Correct, but the Americans used 40mm anti-aircraft guns on their ships, the dating of the Bofors L/60 and L/70 doesn’t matter, the date of the technology does. HE-VT, specifically “small” rounds have existed for quite a while.
Just because it existed for one example does not mean it existed for another.
Yeah, but your statement was:
Which is avidly incorrect.
Considering that Britain used HE-VT in WWII as well, and Britain and Bofors are very close, HE-VT tech would not be out of reach for Bofors.
2 Likes
I guess your context comprehension is nonexistent
Crazy but that’s not true.
You’re telling me this (105mm HE-VT) can fit into a 40mm with the technology of the time?
I don’t really have the time to find the video, but it’s a GE HE-VT fuse, for WWII, that for a 40mm.
Well i really need to see that video to believe any of your claims.
15 years of technology difference
🤦♂️
🤦🤦
In terms of miniaturization 15 years is A LOT.
If it fits a 105 in 1945, it fitting a 40mm is not out of the question in 1960.
4 Likes
If you take into consideration that solid state electronics (such as transistors) became more readily available during 60s, it’s really not that far fetched.
Even US missiles like 9J (this one is partially AFAIK since it used hybrid electronics) and 9H (This one though fully utilized solid state electronics) switched to solid state electronics compared to their ancestors which used the vacuum tubes.
The smallest VT fuse made until 1960 was 3 inch VT for USN 76mm, and even then this fuse size did not exist until far into the end of the war.
Sub 76mm VT fuses did not exist until into the late 70s.
The FACC VT fuse used for the M247 in particular, which was one of the first VT fuses of it’s size, only came to be in 1979.
This paper:
Talks about “currently in production 57mm proximity fuses” and is published in 1967. meaning they started their first production earlier than that.
as well as this:
as the lvkv 40mm VT-shell came into active service in 1975. meaning it was tested and done to the point of already done mass production.
2 Likes
You say this with incredible authority, yet you have no evidence, and in fact evidence has been posted here to the contrary.
2 Likes
I’ll believe the person with hard evidence, which is Necronomica. Still, the indecisive fact is, the L/70 & L/60 uses the same casings, and if the Veak 40 would have rolled to full production, by the time the first batch came off the lot, they would have had an extremely high chance of having a HE-VT shell ready for it, which Is very similar to the LVKV 9040 C.
2 Likes
It will take a bit to find it.
Not only that, but they had a high chance of just making the part have a smaller diameter, and push it back into the shell, meaning the parts are smaller diameter, but recede further into the shell body.
As for this:
Think about the damn Leopard 40/70 thingy in Italy TT.
The M247 used to have a HEFI-T/AP-T default belt with 94mm pen at 10m and 77mm pen at 500m range for the longest time. was pretty good against tanks. Later half of 2022 it got nerfed down to have a default SAPHEI belt with only 34mm pen at 10m.
VEAK 40 is downright a better M247 since it still have quite good AP shells, Would been better moved to 9.0-9.3 than having it’s HE-VT removed and lowered to 7.7
3 Likes
You are quoting to me the production values of the round known as “HE, proximity-fuze model 1964 Type V”, said round never came to be until 1975, but was planned as early as 1962 per the request of the french navy modernizing it’s DDs, with the round itself existing without the proximity fuse in French service as early as 1953 out of the 57 mm/60 (2.25") Model 1951 onboard Jean Bart.
It turns out that planned developments are not indicative of when ordinance is actually available to a vehicle, but if we want to go that way I would absolutely love to see M42s being equipped with the M247’s VT ordinance.
Do you happen to mean the Trinity program for the 40/70 series of guns? That occurred right at the start of 1980 last I checked for not only Swedish 40/70s but also German boats, with the latter having the acquisition and upgrade contract only completed in august 1986.
See above statement about the M42 getting PFHE.
A accurate change though as prior the M247 was using the exact same AP rounds that the VEAK did, in US operation such rounds never existed, rather the SAPHEI rounds were the only option.
We are however willing to stretch reality here on such matters so that is another thing I would not have issue with changing if we are staying with these standards of sourcing.
the paper i linked states on page 119 that " 57 mm lvzonrör är f n i produktion och rörets storlek
skiljer sig inte mycket från ett normalt anslagsrör. Figur 8 visar den
relativa storleken av rör av 50-talets generation, av 60-talsmodell
och av en tänkbar 70-talskonstruktion. "
and translated:
“57mm antiair-proximityfuze is currently in production and the fuse size does not differ by much compared to a normal fuse. figure 8 shows the relative sizes of fuses with technology from 50’s, 60’s and a future imagined 70’s construction.”
nothing to do with French navy, this is the Swedish developement talked about.
Its the Swedish Bofors company. i don’t know about a “trinity” program.
There is a document from 1975(or 1977?) (“ammunitionskatalog, data och bilder”) given out by the Swedish defence ministry showing all the in service ammunition, how they work, their dimensions and how they look.
i’m trying to find it again as i’ve lost it but it shows 40mm with proxy fuses.
Edit:
so far i found this:
saying that 40mm proxy became available 1975 and an upgraded mark 2 became available 1983.
Edit 2:
found info on the Trinity system, the round developed for it was a programmable round, not a strictly proxy, and was presented in 1989. (this later got the name Bofors 3-P) https://www.koms.se/content/uploads/2013/07/TiS-nr-3-1989.pdf
Edit 3(work in progress, saving link):
2 Likes