Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by gatnerd

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3360
  • 191213
  • 4


Squad Support Weapon   Army Guns 20+mm

Started 17-Jun by stancrist; 22402 views.

From: stancrist


EmericD said:

       stancrist said: No, that's what happens when I note the length of time it would take for most members of a patrol to load, aim and fire a rifle grenade, but you say I'm wrong because one member of the patrol would have a rifle grenade already loaded and can fire it quickly without aiming.

Sorry, but you are drawing conclusions from a few training videos you can find on youtube, where people are absolutely not trying to shoot fast.

That's true, they are not trying to shoot fast.  They are trying to shoot accurately, so that the rifle grenade explodes close enough to the target.

Can you provide any evidence which shows how much time it takes for the average rifleman to perform the following tasks as fast as he can?

- How long does it take to extract a rifle grenade from the issue grenade pouch, load the grenade onto the muzzle, and remove the safety clip?

- How long does it take to aim and fire with sufficient precision so the grenade explodes close enough to the target at 100 m?  200 m?  300 m?

EmericD said:

       stancrist said: What I said is that the 30mm airburst videos show fragmentation effects better than the only 40mm airburst video I found.

And what I said (and others too) is that you are comparing 30 mm AC that are using 275 g to 360+ g shells launched >750 m/s, with a <250 g grenade launched at ~240 m/s... so yes, the various 30 mm seem to be more powerful, because they ARE more powerful.

First, "others" did not say that.  ONE other said it.  And he made the same mistake that you did.

Second, I never said that the 30mm cannon rounds "seem to be more powerful" than the 40mm grenades.  To repeat myself for the umpteenth time, what I said is that the 30mm fragmentation effects are more visible.  

EmericD said:

Unfortunately, none of this is useful to demonstrate that an individual automatic grenade launcher would be an effective weapon.

I never said those videos demonstrate that an airburst grenade launcher would be an effective weapon.

I said they give me cause me to think that an airburst grenade launcher might be an effective weapon.

EmericD said:

       stancrist said: I expressed no opinion on whether 40mm grenades are "up to the task" or not.

Yes, I noticed that you are making your best to avoid giving any technical details about what you think might be the weapon that could make "every rifleman a grenadier".

I don't have enough information to give technical details.  The only info I have is that 25mm HEAB had too small casualty radius.

What caliber would be necessary for the airburst concept to work?  30mm?  40mm?  50mm?  Bigger than 50mm?  I have no idea.

And even if I were able to give specifics, after this discussion I doubt I'd bother.  Every time I write A+B=C, you read it as X-Y=Z.


From: roguetechie


With modern digital thermals there's three things that are going to dictate performance heavily.

1. Imaging sensor pixel size, pixel count, and REFRESH RATE (measured in hertz or number of times per second a thermal image is captured). If your optic is made in the US or using us components it can not legally run at more than 9 hertz without falling afoul of ITAR. The human eye can very much notice anything under 60 hertz being jumpy and not quite right especially if both you and your object under observation is moving.

2. Digital display pixel size, refresh rate, and pixel count. This usually far outstrips the performance numbers of your actual digital bolometer ccd. Through digital signal processing fuckery this can somewhat compensate for low pixel count low refresh rate CCD, how much it compensates and how well both depend heavily on the onboard processing power performance and quality of coding etc as well as your chosen frames per second setting. The obvious consequence here is that your battery life goes down as your frame per second setting is increased because you're using more processing power to do digital signal processing up to the limits and QUALITY of your onboard processing limits.

Speaking frankly, this is actually where you run into extremely hard performance limitations with the cheaper side of the market.

3. Your illuminator, the closeness with which it matches your CCD sensor's wavelength limitations, and just the actual performance throw distance and quality of your illuminator is capable of.

On the cheaper end of the spectrum you're generally lacking in all 3 of these which drastically limits everything about your devices performance.

The difference between a $500 and $5000 and $10,000 thermal is multiple orders of magnitude. 

Also country of design, manufacture, and, specific parts sourcing as well as the country you're in or trying to get it into can also heavily dictate your performance and there's multiple cases where if you buy wrong you can spend a whole lot of money for a very gimped thermal.

As an example I'm personally looking at getting a Jerry C Clip on once I get a pvs14 which due to multiple factors from the above list is almost freakishly cheap for it's raw performance (if you can consider $4000 cheap)

The most frustrating thing about the civilian thermal market is how easy it is to spend lots of money on something that's got the performance of a shitty toy if you don't frankly autistically dive into the details behind what makes a thermal good and have the base technical knowledge to understand what you're researching.

I know this isn't very squad support weapon related but it's something that's going to be important going forward.

Jerry C product link below


From: graylion


stancrist said:

Good questions.  Your guess is as good as mine.  I'd guess maybe four mags. But, I'm pretty sure the magazine pictured is 6-round capacity, not 10-round.

If we follow that - 24 rounds of grenades vs 210 of 5.56? not buying. give me AGL or 30x113 on tripods in the heavy weapon squad. Or have one in the squad. Or maybe in the Fireteam. But no way can you replace the rifle with it.

  • Edited 25 June 2022 15:33  by  graylion

From: Murpat


 Even your "low end" $4,000 kit is beyond my budget ... and indeed needs ... now.

Many thanks for the detailed reply - very much appreciated.


From: roguetechie


It's currently pretty far out of my reach too LOL...

That said, it is still nonetheless where the first real "sweet spot" in the cost capability curve can be found. In some ways there's stuff around this cost range which is outright better than what you can find on places like tacswap that have "salty" actual service gear that's made it's way onto the civilian market.

As someone whose always been pretty limited by budget I have a pretty standard methodology for any new thing I get into which involves up to 6 months of leg work and research to see what the smart money is running. The smart money, being a reference to the people who have hard core minmaxed performance to value ratio to get a thing that's at least within the range of usable for doing something professionally at a decent level but still costs like entry level.

It genuinely works for everything from dirt bikes to precision rifles to computer hardware and tools and has helped me actually enjoy all kinds of hobbies that should theoretically be two income tax brackets past my reach.


From: stancrist


graylion said:

If we follow that - 24 rounds of grenades vs 210 of 5.56? not buying. no way can you replace the rifle with it.

You may be right.  It just seems like 30 rounds (4 + 1 x 6-rd mags) of 40mm HEAB might be a lot more effective, with higher hit probability, than 210 rounds (6 + 1 x 30-rd mags) of 5.56mm bullets in most infantry combat scenarios.


From: schnuersi


stancrist said:

It just seems like 30 rounds (4 + 1 x 6-rd mags) of 40mm HEAB might be a lot more effective, with higher hit probability, than 210 rounds (6 + 1 x 30-rd mags) of 5.56mm bullets in most infantry combat scenarios.

That is a really intresting question. But it would propably require extensive testing and analysis.

The potential at least ist there concidering that 210 rds 5,56 are ineffective. The last numbers I saw a rifleman barely can carry enough ammo to statistically achieve one kill.


From: stancrist


schnuersi said: would propably require extensive testing and analysis.

Fully agree.  It should be thoroughly tested and analyzed.


From: graylion


stancrist said:

You may be right.  It just seems like 30 rounds (4 + 1 x 6-rd mags) of 40mm HEAB might be a lot more effective, with higher hit probability, than 210 rounds (6 + 1 x 30-rd mags) of 5.56mm bullets in most infantry combat scenarios.

and no suppressive fire?