Hosted by gatnerd
This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 15:34 by roguetechie
Latest 10:47 by schnuersi
Latest 18-May by RovingPedant
Latest 18-May by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 2/11/21 by smg762
Latest 18-May by TarheelYank
Latest 16-May by graylion
Latest 14-May by Farmplinker
Latest 14-May by autogun
Latest 13-May by Petrus_Optim
Latest 13-May by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 12-May by graylion
Latest 12-May by gatnerd
Latest 9-May by DavidPawley
Latest 9-May by taschoene
Latest 9-May by gatnerd
Latest 29-Apr by mpopenker
Latest 28-Apr by taschoene
Latest 28-Apr by autogun
Latest 24-Apr by taschoene
Latest 24-Apr by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 22-Apr by stancrist
Latest 22-Apr by gatnerd
Latest 20-Apr by roguetechie
25/10/21
In terms of .50's on RWS, is there any merit in switching from the M2 browning to the M3P version, which has 2x the ROF (1100rpm)?
To me this would seem a nice upgrade for the RWS, as it would allow a burst to put roughly 2x the amount of rounds on target in the amount of time as the M2, and the RWS would handle the recoil to ensure accuracy.
That would seem to improve the chances of hitting moving infantry/vehicles, or having enough rounds hit an armored vehicle that one may disable an important sensor. All while keeping the same basic .50 setup and most of the same logistics.
La prova a fuoco della mitragliatrice Fn M3M calibro .50, erede della leggendaria M2.
25/10/21
gatnerd said:In terms of .50's on RWS, is there any merit in switching from the M2 browning to the M3P version, which has 2x the ROF (1100rpm)?
To me this would seem a nice upgrade for the RWS, as it would allow a burst to put roughly 2x the amount of rounds on target in the amount of time as the M2...
That would seem to improve the chances of hitting moving infantry/vehicles... All while keeping the same basic .50 setup and most of the same logistics.
It sounds good in theory, but how much difference does it make in reality?
M3 - https://youtu.be/gBcvKTYUFq8?t=19
M2 - https://youtu.be/MWrthRBdhTA?t=1
Switching from the M2 to the M3 would have some significant drawbacks:
1. It would consume ammo 2X as fast.
2. It would burn up barrels 10X as fast.
3. It would require buying a whole bunch of new manufactured M3 guns.
While FN would love the idea, I dunno if the gain would be worth the cost.
25/10/21
My understanding is that they are tired of having to retightening the bolts on the chopper after using the 30mm cannon. Less maintenance time.
26/10/21
Farmplinker said:My understanding is that they are tired of having to retightening the bolts on the chopper after using the 30mm cannon. Less maintenance time.
That would be pretty weird, you'd imagine they'd have figured out some sort of Locktite like solution there in the last 40 years?
The Eurocopter Tiger uses a 30x113 GIAT, while Russia's MI28 and KA-52 use the even more beastly 30x165mm. I'd think at this point the 'copter mounted 30mm would be a non issue.
26/10/21
Werent they considering the caseless Rmk30 for the tiger..
Can choppers use APDS or is it still too risky
26/10/21
smg762 said:Can choppers use APDS or is it still too risky
The AH-1's M197 is cleared to fire MK149 (Phalanx) APDS ammo. I presume that the reasons are connected with the low mounting of the gun compared to the engine intakes, and the fact that the downwash from the rotor will push the sabot pieces even further away.
27/10/21
Maybe there is more of a push for USMC AH-1 to be able to use the same ammo as the Phalanx system since USMC helos would spend a lot of time riding on USN amphibs.
28/10/21
In terms of the .50 + ATGM option, Slovakia and Denmark will be fielding Kongsberg Protectors with M2's + Spike LR2 missiles.
https://euro-sd.com/2021/03/articles/exclusive/21921/denmark-spike-lr2/
Slovakia will use them on their JLTV's, while Denamrk will be mounting them on Eagle and Piranha vehicles.
Spike LR2 is like a Javelin / TOW hybrid with a 5.5km range. It has the fire and forget, top attack, tandem warhead of the Javelin. But then it also has a built in fiber optic cable like the TOW, allowing it to be wire guided to attack targets that are beyond line of sight. The later option means the JLTV/Boxer etc could be hiding behind a hill, and using a drone to spot an approaching IFV, then guide the missile onto target using the fiber optic cable.
28/10/21
gatnerd said:Short term, I think probably the fastest, cheapest, and most bang for the buck option would be to retain the .50 RWS, and simply mount a coaxial missile system.
Reportedly the RWS on the UK Boxer is capable of mounting the Javelin missile. https://youtu.be/228BDPppgHg?t=295