Read a neat study from the US army on why they kept 25mm on the Bradley instead of upgunning it. It provides more stowed kills against infantry out to 1500m (picture related)
>Figures from the US Army Research Laboratoy on investigating the adoption of a 35 mm gun on the Bradley come to the results pictured above: While a standard 35 mm point-detonating high explosive (HE) round has a higher lethality per round than a 25 mm HE round, the actually amount of stowed kills is considered to be worse at short to medium combat ranges, where the smaller fragmenting effect of the 25 mm HE round doesn't matter as much, because the accuracy is still very respectable. Only at longer ranges - i.e. above 1500 metres/one mile - the 35 mm point-detonating HE ammunition is favourable. Depending on terrain and combat scenario this can be satisifactory or not - during the Cold War the average combat distance in Central Europe was considered to be less than 1500 m, which means that a 35 mm Oerlikon or Bushmaster gun does not offer more lethality against infantry in this situation.
Now that small drones are a big problem expect to see larger caliber guns with airbursting shells to take care of them. Ideally you would have a mix of smaller caliber fighting vehicles and larger caliber organic AA vehicles.
https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2016/04/bigger-guns-are-not-always-better.html?m=1
Interesting figures. I assume it isn’t feasible to use air bursting ammo against every infantry target that pops up and the fact that a vehicle outfitted for 35mm would carry substantially less ammo
I think the additional complication of actually using AB shells should be pointed out, not all targets are good for AB rounds, it takes longer to aim AB munitions, there is added complexity on the gunnery systems and the cost per round is significantly greater.
Naturally. It’s great for well aimed shots say above a trench line or nest to a wall someone is hiding behind
>actually using AB shells should be pointed out, not all targets are good for AB rounds,
Depends what type of the round. But there are types that are HE with airburst fuse, these are just better, if anything there is always fallback to point detonation node. Also not only against open targets, but cover. With common HE there is big dialema of the HE fuse delay, with instant fuse HE has giod fragmentation effect, but it doesn't penetrate cover. With long delay HE round pens cover, but poor fragmentation because round embeds into soil, walls etc, before detonation.
With programmed ABM there is no dialema while shootung cover you can set up long delay, or shooting targets in the open small deal or AB.
>it takes longer to aim AB munition
Again there is point detonation mode by default, you can spray this rounds without any programming like common HE and they would detonate on impact.
Think the Army's next IFV will be acquired with 2 versions with a 30 mm and a 57 mm gun.
That would make sense but this is the first I’m hearing about it
NTA but they want a 50mm bushmaster not a 57. It's the XM913 and they have an APFSDS and AB round developed. I imagine the XM30 MICV will come standard with it, or start with a 30mm and late upgrade to a 50 but I doubt they would run both calibers at once.
the army is requiring entries to use the XM913 50x228 Bushmaster
This one, right here. That 50mm is based on the same 35mm casing but necked up. You can thus carry the same amount of them as you could 35mm. AB would ideally work as dual-purpose against infantry and drones. 50mm APFSDS rounds have been equal or slightly more effective in tests than 35mm IIRC.
Oh right, and since the 50mm is just a necked up 35mm, you can easily convert existing 35mm systems with a gun swap if they still have plenty of life left in them. They might need some additional electronics however, but the hulls being able to accommodate the gun is always the most critical question.
Your graph clearly shows that 35mm airburst is superior to everything at all ranges by more than 200%.
You simply can’t read the graph and didn’t click on the link. The 25mm can carry much more ammo and AB ammo takes a lot more time to utilize than PD ammo. It isn’t feasible to think that an IFV fighting against multiple infantry targets can effectively airburst them all. AB certainly has its place, but quick engagement of pop up troop targets is not that place
>It isn’t feasible to think that an IFV fighting against multiple infantry targets can effectively airburst them all
Why not? Programable fuses set by the muzzle as the velocity is measured have been around for decades and you use a simple larser range finder with +/- settings.
>lase wall next to window
>set +1m on the FCC
>fire into window
>next target, lase wall fire into window
You could even skip the lase wall step by lasing in the window with a -2m fuse setting.
Hell in a low threat enviroment where they US fights it's wars you could just leave the laser on and have it constantly ranging every shot.
