You posted pictures of abrams half built and suggested you can see there is no place for liner. Then you posted pictures of damaged abrams that had layers of armor torn apart by an IED and the layers of armor were different to the in factory examples.
I mean, I was just curious to the content you make, since it seems like you do videos about military technology as you stated. I enjoy those types of channels.
Would you mind showing me where?
What made you think I did such things?
This would also effect every British ww2 rivieted tank
Two crewmen died in the friendly-fire incident. The tank in question had the cupola/hatches open, and the two crew killed were those on stag duty when a HESH round struck the turret. The other two crew sleeping inside survived without injury.
Oh, a “cheap fabric dangling down like a car dashboard rug” - like the one they use ON THE M3A3 BRADLEY? Which got a spall liner because it actually exists in images?
And it’s the same “car dashboard rug” primitive technology in that amerimutt Bradley as it is in Swedish CV90s and Swedish/German Leopard 2s (superior tanks to the Abrams IRL).
Cap
Although I’d like to know why you think tanks with hull ammo and relying in tungsten penetrators are “superior”.
Tungsten doesn’t make a dart bad
Tungsten is actually denser but DU self sharpens and burns metal and is only not used because its scary uranium
It makes it inferior to DU, especially inferior compared to M829A3/A4. Those two rounds are significantly better than DM73.
This is a myth. The tungsten alloy used in DM53/63/73 (same rod, different charges)… it is less dense than the DU rod used in XM900 and newer DU Sabot.
DU: 18,600 kg/m3
Tu: 17,500 kg/m3
When you compare pure DU and pure Tungsten, of course the density seems higher for tungsten. The problem is that it is prohibitively expensive and not as good for long rod cores so they use an alloy that is less prone to shatter and other more favorable properties.
Du is better but Tungsten isn’t bad its a shame my nation stopped using L27 cause of the fear of DU
I’m not saying Tungsten is bad, it does the same job. It’s just inferior to DU. With DU, you can have a heavier Sabot fired at a slightly lower speed and provide higher performance against armor than a higher velocity and lighter Tungsten round. Post-pen will be greater, and the damaging effects of DU’s pyrophoric nature should not be understated as well.
Yeah that what I’ve seen on the L27 vs L28 that l27 (DU) performs better at low speed but L28 (Tungsten) performs better at higher speed
In the case of DU vs Tungsten the DU will have higher performance than the Tungsten but optimal speed is a little lower. The M829A3 will have ~720mm penetration as compared to <700 for DM73 when fired from L/55… and it is fired nearly 200 m/s slower.
I believe a BRL study showed usually DU performed better until around 1700m/s at which point Tungsten usually caught up.
Which means given the weight of the rounds, you can fire a heavier DU penetrator and get more performance from the same cannon and Tungsten is limited in how much additional weight you can add at the cost of velocity. Once it dips below 1600 m/s there is no more room for improvement and DU has a performance lead.
It’s kind of telling that where the US to improve ammo simply designed heavier and/or better rounds, the Germans had to resort to using a longer gun to improve their rounds in my opinion.
Mainly due to the refusal to use DU as it scary (its not)
The longer barrel improved accuracy and ammo performance without sacrificing the life-span of the breech. The US has deeper pockets. The Leopard is also exported more often than the Abrams. We do produce tungsten munitions, such as KE-W (kinetic energy weapon) A1, A2, A3, A4… etc.
Honestly, I sometimes wonder if the pyrophoric nature of DU penetrators is what made them ultimately decide kevlar spall liners weren’t really useful in the Abrams.
Not only that, but it allowed for a less combustible propellent that hadn’t previously meshed well with use in the L/44, due to the available barrel length and flash point of the propellent.
Unlike M829, it was found that DM43 and DM53 were capable of being fired from the L/55 without accuracy and velocity drawbacks. M829A2 saw an almost 15% loss in accuracy with use in the L/55, and America’s KET testbed was the primary means of increasing accuracy and effectiveness through the longer barrel.
M829A2 was introduced shortly after though, and KET was dropped.
It has little to do with export, as it’s been shown that even without upgraded models with reinforced breechblocks the L/44 and L/55 are capable of firing M322 by 3 separate countries.
I feel as if kevlar liners would do the exact opposite, and be quite effective against DU penetrators. Like spaced armor, though, I don’t think it would make enough of a difference to entirely negate the munition.
You said youtubers didn’t need to hand over their footage when filming around modern military equipment for inspection.
“We’ve never had to do such things lol.” was your response so I figured you did some sort of military tech channel. Unless you have never actually engaged with classified military stuff in which case… why did you say that?
The US actually did this by drastically increasing the pressure of their 120mm ammo, making it NATO non-compliant. Modern US ammo for the M256 can’t be fired safely by NATO allies, it’s a bit of an issue. Not to mention most countries want nothing to do with DU ammo given the environmental hazards.
