Because you decided so. I actually asked why the high mode is even there if a cannon can’t hit anything even when firing slow (by your own logic).
Then why is the accuracy demonstrably poor?
Oh look a wobbly cannon. I literally gave you a firing table for 2A42. Nuh uh is not an argument, if you have something factually significant then show it, please.
It’s not.
What is then, enlighten me please. Why tf dudes out there welding a goddamn mansions above their vehicles? Are they stupid?
Because the gun is not built for accuracy at long range and volume of fire is more than enough against an infantry threat.
Which is almost certainly for single shots are demonstrably incorrect, watch any footage of these things firing.
This is a long, long explanation with a significant amount of historical context but can be summed up to
Yea, let’s refute an actual data, because you have a feeling. I’m not doubting that a heavy slower-firing etc. cannon will have better accuracy. My point is that 2A42 accuracy is good enough, not that it’s a death laser.
The accuracy in low firerate is fine. The problem is that it doesn’t get worse in high firerate mode.
We have no firing trials for 550 RPM mode of that gun? There should be ample documentation of that in Soviet archives.
if the accuracy was mysteriously just fine at max RPM
Half a metre at a kilometre (which is not a very big distance, btw) is good enough for most of its purposes, sure. But sometimes you need more control, to not overheat your cannon, to not waste an entire belt of ammunition and maybe, you even need to hit something more precise than a 1 metre circle at 1 km.
Because the gun is not built for accuracy at long range and volume of fire is more than enough against an infantry threat.
You know it still needs to hit pretty close to it’s target.
This is a long, long explanation with a significant amount of historical context but can be summed up to
Whatever dude, facts speak for themselves. It takes a lot to knock out a vehicle modified in such a way with an RPG-7V based drones, compared to it’s regular variant.
Which it does as far as infantry is concerned.
I literally listed the reasons right there.
Sure is for a vehicle with no laser rangefinder.
Also shouldn’t forget that versions of that cannon or derivatives that are rebuilt for accuracy have lower firerates, heavy barrel reinforcement or both.
Yea. You know the 2A72. It was surely built for better accuracy. Oh no, wait. It’s the fact that a BTR-82 weighs like half of what BMP-2 is. And that the BTR is a wheeled vehicle, it’s suspension doesn’t really like three times the recoil.
Is that why the BTR-90 which weighs about the same and is also wheeled uses 2A42? Your logic is flawed.
We have no firing trials for 550 RPM mode of that gun? There should be ample documentation of that in Soviet archives.
Keep telling yourself that the user manual for automatic cannon that features two automatic modes contains ballistics info for only one of them.
Well you only provided one table and are yet to prove whether it’s for single, low, or high firerates. so clearly it is only for one of them.
Is that why the BTR-90 which weighs about the same and is also wheeled uses 2A42? Your logic is flawed.
Is that why it was never adopted? Damn, what a great vehicle we lost(
2A72 has worse dispersion than the 2A42. In Ukrainian modifications to that cannon they clearly have significant barrel support to reduce that problem. Same is for the BMP-3 with that cannon, the barrel is jacketed inside a support tube welded directly to the 100mm barrel to reduce barrel movement on any axis not parallel to the recoil of the gun.
They’re actually in use to the extent that at least one is known to have been lost in combat.
Same is for the BMP-3 with that cannon, the barrel is jacketed inside a support tube welded directly to the 100mm barrel to reduce barrel movement on any axis not parallel to the recoil of the gun.
So maybe it won’t break itself or bend a pretty thin 100mm firing tube during a reload, which it is like 5 cm apart from?
what is this even supposed to mean
The reason for this sleeve at the end of a 2A72 on a BMP-3, what exactly couldn’t you understand?
Are you familiar with a concept of sarcasm? The most popular, initial public version for denial is a rear engine layout. Army wanted a BTR with the troop compartment and doors in the back. That drastic redesign is not really feaseble, a new vehicle is needed instead, but the state doesn’t really want it anyway, so it never happens. As usual they eventually move to a cheaper option so they can pocket that money for themselves or whatever they do with our tax money.
