRH officer wo said the main drawback of the Challey's gun was 2 piece ammo.
 
#4
Not so much the one piece ammo is the drawback , but a rifled barrel is much more consistentley accurate than a smooth bore.
 
#6
Regarding fixed ammo. Where do you put all the potential brolly stands and clock faces after it's been shot? :?

At least with seperate ammo once it's gone it's gone. :)
 
#8
I think the switch is inevitable, simply because we are the only users of a 120mm rifled gun. As the article mentioned the facilities that support the current gun have closed as there isn't enough work to keep them open - so that's the end of it.

Everyone else uses 120mm NATO smoothbore - and so spares, support, new rounds etc etc will be readily available. Not much of a decision to make really.
 
#9
I heard yester that a new gun requires a complete turret overhaul, for obvious reasons (gun, ammo stowage) but also I don't believe that an auto-loader and turret Sans Operateur would be a good idea. Just too much going on in the coffin for that.

I saw the CR1s bound for Jordan being refurbished at Lulworth [nostalgia strikes], and of course our friends in the sand are installing an auto-load rack, to be followed anon by a German smoothbore.

Gentlemen, we are alone in the rifled world. But fear none, for we have HESH. Our best friend.

Anyone with new info about FRES?
 
#11
The_RTR_Star said:
Gentlemen, we are alone in the rifled world. But fear none, for we have HESH. Our best friend.
Armour piercing ammunition
There are several types of ammunition designed to defeat armour, including HESH (High Explosive Squash Head), HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank), APDS/APFSDS (Armour Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot) - the latter being a type of KE-penetrator.

HESH rounds require a rifled gun while HEAT and other rounds can use a smooth bore gun as well as a rifled one. The British army and the Indian army, convinced of the superiority of HESH rounds, are now the only ones to field main battle tanks with rifled guns.
From www.campusprogram.com/reference/en/wikipedia/t/ta/tank.html

Can anyone say from experience whether HESH really is good enough to warrant choosing rifled barrels against the trend? If so, how much better is it and why?
Yup, i'm overlooking the unsavoury connotations of the "KE-penetrator".

Civ
 
#12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not so much the one piece ammo is the drawback , but a rifled barrel is much more consistentley accurate than a smooth bore.

have to admit, i always thought that was the case, but if any boffins can tell me why its not so, i am open to learning new things 8)
 
#13
Ok this is just a bit of free thinking based on my schoolboy physics, if its wrong, its wrong, i'm not trying to preach,

A rifled barrrel is more accurate because the spin it imparts to the round (essentially a lump of metal) makes it more inherently stable, so that it won't tumble and goes further and straighter.

However that is not the only way to make the round spin, if you add fins that flick out when the round leaves the barrel, you can add the spin to stablise the round while the round is in flight.

Or small wings so that the round would fly, achiving the same effect as spin. (At the speed the round is flying they could indeed be very small)

Thoughts gents?

You should then be able to get the best of both worlds.
 
#14
Interesting! I wonder if the white coats at DERA... er... Qinetic have come to that solution yet?!

HESH is a very accurate round, and they say that HEAT, and smooth-bore ammunition in general, does not come up to the same standard.

HESH is the preferred ammunition if only because it's quite devastatingly versatile. It will not destroy latest generation armoured vehicles (T90 or BMP3), but is excellent against bunkers, buildings (mouseholes and then some!), APCs, transports, and area targets to name a few... oh, and Basra hospitals (Sorry 2RTR - no offence meant, since it was an excellent shot).

Don't know if HEAT can achieve the same accuracy, effect or versatility as that, but it seems that it may only be a matter of time before we will have to find out.

I also hear that DERA... er... Qinetic/ATDU are working on a guided weapon system for the smoothbore, bu it currently weighs a whopping 28kgs 8O - glad I'm not a loader!
:lol:


"Hey Goose, you big stud. Take me to bed or lose me forever!"

"Show me the way home, Honey!"
 
