given that it was developed to fight ww2 tanks how well would the lahti do against modern tanks?
given that it was developed to fight ww2 tanks how well would the lahti do against modern tanks?
given that it was developed to fight ww2 tanks how well would the lahti do against modern tanks?
Short answer, bad.
You can definitely damage treads, knock out periscopes, and generally be a nuisance but you're not piercing the armor.
That being said, most APCs aren't rated for 20mm rounds.
There are also improvement in ammunition since WWII, right?
Depleted uranium? Tungsten?
Yeah but not enough to make 20mm a tank killing caliber. If you happened to have a Lahti in Ukraine you'd be best off using it against BMPs and such.
I bet it would go all the way through some of the lighter skinned vehicles like BMDs
the BMD is just a self-propelled zinc coffin that can't even stop 7.62x54r based on the photos from Ukraine. Even a well made aluminium vehicles something like the Gavin or CVRT are generally rated for .50 BMG at the front and 7.62 on the sides although that is as built in the dark ages of the 1960s/70s. Most that are still in service have had extra composites and kevlar spall liners added that beef them up to .50 BMG front and sides but 20mm AP probably would still pen them.
>gavin
i saw what you did there anon
I should hope so. 7.62x51 or the 7.62 russian will zip right through a BMD.
>tanks
foegeddaboutit
I'm certain that weighs more than a javelin anyway.
>110lb unloaded
Yeh just a lil bit
it would work well against IFVs like the BMP and BTR
>Modern tanks
Could penetrate the side of a T-72 in places, but overall not an effective weapon against heavy armor.
>IFVs
Will easily destroy BMP-1, BMP-2, any BMD from the front. BMP-3 is better armored, but easily destroyed with a side shot.
can I hunt Kodiak with one of those?
>it was developed to fight ww2 tanks
It was developed to fight 1930s tanks.
Lots of WW2 tanks were 1930s vintage though.
I think the point anon was trying to make is that it was only effective against the very earliest tanks in the war rather than WWII in general. It essentially became obsolete halfway through the war.
Not so much obsolete, but its role in use did see a drastic shift away from an anti-tank weapon to instead an anti-aircraft and anti-materiel role
speaking of which the things I would pay to get to fire that thing
30mm vehicle mounted auto canons can barely disable 50 year old tanks at just the right angle - and those can withstand higher pressures and have longer barrels...
so i would say very badly
It wasn't developed to fight "WW2 tanks" you fricking moron, it was designed to fight interwar tanks. god, I hate zoomers.
no cap? fr fr
20mm gun was seen as inadequate against the T-34s frontal armor at any range
considering its front armor was 45mm at 60degrees, then the 80mm side armor of a T-72 or M60A1 would be invulnerable at any angle except perfectly perpendicular at close range
the side armor of the M1 abrams is ostensibly 40mm thick, but with an additional sideskirt and airgap between the two
the side skirt is plain steel on the rear end, but ceramic on the front end
the swedish estimated 150mm effective steel-equivalent armor on the side, which gives it about 30-45 degrees invulnerability to its own 120mm APFSDS
so depending on how accurate you think the swedes are, and how effective the side skirts are
a 20mm AP round could penetrate the M1s side armor with a perpendicular angle at specific locations
or nowhere at all
Can't even beat 2 inches of armor, it would need to beat like 2 feet.
if you hit the engine deck or thinnest side and rear armor, you could possibly disable it. i wouldnt expect it to be too effective but then again dropping 40mm mortars from drones has done the trick for the last 4 months. mind you this is a 100+ lb gun with at least 40mm of pen against steel. its no slouch
People need to stop using Ukraine as if it means anything about Modern Military technology.
It's not our fault that this war has proved once and for all that there is ONLY one modern military.