smg762 said...

do IFVs ever use APFSDS much in todays world,

Western ones do.

am i right in thinking that .50 or even 15-16mm APDS would not be very usefull, given that it's only application would be IFVs - and it would struggle in that role.

FN planned APDS for their 15mm machine gun, what would have been the indtended role for this>

smg762 said:

FN planned APDS for their 15mm machine gun, what would have been the indtended role for this>

You need to know the context.

At the time it was developed, there were various arms limitation agreements between NATO and the Warsaw Pact. One of them concerned the calibre of automatic weapons as installed in MICVs and light AFVs. It was decided that the permitted calibre should be under 20 mm (AFAIK). This put NATO at a disadvantage because the biggest legal calibre they had was 12.7mm (the .50 BMG), whereas the Pact had the 14.5 mm KPV which was twice as powerful. FN therefore developed the BRG which was intended to beat the KPV.

It did the job, but the Cold War ended before anyone bought it, ending the project.

autogun said:

It was decided that the permitted calibre should be under 20 mm (AFAIK).

Absolutely corrext. The wording has been "under 20 mm". This meant that all AFV armed with 20 mm (and larger) ACs would be counted as IFV/combat vehicles which had been limited in number by the treaty. While 14.5 and .50 cal vehicles counted as "unarmed" and non combat vehicles without any restriction in numbers.

autogun said:

It did the job, but the Cold War ended before anyone bought it, ending the project.

Yes it did because the weapon system had been specifically designed to defeat the armor of the then in use and modern Soviet design AFVs. Especially with APDS it could do so at quite conciderable range.
 

The BRG-15 would end up obsolete quickly regardless of the end of the Cold War. The Mk211 does improve the performance of .50 weapons to the point that a 15 mm is not needed anymore. The next generation of Soviet AFVs would have been protected and the designes that made it into service are protected against .50 and potentially 15 mm. So the weapon would have had a usefull service life in its niche of 10-15 years. Two decades at best.

Interesting one on how to build armour

 

YouTube

Ukraine: This War Too Intense for Western Tanks! 29 Sep 23 Daily Update

90mg in Every Piece! Crush Fatigue! Support Ukraine! https://strikegum.com/Get the essential National Security News FREE Right to your inbox with the Strateg...

Video unavailable

This video contains content from WildFilmsIndia, who has blocked it on copyright grounds

goodness. fundamentally what he is saying is that a Ukrainian thinktank has said that they are finding that Western tanks are not up to the rigours of a long war and are too difficult and expensive to fix and we'd need cheaper and more easily repaired tanks rather than hitec monsters

Edith says: So I am wondering: the MBT in UA seems to be an assault gun. Is there anything a 120mm can do in the assault gun role that a 40mm can't?

graylion said:

Is there anything a 120mm can do in the assault gun role that a 40mm can't?

Good question.  120mm looks to have at least an order of magnitude greater destructive capability vs 40mm.

  40mm

120mm

It takes more time and more rounds fired with medium caliber autocannon to achieve the same target damage.

  30mm VS BUILDINGS

125mm VS BUILDINGS

so are we back to the CV90120 and the Lynx 120 FSV? 

105 M10 obviously.