#15
HESH is the preferred ammunition if only because it's quite devastatingly versatile. It will not destroy latest generation armoured vehicles (T90 or BMP3), but is excellent against bunkers, buildings (mouseholes and then some!), APCs, transports, and area targets
DoT,

If this is true how come we haven't been able to convince the other countries, surely it's a simple thing to prove? Is there some major drawback that isn't being mentioned? (Perhaps they don't like the idea of having big lumps of metal detaching and spinning around inside their enemies tanks.) Or is it the NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome that seems to rule every country outside the UK?

I can see that if we have to re-gun, then it (chally) will be scrapped and we'll end up buying yet more foreign kit. It's all part of the grand plan to unindustrialise (new word) the UK.

The argument that 'the rest of NATO don't use HESH' isn't that important - we've never been to war with them, nor are we likely to. The argument that the merkins don't use it is much more relevant. Watch us scrap the rifled barrell and ammo only to see the merkins introduce a world beating concept ammunition (SHHE) that is versatile and uses the latest rifled barrel designed and manufactured by Northrop Industries.
 
#16
It does seem a little ironic that cannons started off as smooth-bores, back in the days when... and the rifled barrel (be it musket or cannon) was seen as the sophisticated technology.

Very much a case, I think, of the Americans dictating terms on everything from standard fuel types to railway gauge widths, all on the back of the whole Cold War context.

Of course, it's (arguably) less likely that we'll go to war with these other countries in a NATO capacity - so why change the CR2 gun? - but if we have to rely more and more on the US for logistic support, then it make sense to standardise.

It may well be the case that we have to accept inferior technology, and that barrel-launched ATGW currently sounds as impractical as it does excellent, but that seems to be the way we're going at the moment.

There must be someone from MoD R&D reading this, or at least someone who knows someone etc. who can help out with this...? :?:
 
#17
with regards the fins, if you have a fin assisted round technically it becomes a mortar, the fins also create additional drag which would possibly reduce the range further, although accuracy would be increased. Rifled barrels are the way ahead for overall accuracy/range/kick arrsedness.
I should point out now, I'm a pikey physics student.
 
#18
Fins aren't necessarily a good idea. The round tends to weathercock into wind and fly itself off target. The 73 mm gun on BMP-1 used a fin stabilised HEAT round and wasn't particularly successful. So when the BMP-2 came along they ditched a gun launched HEAT round in favour of a 30 mm cannon and relied on the ATGM to kill heavy armour.

Of course with a long rod APFSDS the projectile speed is such that wind effects are negligible, before you all point that out to me. However, full calibre HEAT rounds must be fatter and slower hence again fins may not be the answer. Of course, give it a motor and some form of guidance and turn it into a GLATGW and the problem goes away.

Having said all that there are plenty of 120mm HEAT rounds out there and I don't see any users complaining that they can't hit the target with them. With all the rounds the Yanks pop off we should get a good idea of what to expect.

And being really picky mortars are not defined by fins on the round or not, the first mortars fired round shells after all. More like low velocity, high trajectory explosive rounds for indirect fire. Although modern gun-mortars are starting to blur the old distinctions. But I digress.
 
#19
One_of_the_strange said:
Fins aren't necessarily a good idea. The round tends to weathercock into wind and fly itself off target. The 73 mm gun on BMP-1 used a fin stabilised HEAT round and wasn't particularly successful. So when the BMP-2 came along they ditched a gun launched HEAT round in favour of a 30 mm cannon and relied on the ATGM to kill heavy armour.
Not being funny, but why does the BMP-3 have a 100mm gun and a 30mm cannon?

Going into the future here, what happens for Chally 3? Is there a replacement in the pipeline/on the drawing board, if so its possible it will be an auto loaded low profile design, for simplicity it would have to use one piece ammo.

ps is it still called QF? one piece ammo that is.
 
#20
Is there no option for a round where you can flick something to keep the fins in?

That way you can choose fins in for long-range or fins out for very (maybe, this seems to be a matter of debate) accurate but shorter range.

Though if it were they'd likely have tried it by now. :?

C
 

New Posts

Top