bojan Posted February 12, 2021 Share Posted February 12, 2021 (edited) Not really, Yugoslavia also considered license production, but turret casting was way too complicated to be done with acceptable % of errors. Problem is it was thick, had to be (relatively) high precision, with specific hardness and tensile strength all through the armor etc. It could be done, but a number of rejected turrets would be way too high and that would lead to a much higher cost per unit. Turret casting was still quite a feat in the 1960s and a problem for a lot of countries wanting to design ingenious tank. Swiss had all sorts of problems with their Pz 68 for example, including hull cracking. Compared to T-55s turret Vijayanta's was assembled from smaller separate pieces (of the lesser thickness also), a much easier process. Edited February 12, 2021 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted February 12, 2021 Share Posted February 12, 2021 Yes, it was a lot thinner, about 80mm in several places IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo Posted February 12, 2021 Share Posted February 12, 2021 1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Yes, it was a lot thinner, about 80mm in several places IIRC. It was designed with exports in mind, so surely Vickers made sure it could be built by modestly equiped overseas clients. Not to mention setting a tank building factory would bring extra £ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted February 12, 2021 Share Posted February 12, 2021 I've got the sales brochure around here someplace, I really must scan that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 (edited) I would really like to see manual for IS-4/T-10/T-10M to see how Soviets intended to do it with their 12.7/14.5mm coax... OTOH those tanks did not initially have APDS, so I guess that with RMG (especially 14.5mm with HEI-T in T-10M) you actually gained decent additional range. Edited February 13, 2021 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 Chinese 105mm APFSDS ammunition for their Type 15 light tank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 Type15 Light Tank and its 105mm tungsten based APFSDS-T round I cannot publish more images Here’s the link to the Chinese 105mm APFSDS ammunition for their Type 15 light tank pictures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted February 13, 2021 Share Posted February 13, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssnake Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Parts of this thread were split off into this new one: https://www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/45496-fire-control-ranging-dispersion/&do=getNewComment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovngard Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 18 hours ago, Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo said: Chinese 105mm APFSDS ammunition for their Type 15 light tank Are those Chinese ammunition compatible with 105 mm guns firing NATO standard 105×617mm cartridges ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 (edited) Yes in general, case size is same. OTOH pressures might be higher than old L7/M68 could handle. Edited February 14, 2021 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 9 minutes ago, bojan said: Yes in general, case size is same. OTOH pressures might be higher than old L7/M68 could handle. Any info available on designation and capabilities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovngard Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 (edited) Edited February 14, 2021 by Sovngard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 2 hours ago, Sovngard said: 105mm tank guns (BTA2) are different from 105mm L7, M68 guns (DTW2? Maybe higher pressure Chinese design? The BTA projectile is also longer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 few questions about L28 APDS family 1) Die patronen 105mm x 617 L28A1(UK) DM13 and DM13B1, durfen nicht aus der Kampfpanzer-Bordkanone M68(US) verschossen werden why L28/DM13 can't be used from M68 ? L28A1B1 uses molybdenum disulfide grease on sabot ring, and some "additional cuff" , what is "additional cuff" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 (edited) The M60A1 user manual suggests that it could. It was refered in the US text as M392/L36 (C506). DM13 as well. https://www.dropbox.com/s/nnaaiuwtxoeab1d/M60A1 Maintainance Manual.pdf?dl=0 Cant speak for the M60A3 or M1 of course. Edited March 4, 2021 by Stuart Galbraith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Przezdzieblo Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 4 hours ago, Wiedzmin said: few questions about L28 APDS family why L28/DM13 can't be used from M68 ? The US adopted the two UK rounds with the exception that the igniter in the primer was replaced by a US design. The UK primer is a conductive-mix design and is considered to static discharge. Occurences of accidental primer initiation when tested by the US reinforced the US plan to develop a bridgewire type igniter. In addition, field manuals restricted firing of UK ammunition by US troops. To achieve an interoperability and safe firing agreement, the teams thoroughly reviewed and discussed primer sensitivity and safety history. [...] In the late 1960's the US Army Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM) condudted safety and performance tests with the UK APDS L52A2 round and with the L45A1 DS/T training round. Both rounds contain the L1A4 primer, with the conductive-mix igniter. No safety hazards were encountered during firing of the L45A1 round. TECOM concluded that the L1A4 primer for the UK 105 mm APDS-T L52A2 projectile is not sussceptible to activation [...] TECOM recomended that the US adopt the UK 105 mm APDS L52A2 projectile for standardization. Safety and interoperability agreements on bilateral use of artillery, tank and mortar ammunition during training, 1979, pages 12-13 --> click Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Sielbeck Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 If I remember correctly we were told that there was a cover over the primer of the British rounds that was not to be removed until the round was chambered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Przezdzieblo Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 United Kingdom L28A1 cartridge, similar to the M392 except for its primer (L1A2, L1A3, or L1A4), is not to be fired in 105mm gun M68 except under combat emergency conditions. The clip will remain on the cartridge case at all times until the cartridge is partially chambered. TM 43-0001-28, p. 2-71. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETAC21 Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 On 2/10/2021 at 9:47 PM, Jim Warford said: You're welcome... I found a close up of the ammo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 On 3/4/2021 at 6:42 AM, Wiedzmin said: few questions about L28 APDS family L28A1B1 uses molybdenum disulfide grease on sabot ring, and some "additional cuff" , what is "additional cuff" ? "Cuff" - if that is from original English text - is a circular band at the end of a sleeve. This could be differentiating the driving band (aft) from the centring band (forward). (i.e. it's not a type of special sauce to also be applied!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted March 5, 2021 Share Posted March 5, 2021 Really interesting article from European Defence Review, and the thoughts of Rheinmetall on the future of tank guns. https://www.edrmagazine.eu/what-future-for-tank-guns-the-rheinmetall-view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Przezdzieblo Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 And something about new French APFSDS called SHARD: https://www.edrmagazine.eu/120-shard-the-new-generation-of-anti-tank-ammunition Remember that round, with blue wires in cartridge? CLICK Some time ago it was speculated that it could be data link, like in case of new US ammunition. But there is one more possibility. Because of long projectile primer must be short, and igniter wire is a way to enhance efficency of propellant charge. Described in this Nexter patent --> CLICK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorka L. Martinez-Mezo Posted March 12, 2021 Share Posted March 12, 2021 On 3/4/2021 at 8:54 AM, Stuart Galbraith said: The M60A1 user manual suggests that it could. It was refered in the US text as M392/L36 (C506). DM13 as well. https://www.dropbox.com/s/nnaaiuwtxoeab1d/M60A1 Maintainance Manual.pdf?dl=0 Cant speak for the M60A3 or M1 of course. The DM13 APDS was listed on the Spanish manual for the M60A3, although l very much doubt it was ever available..... Most probably lifted from the original US one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now