This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 16:05 by Barnowlgreen
Latest 13:32 by Red7272
Latest 10:01 by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 1:19 by hobbes154
Latest 20-Apr by stancrist
Latest 20-Apr by QuintusO
Latest 19-Apr by hobbes154
Latest 19-Apr by gatnerd
Latest 18-Apr by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 18-Apr by autogun
Latest 18-Apr by autogun
Latest 14-Apr by renatohm
Latest 14-Apr by roguetechie
Latest 12-Apr by RovingPedant
Latest 8-Apr by Farmplinker
Latest 8-Apr by tidusyuki
Latest 3-Apr by roguetechie
Latest 3-Apr by gatnerd
Latest 31-Mar by larrikin2
Latest 28-Mar by DavidPawley
Latest 2-Jan by renatohm
Latest 27-Mar by stancrist
Latest 26-Mar by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 24-Mar by Mustrakrakis
Latest 24-Mar by poliorcetes
I think it's case of better to have and not need, than need and not have.
Also, might this overwhelm APSs so ATGMs can do their job?
I do agree with you regarding AP.
An added bonus to increased AP performance, these necked out 40 / 50 also have much heavier HE shells, so I think that, in the end, it's all good anyway.
But I mean, against which probable adversary or target? I try to insert these concepts in the real world and in actual clashes.
It's like sabretooth tigers. They have magnificent killing tools, but when megafauna mostly disappear, such sabres were useless. Or dreadnaught run: guns of increasingly more calibre and more and more armour. And suddenly, war ecosystem change and they were useless
What I try to illustrate are actual necessities or lack of them. Western armies need multiple layers of defensive resources against all kind of UAVs and their weapons. The threat is very, very real
Against which adversaries are going to be used such AP medium calibre guns and AP ammo? What is the probability of a clash in which a medium calibre gun is going to be enough decissive? Is there any fact-based reason for increasing calibres beyond "russian threat and their new 57mm turrets"?
If the crimp is some 30 mm long,
which it clearly is not.
Compare the difference in case length to the diameter of the 30mm projectiles: it’s significantly less.
Perhaps the US Army likes the idea of IFVs being able to penetrate opposing IFV frontal armour, has heard of this thing called APS and prefers to have more than 4 stowed kills.
renatohm said: If the crimp is some 30 mm long, which it clearly is not. Compare the difference in case length to the diameter of the 30mm projectiles: it’s significantly less.
I have received a slightly better version of the image, taken by Greg Knowles. I don't know how to show it full-sized (the forum software seems to shrink every image), but the designation on the S40 label says "40 x 180".
Maybe you could upload it to Google Photos or something and share the link with us?
I measured both cases using IrfanView (not the most accurate tool ever, but still), and the length of the 40 mm is indeed 180 mm.
Which gets us back to the previous point - either Jane's had a typo (more likely), or a new version was developed after this one was showcased.
Another point deserves mentioning - the 180 mm version already had the pill reduced to 39 mm to allow for some case taper, I wonder how much more they would have to go down is the case was lenghtened even more...