No one is arguing that airbursting isn’t better for troops behind cover but for just point shooting the army concluded the 25mm to be superior out to 1500m
How realistic is it to expect to catch a company or even a whole platoon out in the open, when IFV engines can be heard coming from over a mile away? I've seen that Ukrainian BMP-2 assault against entrenched infantry, that would have been a prime spot for AB.
It is also a cost issue. Especially if you’re just going to use the AB rounds in a PD role. Maybe in the future those costs will come down with economies of scale.
The opposite could also be true. A sweet government jobs program to manufacture and replace 6,000 guns is pretty lucrative
>A sweet government jobs program to manufacture and replace 6,000 guns is pretty lucrative
True but the MIC seems to have pulled their head in a bit since congress noticed the couple of TRILLION they can't account for.
>It is also a cost issue. Especially if you’re just going to use the AB rounds in a PD role. Maybe in the future those costs will come down with economies of scale.
Yeah, that's always a valid concern. I would kind of expect AB rounds causing an issue of gunners wasting that ammo. They've got the ability to hit things around corners, but they can't see if anything's actually there, might incentivize them to just blindly spam AB at nothing. Launching small drones to scout for targets would help with that, if possible.
I get what you are saying but your own link says
>As the figures from the test and simulations made by the US Army Research Laboraty show, programmable ammunition can greatly increase the lethaliy against infantry. Programmable ammunition also can provide considerable better results when used against aircrafts, main battle tanks (by damaging all optics) and infantry hidden in structures (by exploding within the building).
>As the current electronics and fuzes required for programmable ammunition cannot be fitted into small calibres such as 20 mm and 25 mm ammunition without reducing the payload beyond to an unreasonable small amount, calibres of 30 mm and above have gained popularity.
Without giving any reason why it wouldn't be better other than "different vehicles carry different ammo loads". I'm not taking those numbers at face value because it doesn't pass the sniff test of packing efficiency.
I just checked with
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/circles-within-rectangle-d_1905.html
and found that you don't half ammo capacity until you go from 25mm to 35mm.
Keep in mind they're all bottlenecked. Are you taking full case diameter into account?
Does it really tho? Even with regular rounds you use the laser range finder as an input for the FCC. The only differance is that the FCC automatically programs the rounds when chambered. If you dont lase the target AB rounds will act as PD, or detonate after a preprogramed range you have previously set.
>35mm PD is worse than 25mm PD
>graph shows 35mm AB blowing them both away
So why not use programable fuses? It's not like the US military can't afford them.
>US study says 25mm is good enough
>US wants to save money by not upgrading thousands of vehicles to 30mm
Gee i wonder why.
Fair point, I have been arguing that AB 35mm is better but I don't have a couple of million rounds of 25mm laying around and a thousand autocannons that eat it.
For a cost benefit point of view the money is probably better spend giving every section a drone operator.
OTOH, if you're starting from 0, ex. upgrading from sovshit to NATO, you're much better off going straight for the bigger round.
>muh stowed infantry kills
Meanwhile larger rounds are better at literally everything and if you're that worried about infantry just use your coax and HE or airburst rounds.
Bradley doesn't have a coaxial machine gun, which seems like a bizarre oversight.
Where are you reading that the Bradley doesn’t have a coax? It certainly does and there is video from iraq of a gunner using it
Yes it does, what the hell are you talking about?
I'm neverserved but I get the idea that the main role of an IFV supporting infantry these days is "see that building over there, make everyone in it dead".
In that case bigger really is better because you can put a lot of 25mm HE into it and not get the same POK as one 40mm HE in each window.
Targeting a building with HE would be better done by an assault gun because in this case bigger is better. There is also atgms that can handle that role
>assault gun
Now I'm going to upset everyone because I think a light tank with a large caliber low velocity cannon has a place on the modern battlefield.
I think the same. As much as I love 20-30mm autocannons I understand that there is a need for larger HE slingers. I’m not hung up on the assault gun/light tank debate I just recognize the role is needed
105mm rifled HESH ^_^
It shouldn't upset anyone, the low velocity/high HE payload 76mm gun on Scorpion was hugely popular.
