autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

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

  • 3232
    MEMBERS
  • 183602
    MESSAGES
  • 5
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

XM-25 here we go again...   Army Guns 20+mm

Started 9/11/20 by autogun; 14721 views.
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

9/11/20

This is exciting news. 

I've been hoping for something like this for awhile. 

Off the shelf:

Milkor 40mm w/ Multi Ray 800 FCU = 16.14lbs

24x 40x51 MV = 15.84lbs

Total = 31.98lbs

In terms of achieving the target weight of 14.5lbs, thats doable.

Rippel XRLG40 = 11Lbs

w/ Multi Ray 800= 12.54lbs 

Reducing capacity to 5rds could further reduce weight, although would complicate firing 3rd bursts. More likely, a Finite Element Analysis re-design of the launcher would find extra weight savings. 

In terms of the velocity requirement, that seems improbable. 40x51 is already on the upper end of tolerable recoil.

Per Emeric:

"A 250 g grenade launched at 100 m/s will need 8° of elevation to reach 258 m in 2.78 s, with a falling angle of 8.5°."

  • Edited 09 November 2020 12:42  by  gatnerd
taschoene

From: taschoene

9/11/20

gatnerd said:

0mm w/ Multi Ray 800 FCU = 16.14lbs 24x 40x51 MV = 15.84lbs Total = 31.98lbs Per Emeric from a previous discussion: "A 250 g grenade launched at 100 m/s will need 8° of elevation to reach 258 m in 2.78 s, with a falling angle of 8.5°."

This solution doesn't satisfy at the time-of-flight requirement in the RFI.  To get to 500 meters in less than 3 seconds, you'll need an MV of at least 200 m/s, and possibly more.  That's not happening with a 40mm grenade in a package that fits the desired size and weight limits.  This demands a new ammunition nature to work, I believe, probably more like 30mm.

  • Edited 09 November 2020 13:14  by  taschoene
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

9/11/20

I expect they'll likely soften that time of flight requirement.

The 25mm XM25 was 210ms velocity, and even with the lighter grenade and nice semi auto design, recoil looked brisk in videos I saw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-7L0Frj6vQ

Meanwhile, current 40x46 already has pretty marginal lethality, so it's hard to see them going to a much lighter grenade.

  • Edited 09 November 2020 14:53  by  gatnerd
EmericD

From: EmericD

9/11/20

gatnerd said:

Meanwhile, current 40x46 already has pretty marginal lethality, so it's hard to see them going to a much lighter grenade.

The casualty radius of the 25 & 30 mm grenades studied during the "PAPOP" program were around 0.5 m against protected targets... absolutely not enough.

jxexqx

From: jxexqx

9/11/20

is this, finally going to be a use for Metalstorm technology? (I say this only semi-seriously . . .)

In reply toRe: msg 7
taschoene

From: taschoene

9/11/20

I'm trying to imagine alternative approaches that could be applied.  Maybe a 40mm GL-compatible course-corrected rocket for the counter-defilade round to get the necessary velocity without punishing recoil.  Other bits of the requirement are within the capability of a 40mm MGL with improved ammunition.

Red7272

From: Red7272

9/11/20

taschoene said:

I'm trying to imagine alternative approaches that could be applied.  Maybe a 40mm GL-compatible course-corrected rocket for the counter-defilade round to get the necessary velocity without punishing recoil.  Other bits of the requirement are within the capability of a 40mm MGL with improved ammunition.

Or maybe just a heavier 40 mm grenade with a bounding function? At longer ranges a quadcopter with a grenade might work as well without limiting it to being launched by a GL.

17thfabn

From: 17thfabn

9/11/20

"Meanwhile, current 40x46 already has pretty marginal lethality, so it's hard to see them going to a much lighter grenade."

I've wondered why the U.S. uses the HEDP but not a dedicated HE projectile in both their 40 X 46 and 40 X 53 grenade launchers.

A well designed HE would have a better lethally radius. With airburst fuse or bounding ammunition it would be even better.

stancrist

From: stancrist

9/11/20

17thfabn said:

I've wondered why the U.S. uses the HEDP but not a dedicated HE projectile in both their 40 X 46 and 40 X 53 grenade launchers.

HEDP was opted for in order to have one ammo type that could be used against both personnel and light armored vehicles.

HE is ineffective against light armor, so grenadiers would have to carry reduced amounts of two ammo types:  HE and HEAT.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

9/11/20

taschoene said:

I'm trying to imagine alternative approaches that could be applied.  Maybe a 40mm GL-compatible course-corrected rocket for the counter-defilade round to get the necessary velocity without punishing recoil.  Other bits of the requirement are within the capability of a 40mm MGL with improved ammunition

When I was really looking at it, the best alternative to the 40x51mm AB was the M72 LAW Airburst. 

MR800 FCU = 1.54lbs

M72E11 AB: 10.6lbs

x3= 31.8lbs

Total = 33.34lbs

Milkor 40mm w/ Multi Ray 800 = 16.14lbs

24x 40x51 MV = 15.84lbs

Total = 31.98lbs

You get less 'shots' - obviously - by going with the M72 AB. But each shot with the M72 is an order of magnitude more devastating. 4000 pre formed tungsten fragments, with a 15m lethal radius. And thats a 'real' lethal radius in that the tungsten pellets are penetrating 12" of ballistics gel, not the laxer standard test of penetrating a 2mm aluminum sheet used for most HE tests. 

For reference, the STK Airburst 40mm uses 330 tungsten pellets. 

This makes the system:

-More lethal

-More tolerant of aiming error 

-Capable of taking out multiple targets with a single blast 

Abandoning 40mm in favor of a 'M72 Squad' would also allow greater operational flexibility:

-M72 Airburst for infantry / counter defilade 

-M72 Anti Structure for urban warfare 

-M72 Anti Armor
...[Message truncated]
View Full Message
  • Edited 09 November 2020 22:04  by  gatnerd
TOP