Here we see a textbook example of an IFV laying down suppressive fire to cover the advancement of the column. A large caliber like 40mm simply doesn’t carry enough ammo to be able to cover the area this Bradley just did.
IFV caliber size
Here we see a textbook example of an IFV laying down suppressive fire to cover the advancement of the column. A large caliber like 40mm simply doesn’t carry enough ammo to be able to cover the area this Bradley just did.
From the other thread :
So here's what I'm taking from the video
1. Stabilisation doesn't matter, people stop to fire more accurately when they wantto lay down supporting fires anyway.
2.Rate of fire doesn't matter, the gunner is firing no faster than if someone was loading 3 round clips
3. Multi feed ammunition doesn't matter, since they exclusively fire HE, and if you needed to swap it'd be just as quick to load armour piercing ammunition into the hopper.
4. Road speed doesn't matter once you have finished your approach march
However what does matter
1. Gun size, 30mm means more bang for your buck.
2. Crew survivability, the warrior is acknowledge to be more survivable than the Bradley, although the bradley still has good survivability
3. Armour, the warrior is better armoured
4. Mobility, warrior has better power to weight, better ground resistance and higher cross country speed
I'm sorry lads, I feel the case I've made is solid and the Warrior is a better IFV than the Bradley. I pronounce myself the winner, Warriortard a sucker of donkey dicks and /k/ a better place for this post.
Stabilization absolutely matters. 99% of the shots in this video are on the move
If the gun is small enough and clip fed, the gunner can stabilise it himself.
2 axis stabilisers are basically a cargo cult, few realise this.
You don't actually need a cartridge case, the gunner can seat the powder, wad, and bullet himself. Few realise this.
This thing is shooting way faster than someone manually loading 3 round clips. The gunner has to break from firing and physically load clips into the gun, that’s terrible.
> Multi feed ammunition doesn't matter, since they exclusively fire HE
moron
> and if you needed to swap it'd be just as quick to load armour piercing ammunition into the hopper.
it would be quicker to just flip a switch
Smartest warriertard
You only need raise an eyebrow
>Stabilisation doesn't matter
stopped reading after that
>warriortard larp
(You)
>t. never meched
What Russia tank can take a 5rd burst 25mm APFSDS?
Tell us you don't know what you are talking about without saying you don't know what you are talking about. You fat idiot.
It's called ergonomics.
>Stabilisation doesn't matter
You are the dumbest Black person. Look at how your fellow compatriots shoot their glawks in the wilds of chicago and oakland. Little to no stabilization which results in consistently missed shots and non fatalities of their intended target.
Apologise to Bradley, filth.
I’m sorry Bradley
Louder.
IM SORRY BRADLEY
LOUDEEERM
30mm chads where we at
we can not I repeat we can not stop winning
Yea 25 and 30 make the most sense for a general purpose IFV.
40mm is better because they have bigger explosion radii. This makes it way better to use at long range, and it has much more damaging AP ammo.
30mm if you run impact fuse HE.
40mm and more if you run airburst HE (airburst 30mm is too small bang for the bang for costly time fuse, it doesn't fit prescored shell body or preformed fragments, 40mm and more can fit).
damn they really did a number on those trees
Exactly, you would not want to be in that treeline targeting those Bradleys. Props to the m2
The 25mm sucks ass and with a 40mm you wouldn’t need to fire several dozen shots to clear a tree line
The 25 is so much better. With the 40 you wouldn’t be able to suppress as much treeline. It’s why only countries who manufacture 40mm aa guns use it on their IFVs and no one else
Suppression works by making the enemy understand that his position is known, he's being targeted, and he will likely die if he leaves cover. Suppression is not dependant on rate of fire. Also a 40mm is more likely to straight up kill than suppress.
>40mm can't suppress a treeline because too little ammo
>What is 40mm 3p ammunition??????
3 off those would have not only suppressed the treeline, but killed everything in the trenches.
OP is moronic
You’re a fricking moron. 40mm radius is laughably small that’s why volume mogs it
This isn’t true. 40mm airburst is good for killing troops in defilade but it sucks for setting up a base of fire, they just can’t carry enough ammo
eh 230+ rounds is more than enough, if you retrofitted a Bradley to carry the same gun and considering the internal volume you could probably get 400 ish rounds in that vehicle.
400 of those monsters?
instead of infantry in the back?
As an example, A2 Bradley stows 3x4 Hotboxes of 25mm ammunition on the floor of the troop compartment. each hotbox holds 50 rounds for a total of 600 rounds
25mm round length is ~220mm, 3 columns of 25mm across the width of the vehicle mean a total width of 660mm, which would mean only 1 column of 40mm would fit (round length is ~540mm
Base of the 25mm cartridge is 38mm diameter, base of the 40mm is 62mm. Each hotbox holds max 17 rounds along it's length for a total of ~650mm, equivalently that means about 10x 40mm rounds, with 4 columns of hotboxes along the length, that 40 rounds in that column
Each hot box holds 3 layers of 25mm for a height of ~ 114mm
Strictly that means 1 layer of 40mm, but we can be generous and give it 2 layers since it almost fits
That means 80 rounds of 40mm can be stowed in the floor without changing the stowage plans of the vehicle much.
Sometimes I forget just how many rounds the Bradley can carry
Thoughts on CT ammo?
Seems to be a similar cartridge base diameter as the 40mm conventional and around ~280mm length basing it off it being slightly shorter then the 30mm.
If thats the case, I would say you could fit 20 rounds per hot box in a 4x2 layout for a total of 160 since columns of 3 would mean a width of 840mm.
40mm is outdated garbage.
