This source confirms “proximity-fuzed prefragmented” ammunition for the 35mm in the XM246
The same source also confirms APDS and dual feed functionality. This report about APDS has been accepted Community Bug Reporting System
You can see proximity rounds in action vs Huey helicopter at the end of this video, but what vehicle fired these rounds is not seen explicitly.
35mm APDS and HEVT is mentioned in “Patton - History of The US Main Battle Tank” by Hunnicutt.
Doesn’t barrels need special coils to program proxy fuses? All aviable footage about this SPAA shows just common muzzle brakes. So what is it about? Just because someone developed the round, it doesn’t mean it was ever fired by XM246.
Would it even make sense to develop special rounds for the XM, when the system wasn’t ever accepted for further testing?
Also your source does not mention that XM246 ever fired these ammo types. Its just a pic about the weapon system in general and aviable ammo types. Same for this senate doc, the author just seems to mention whtats theoretically aviable. No proof it was ever used by XM246.
Unlike other models XM246 also seems to lack these small secondary ammo clips containing 20 of the APDS shells each.
AHEAD rounds need programing, proximity rounds require no programing. Prox rounds simply trigger when their onboard sensors detect a target. AHEAD rounds are timed, and thus need programing per shot.
PUMA’s AHEAD rounds:
M247’s HE-VT rounds:
Can also see the radio/radar waves in the animations:
Yes, that’s true for time fuzed munitions like AHEAD. However, the 35mm proximity round in question is HE-VT, which is radio fuzed and needs no programming.
Motorola thought so
What, do you need 4K UHD footage of the rounds being loaded and fired? Changes in WT are made regularly with far less documentation than I have provided here.
Here are more pics of this round
I believe the model on DEV server is incorrect, numerous sources state this dual feed ability. Unfortunately Gaijin does not accept Jane’s as a source, because it appears they have the only drawing of internal ammunition layout.
If Gaijin doesn’t believe this drawing, then I’d like to see what source they used for current model. My bet is they made it up, and in that case a Jane’s drawing is infinitely more credible
My sources is that I made it the fuck up
-Likely or just Gaijin
Gaijin always act like they know more than the players, they dont even play the game themselves but oh well
tho looking at ingame model, it like 60% close
but base on like size and ammo capacity i think they just model it so it looks like the gepard
Wow, another gimmick vehicle! What a wonder.
Yeah, can the devs just fix a few things here and there before they add another obscure random prototype that nobody cares about? Thanks.
AHEAD got improved massively since then.
Spotting helicopters in the treeline 6km away is infinitely easier with thermals. Even with radar.
Lets try it by playing a match together. You take a gepard and i take pgz09 and watch who gets more air kills.
Multiple times gaijin has stated how they knoe better than the manufacturer themselves…
Like with the MANPADS devblog.
It might be that Gajin intends to introduce this rejected prototype to fix the M163 (7.3) to Sgt York (9.0) gap. So Gajin wanted to introduce another rejected prototype with limited capabilities, which suits this BR range around 8.3.
Suddenly US comm pulls alot questionable documents from Senate hearings, which just give an overview over the theoretical capabilities of the 35mm Oerlikon weapon system. Imagine what happens when this spaas finally would get APDS, HE-VT, Dual Feed etc…
In this case it would be even better than the failed and rejected Sgt York project. With Proxy fuse and high pen rounds and whatnot. So it would be easily BR 9.3 or 9.7. Hardly a M163 gap filler anymore.
the xm246 is already a dual feed system and also design to fire mixed munnitions
Believe it or not, it’d still be a 8.3 or 8.7 vehicle.
APDS and dual feed is standard to the other 8.3 35mm SPAAs, nothing special with that.
Also, PGZ09 has these features + AHEAD ammunition at 8.3, everyone including Gaijin don’t seem to mind
I’ll have to repeat myself again, XM246 not having HE-VT is not a dealbreaker for me. I’d rather see all the other issues fixed first.
What I’m doing is raising awareness about a double standard when it comes to BRs.
i have found more info on this, the proximity ammo for the XM246 was tested but not on the XM246 itself but another testbed and the ammo was only tested under oerlikon and hence had to use another turret system, specially because the ammo was used during the design phase of the XM246 and only saw actual use for experimentation in 1982, during this point in time it was tought something better than proximity, instead of using proxy they could design a new point detonation ammo that could be used to have more effective target acquisition but unfortunately this never got out of the planning phase due to the XM246 losing to the XM247 later named M247, for what i could get the point detonation ammo its basically like an early idea of AHEAD ammo
Do you have a source for this by chance?
i have to find the documentation for the build date but, one of them you posted already specifically for the proxy ammo, and the other one i got it from the XM246 suggestion
the source for the date i got was wikipedia but cannot find anything else unless i ask someone about it, so far im using, globalsecurity.org and designation-systems.net for the info on date, since info seems to match with what i have, build and design dates etc
Do these sources mention the use of the MPF round though? Because the M247 was chosen over the XM246 in 1981, meaning that this ammo could’ve been pointless to continue developing if the U.S. military wasn’t going to accept the 35mm caliber into service.
they do not mention proxy fuze for 35 mm but mention the possible build of a point fuze detonation ammo wich is where i got part of my info from
Hmm, I wonder then if the idea for the point detonating fuze was for 40mm caliber, or simply a plan in case the 35mm caliber ever came into relevance again.
as far as i could get it was for 35 mm, the proxy fuze for 40 mm was called more in the page but nothing out of that
