tanker_karl

First MBT deployment of LRF in 1971 (presumably Chieftain) according to Thales Optronics (formerly Pilkington Optronics, formerly Barr & Stroud) : https://web.archive.org/web/20080827212056/http://pilkoptr02.uuhost.uk.uu.net/about.htm

If you want 21st century Gav!ns there is always FFG Flensburger Fahrzeugbau GmbH http://www.ffg-flensburg.de/en/home/ new engines, band tracks, armour plates, stretching... Likewise, FNSS offers an M113A4 upgrade : They are also marketing an Über-Gav!n called ACV-30 (combat mass = 29,500 kg), which may be ideal for much needed 8-inch Gav!n SPH...

It is indeed a 122mm D-30 Gav!n SPH. Another pic : (credit : Yves Debay / Assault Magazine No. 69)

Is the australian cavalry scout M113 still stored in some depot? Philippine Army To 'Recycle' Old Scorpion Tanks

The BTR recovery vehicle looks interesting. What turret is this? Looks a bit like those old french ones on the ERC-90 light tanks. And where was this photo taken? Iran maybe? The pic was taken in Libya, 2-3 years ago IIRC. The turret is the Hispano Suiza H-90 from the AML-90. Below is a Gav!n with the NEXTER (formerly GIAT) TS-90 turret : And a couple more Gav!n pics from Libya : (credit : Yves Debay / Assault Magazine No. 69)

There's no debate that HE (or HC or SAP) should be the preferred choice whenever available (together with appropriate fuzing). I was merely wondering how HESH would perform. *Not so well* seems to be the answer based on the replies posted so far. Thanks for the clarifications.

Wouldn't it be good enough against a ship's superstructures though ?

At IDEX 2007, NORINCO had a poster showing a 122mm BB/RA HE shell designated BEE2, with a maximum range of 27 km. Not sure what the bursting charge might be though. Some more tidbits from Jane's IDR :

There are not so many HE projectiles available for 105mm HP guns (French OE Mle 60 is one exception, not what else might be available out there), projectiles most commonly available being APFSDS, HEAT and HESH. I understand why you may not want APFSDS or HEAT, but I'm not so familiar with HESH projectiles. Could you explain why you wouldn't want HESH ? TIA.

Below is a clip from youtube showing how the revolving autoloader of the Sora 122mm works : When compared with the DL4 autoloader designed by Vesys (http://www.vesys.rs/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/sap_ceo_40s_xvid800.mp4?_=2), I'd like to get of better grasp of the pros & cons of each design. E.g., the revolver magazines of the Sora 122mm SPH seem to feature a more simple loading mechanism than the Vesys design, but being attached to the breech, these may actually have more impact on the elevation mechanism of the gun. E.g. the revolver magazines of the Sora 122mm SPH also higher higher, which might make them more vulnerable and probably put the CoG of the gun higher, which might affect the stability of the firing platform. I'd very much appreciate it if someone could shed more light on the pros & cons of the respective designs. All the more as the Vesys design seems to have been available since 2009 and derived from the autoloader designed for the Nora B-52, which makes me wonder why they went for the revolver design for the Sora 122mm.

I've just come across some information concerning another 122mm autoloader designed in Serbia by a company named Vesys (http://www.vesys.rs). From what I understand, the autoloader is designated DL4, and allows for a ROF of 7 rpm and loading at all elevations : http://www.paluba.info/smf/index.php/topic,5289.msg202156.html#msg202156 http://www.ekapija.com/website/sr/page/279798 Below is a short clip showing how the kit works : http://www.vesys.rs/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/sap_ceo_40s_xvid800.mp4?_=2

Against modern warships with no meaningful armor protection, how effective would existing HESH / HEP gun projectiles be ?

I stand corrected re: charges. Thanks for the details.

There is a problem with flatbed warping ATM, it needs purposely reinforced chassis, not just any truck. Other than that it is quite good. M09 is a pointless proposal, army is not interested in it preferring SORA*, not enough armor to matter but enough to limit mobility, stability is bad, crew has very limited space to work etc. *M09 was developed by mostly vaporware producer Yugoimport, SORA was developed on a fraction of budget by Military Technical institute and has better mobility, better stability during firing, better time into and out of action. better burst RoF with supported MRSI etc. Thanks for the reply. The limitations you mention for the M09 are indeed quite obvious. Regarding SORA, I find the MRSI capability you mention intriguing, since I was under the impression that the D30 only came with two propelling charges (full charge @ 690 m/s and reduced charge @ 565 m/s). This may limit the options available, though the charges might also be combined with different projectiles (e.g. with/without BB) . Would you have more specific details on this MRSI capability (i.e. how many rounds over what time interval at what range) ? TIA.