40mm supershot or 50mm supershot is where the money is.
>400 of those monsters?
>Thoughts on CT ammo?
Every mm should be telescoped, and we should rethink the ammo mix after that.
For size comparison of 20 to 57mm
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2012/armaments/Tuesday13975williams.pdf
Imagine if the round was infinitely telescoped and only occupied space in 2 dimensions.
>Every mm should be telescoped, and we should rethink the ammo mix after that.
Thank you for having the major brain take. If you can cram 3x as many 25mm telescoped rounds in you can start thinking about increasing rate of fire and increasing ammo allotment per engagement. I do suspect the sweet spot will be greater than 25mm, but still probably less than 50mm.
Thank you gunner. Very nice to get your input based on your own combat experience. Thanks again for your service.
Making a good IFV sounds almost like trying to make a good ship in Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts without having a clue.
I'm really starting to think an uncrewed turret is the way to go. IFVs are my second favorite military vehicle but frick me I can't think of any that I'd call actually good, and are rather competing with each other over which is the least problematic.
Let's look at base requirements:
>CBRN equipped
>Space for dudes
>Protected against autocannons
>Autocannon, ATGMs
>Ideally, amphib
>Engine and drive to scoot this overburdened box
I think I like them so much specifically because they're such a logic puzzle of compromise.
>>CBRN equipped
for dudes
against autocannons
, ATGMs
, amphib
and drive to scoot this overburdened box
Doesn't Bradley do all of these except the amphibious capability?
Yes but he will say not good enough. Design compromises are real
Sort of. When I say no IFV is actually good, I mean that they all seem more like a kluge solution. It works, barely, and no part is ideal.
I love the Bradley, but it does have quirks, especially with track retention. The biggest issue I have with the Bradley is its inability to transport a squad.
>no IFV is actually good,
Good at what dude?
An if is supposed to carry it's crew safely to battle and stay there to support them.
There are plenty that do that job adequately, with decent firepower and protection to boot.
I didn't mean to suggest that there aren't IFVs that do the job they're meant to do. I probably should stop thinking of them as a jack-of-all AFV, though, and more within a very specific task.
I guess it works as a reason to have more of them, which is always nice.
>inability to transport a squad
Think about it this way: instead of having 4 vehicles and the PL and PS ride with a squad, you have 6, with the PL and PS each having their own, and they can crossload the difference of the platoon.
>The biggest issue I have with the Bradley is its inability to transport a squad.
And if your entire squad is in that vehicle and it hits a mine or gets hit by a tank or ATGM then the whole squad is gone (or combat ineffective). Spreading them out increases troop survival.
There’s not really a downside to more vehicles with fewer troops if you can afford them and supply/fuel them
>The biggest issue I have with the Bradley is its inability to transport a squad.
Not many IFVs can carry a "full squad" they all cope with either splitting squads, or making smaller dismounted squads between 5-7 infantrymen
Transport a squad? So 12 men in combat equipment. What vehicle does this?
>So 12 men in combat equipment. What vehicle does this?
You don't want it to, if one vehicle carrying all your blokes gets clapped by a tank round or ATGM then you've lost the entire section
>uncrewed turret
Nah. Going without a turret is the solution. Think Strv 103 but with a 40 mm instead and additional seats. You need the godly suspension anyway to sonic across terrain.
No turret means no problems with the main ammo storage.
Wouldn't that seriously compromise its ability to shoot where it needs to?
Well, you need to turn the whole tank of course, but, with the proper drive system, you can do it fast enough to not be a hindrance. It worked for the S-tank.
An ammo roll instead of an ammo belt. Pretty good idea.
The Chieftain did say the 25 mm is a bit lacking the HE department, but AP is fine. With bigger rounds it would make more sense to integrate an option for smart programmable rounds, but it would be more expensive.
HE looked fine for the job in OP video
Also, the army is testing a 50 mm gun.
the 50mm gun is a uses a straight-walled 35mm cartridge, so the ammunition capacity shouldn't be too different
I don't think you understand how dimensions work. 35mm is smaller than 50mm.
The 50mm x 228 cartridge is literally a modified 35mm x 228 cartridge with straight walls, instead of necking down to 35mm
>necking up autocannon
I coomed
25mm turned out to be the hero
Spraying blindly down a km of tree line is a "textbook example"? What kind of clown monkey book it that? How they’re supposed to be used is someone spots an enemy position, communicates the exact location to fire elements who then lay fire into that location in an attempt to destroy the enemy — not suppress them.
The kind that actually works. This is what it looks like when IFVs are used. The fact that you don’t like it isn’t relevant
>Spraying blindly
No need to read further.
25mm HE rounds are more or less high-velocity VOG rifle grenades, and we've seen how useful those are at incapacitating troops at close range.
isn't the US planning on replacing these guns with larger 50mm XM913?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM913_chain_gun
Yes and it's glorious. Incidentally, the 50mm shells take up as much space as the 40mm bofors shells
>Incidentally, the 50mm shells take up as much space as the 40mm bofors shells
Akshually less. 50mm has same size as 35x228 (build on the same case).
Jesus. That's cool and all but can we just stop to appreciate how timeless 40x365r has proven to be
Were there any experiments with making caseless ammo for autocannons? Seems like it could work, for electric firing is possible on them.
Casesless sucks.
There are combustible case rounds for 120mm tank guns.
>Randomly posts about the warrior
>Brings up the 40mm of the CV90
>Both his pet subjects
Is this warriortard coping because his much shilled Bradleys doing shit?
Bradley guncam footage released this week is the best we have of any western IFV. You’ll never recover
How can CT ammo be accurate? How does land even work for the projectile?