2A72 automatic cannons can shoot APFSDS-t like a 3UBR11 or the M929
The 2A72 cannon just one improved variant of the 2A42 so i dont know any reason why not.
https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/BMD-4_Russian_Airborne_Amphibious_Infantry_Fighting_Vehicle_
Odin again fooling another soul. Isn’t M929 a US-made ammunition for 30 mm auto cannons? If so, why would Russia use them. Also, I would suggest a suggestion post or a bug report instead only of a discussion topic, would be more fruitful.
Go to page 144/145 (or page 73)
“The compatibilty of the M929 with the 2A72
cannon, as used in the BMP3 vehicles,
is currently being evaluated.”
allowing this would open the can of worms that is NATO compatible 120mm round interchangability, meaning that anything with an L/44 would be able to fire DM53/M829A2/M833 and so on, i don’t think that proposing ammo under the banner of ‘it’s qualified’ but said round has never been near a russian 2A42
true, but the 3ubr11 correct too
I would like it on the BMP-3 but neither of the BMD-4s, their speed already justifies the lack of APFSDS
I guess he’s referring to the M929 mentioned on the image and the document. Would be more fruitful as I mentioned you reporting it than discussing into the Forums, regardin 3UBR11 APDS FS-T ammunition.
“Too high of a BR bump”
Yes, it justifies a lot. If we’re going to use this reason, why do VBCI, Type 87 RCV and VBC (PT2) has APDS FS rounds?
Which all of them, in order, sits at 9.3, 9.0 and 9.3.
2 are huge targets, 1 has no stablizer, thermals, or LRF, and all lack ATGM thats why.
It was only mentioned speed.
My bad then
Because thet are a lower calibre and have far lower spalling/penetration from the 25mm, besides the fact that the 2A72 chews through anything but MBT frontal armour already goven cause for concern about giving it APFSDS at the same BR while being used on platforms with tandem atgms
what’s next DM 73 on Abrams?
What does that have to do with anything?
which could be a valid factor if they had anywhere near the amount of firepower the BMD’s can bring to the table.
wheeled can only get to those speeds in large open maps, with hard terrain.
in urban area’s their increased turn circles and the inability to pivot turn, seriously hampers their performance.
Without said dart they would drop to APDS with 80mm of pen point blank, guess what every USSR MBT has for side armor? indeed 80mm.
the BMD’s also have 82mm of pen on APDS but not many non USSR/CHN MBT’s have anywhere near that amount of protection (on the side). Just looked at wiki.warthunder, only M60 variants at 9.3 have 70mm of armor, Magach’s maybe more due to heavier sideskirts. Also the ability to fire ATGM’s (Tandem) on the move is nice.
so Yes similar BR and with dart maybe similar performance or at least useful.
Giving BMD’s and maybe BMP-3 dart would put them in M3A3 BR range for me, similar pen, but still tandem ATGM on the move, with 50mm less pen then TOW-2A, but also 40 m/s faster.
BMP-3 would be similar to CHN ZBD04A.
Just put the same APDS against angled armor, something you find in any vehicle in this BR and you’ll see how worthless is the APDS. Glad, the 30 mm 2A72 is a coaxial, while the 100 mm is the main weapon, while in-game is the complete opposite. Use all the 4 missiles on the BMD-4/4M and you’ll be useless. The BMP-3 does have more but considering the long time of reload and more limited mobility and weight makes this vehicle no so good for rushing like BMD-4/4M can.
You can, if you got said vehicles, test it against most MBTs you find in this BR range, even the Leopard 1A5/A1A1, the 30 mm APDS 3UBR8 can’t pen without going for the angles on the corner of the chassis or the TAM 2IP without going for the missile. M60 and variants is the same thing, and worse the XM-803, MBT-70 and Kpz-70, try to pen those with the APDS. The only thing that makes the BMD-4/4M powerful is the 9M117M1, which, along side the mobility in exchange of armor.
The BMP-3 would be never similar to the ZBD-04A, the engine and transmission mounted on the front, external fuel tanks makes the survivability of this times more better than the BMP-3 which relies on the fuel tank as filter against chemical weapons like HEAT. The same is for the ZBD-04A but also protection against lower caliber kinetic weapons like AP.
With the OP @Viper_Zero using the document mentioning that the BMP-3 can use M929, when it can, it’s not the round in service in the Russian Armed Forces, but NATO members, probably on the vehicles mounting the 30 mm Bushmaster II Mk. 44 auto cannons and 2A42 auto cannons used by Slovakia, which, by a news article published in janes.com, mentions the use of M929 during trials in the BVP-M2 ‘Šakal’ with the RCWS TURRA 30;
Belgium’s Mecar and Slovakia’s ZTS-Special conducted validation trials in late April in Slovakia with new M929 armor piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot-tracer (APFSDS-T) ammunition developed specially for the 2A42 family of 30x165 mm calibre automatic cannons.
The trials were held over two days at the Military-Technical Testing Institute Záhorie (VTSU Záhorie), and fired 240 rounds from the TURRA-30 unmanned turret fitted on a Sakal infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) prototype, and from a two-man turret on the BVP-2 (a locally produced BMP-2) IFV. The 2A42 cannons were fitted with new four-chamber muzzle brakes.
The M929 APFSDS-T ammunition is about 95% complete, a Mecar spokesperson said, adding that it is now being marketed to potential customers. The spokesperson did not reveal the potential customers.
According to a Mecar presentation, the M929 APFSD-T ammunition is 293 mm long with a 690 g nominal weight; the propellant has a 130 g nominal weight. The 235 g penetrator is produced from a cobalt-free tungsten alloy and the cartridge case is steel. Muzzle speed (at 21°C) is 1280 m/s. The tracer burns for 2.1 seconds, and the penetrator takes 1.7 seconds to fly 2,000 m. It can penetrate 50 mm of rolled homogenous armor (RHA) at 60° from 1,000 m, and 40 mm of RHA at 60° from 2,000 m. Its dispersion is <5 mil. Operational temperature is from -32°C to 62°C.
at janes.com. 17 May, 2019
While ODIN mentions it can use the 30 mm M929 APDS FS-T ammunition, it doesn’t specify which country uses the said 30 mm 2A42 auto cannon. And that’s why I mentioned on my first comment in this thread “ODIN again fooling another soul. […]”
I guess he meant a similar round in terms of performance.
Same would go for most of the L7s that currently don’t have APFSDS or all 125mm tanks down to 9.3 can fire 3BM60 equivalents.
It is not.
2A72’s mechanics(very different from 2A42) fails to feed APFSDS.
okey paste here the documents what said not and fail the feed