Switching gears a little bit. I understand the airbursting ammo is range based so the vehicle losses a target, sets the range +-, and the round blows up at that range. This seems like a bad way to kill drones. Can a standard laser range finder reliably pick target a small quadcopter? Wouldn’t a vehicle mounted radar, skew to cue, and proximity rounds do a better job at killing small drones?
If you want to reliably kill drones you are going to need a radar and / or a FLIR scan camera that can find and lock targets.
You aren't hitting shit by just aiming an autocannon into the air without any FCC aid.
Two axis independently stabisled FLIR+ LRF with high HZ measurements would suffice (aka modern top tier AFV gun sights).
You still need to see it in the first place.
Would that really work
If you spotted the drone and got an IR box track on it then it would work fine but what are the odds the gunner just so happens to see a drone in the sky?
Just a heads up this entire thread is warriortard device hopping and talking to himself
Fuck off. This has been one of the most civilized threads discussing IFV applications in a long time. You are in fact the first person to even mention the warrior in this thread.
>You are in fact the first person to even mention the warrior in this thread
And you think that 30mm RARDEN not coming up in this discussion was just an accident. It was blatantly omitted and the reason is plain for all to see
We are talking about upgrading from 25mm HE to something with more bang and idealy enough room for a programable fuse.
30mm is such a marginal gain I don't think anyone would argue "we need to spend billions changing from 25mm to 30mm".
Don’t bother the dude is broken. Any discussion about IFVs turns out like this. Just ignore and move on. Personally I report every single off topic rant about WT
>It was blatantly omitted and the reason is plain for all to see
From your own source. "Unfortunately the resolution of the image is poor and it seems to be the result of photoshop work."
The post you replied to doesn’t include a source. What are you talking about
No one talked about the rarden because it’s a niche round that doesn’t see much use. No one is leaving it out to be meanies to the bwitish
>See much use
Nta but the 30x170 is probably the second most used western ifv round in combat.
The graphic is about 35mm airbust ammo being great not 25mm being great. There isn't a RARDEN or Bushmaster 2 airburst round. and they arne't in the comparison because they weren't current rounds in Canadian or US inventories at that time.
Fuck off warriortard that graphic is clearly photoshopped
Is he in the tread with us now?
Why do you like fart porn. Stop pretending like it isn’t you. Your posting style is basically a fingerprint
Why not use 40mm HEDP rounds?
It's probably going to buttfuck any soft-light targets and even armored ones if with APFSDS.
Ammo capacity is dogshit
Can you post an instance were an IFV has run out of ammo to the point its caused an issue?
What a weird statistic to think is public knowledge. Seriously Lmaoing at your concept of how the world works.
So no you cant. Thanks for confirming that having a huge ammo capacity isnt neccesary unless your a turd worlder without a supply line.
The information you asked for doesn’t exist in public records. Only a retard would claim victory after doing that.
40mm HEDP won't pen much more than a MRAP or BTR, 40mm APDS will pen MBTs from the side.
You are just making a weaker HE to replace a better AP.
>can you post combat performance of vehicles that have never seen combat outside of afghanistan or getting blown up in Ukraine
Because shaped charge performance is based on diameter, it wouldn't have better penetration than a 40x46mm HEDP so about 40-50mm RHA. You'd get better results with a Bofors L/70 40mm APFSDS.
Because the 9040 doesn't fire HEDP It fires 3P and APFSDS
For its 3P you essentially choose between
Point detonation, if you haven't chosen anything else this is what you will get
Delayed detonation for IFVs and buildings, it penetrates and explodes roughly 75cm in
Air burst, you laser, it then explodes in the air in a staggered pattern
If you want to kill helicopters or UAVs you lay the gun on them and laser,laser then fire, it's gated and will proxy fuze only as it gets within 100 meters or so
I love the Bradley and the 9040, i hope we can keep this civil.
>I love the Bradley
Your challenger 2 false flag thread got deleted and you immediately came here, we followed to remind you that you're not welcome on this board. seriously, have a nice day fart fag. You lost, the Brits won (as usual).
First time I posted today friend, challenger 2 might have burnt but I am sure it will be repaired and back in use soon,
Also more or less ready to fire ammo is more a influence on doctrine and tactics then it's a detriment