login   |    register
Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Abram tank with trophy ADS seen
avenue
Visit this Community
Philippines
Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 541 posts
Armorama: 539 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 01:34 AM UTC
US army abrams tank deployed in Roumania seen with Trophy ADS .
I am sure.all the military kit maker notice it,just a matter of time before it appear in the market.
avenue
Visit this Community
Philippines
Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 541 posts
Armorama: 539 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 01:39 AM UTC
https://defence-blog.com/army/mysterious-version-of-abrams-tank-was-spotted-in-romania.html
Kenaicop
#384
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,363 posts
Armorama: 1,260 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 01:46 AM UTC
Nice find, wonder what unit?
ReluctantRenegade
Visit this Community
Wien, Austria
Joined: March 09, 2016
KitMaker: 2,308 posts
Armorama: 2,200 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 01:56 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Nice find, wonder what unit?



Elements from the 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division.
HermannB
Visit this Community
Bayern, Germany
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 3,954 posts
Armorama: 3,922 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 03:35 AM UTC

Brief video with M1 A2/Trophy in the background

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/684527/justice-eagle-19-opening-ceremony

Also interesting, M109A7 live firing in Poland

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/681270/hamiltons-own-b-roll-package
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,030 posts
Armorama: 2,428 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 04:18 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Also interesting, M109A7 live firing in Poland

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/681270/hamiltons-own-b-roll-package



Interesting! If you watch the M109A7 video, that small coffee can-sized light green gunpowder charge packet is what fires the shell. That gunpowder charge packet is pretty darn small!

So I would assume grouping charge packets behind the shell would increase the range? Or having a much larger charge packet might? Or would that overstress the gun barrel?

Now I kind of believe that the cannon can achieve a range of 100-150 miles at least if the gunpowder packet was made larger. Am I wrong?
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,420 posts
Armorama: 13,530 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 05:10 AM UTC
They are called MACS (Modular Artillery Charge System) and are a solid propelling charge, as opposed to earlier powder charges, and were originally designed to be used with the Crusader artillery system. They come in two types and are stacked to achieve different ranges. The limiting factor is the size of the gun. Current guns allow 5 of the high end charges to be stacked to achieve about 40 kilometers (using RAP) in range. To achieve longer ranges and more charges to be used, new guns will need to be designed with larger and stronger breaches to compensate for the larger, more powerful charges. The issue then becomes the size of the gun. It gets exponentially larger as well. The current M109A/A7 is about as large as we want to geth and they are acceptable for our current warfighting strategy.

Here is a dated, yet good article that describes them.
MACS charge
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,030 posts
Armorama: 2,428 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 11:18 AM UTC

Quoted Text

They are called MACS (Modular Artillery Charge System) and are a solid propelling charge, as opposed to earlier powder charges, and were originally designed to be used with the Crusader artillery system. They come in two types and are stacked to achieve different ranges. The limiting factor is the size of the gun. Current guns allow 5 of the high end charges to be stacked to achieve about 40 kilometers (using RAP) in range. To achieve longer ranges and more charges to be used, new guns will need to be designed with larger and stronger breaches to compensate for the larger, more powerful charges. The issue then becomes the size of the gun. It gets exponentially larger as well. The current M109A/A7 is about as large as we want to geth and they are acceptable for our current warfighting strategy.

Here is a dated, yet good article that describes them.
MACS charge



Thanks, Gino.

That begs the question...for the toted 1,000 mile supergun, I wonder how they're going to propel the shell. If the gun is mounted on a 8X8 or 10X10 HEMETT that is long enough to accommodate a new longer cannon, then perhaps there would be such a thing as a 1,000 mile cannon. On a M109A8, I kind of doubt it can hold a long cannon, but we'll all see.
amoz02t
#192
Visit this Community
Kentucky, United States
Joined: November 25, 2009
KitMaker: 1,348 posts
Armorama: 1,248 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 11:55 AM UTC
16 inch battleship round powder load in WWII gave, what a 20 mile range? Those were some big bags!



HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,420 posts
Armorama: 13,530 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 12:37 PM UTC

Quoted Text

That begs the question...for the toted 1,000 mile supergun, I wonder how they're going to propel the shell. If the gun is mounted on a 8X8 or 10X10 HEMETT that is long enough to accommodate a new longer cannon, then perhaps there would be such a thing as a 1,000 mile cannon. On a M109A8, I kind of doubt it can hold a long cannon, but we'll all see.



Nothing short of a giant rail gun or fixed position is going to achieve that kind of range. Then you have the same problem as the Germans did in WWII with their rail guns. They take too long to set up, move, and set up again that they are sitting ducks and are quickly destroyed once they are fired.
TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,625 posts
Armorama: 1,550 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 01:48 PM UTC
In addition, the varying/changing winds will cause inconsistent drift at those ranges and effect accuracy. I am sure there is a practical range limit due to environmental factors.
Bonaparte84
Visit this Community
Hessen, Germany
Joined: July 17, 2013
KitMaker: 325 posts
Armorama: 318 posts
Posted: Monday, June 03, 2019 - 09:13 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Nothing short of a giant rail gun or fixed position is going to achieve that kind of range. Then you have the same problem as the Germans did in WWII with their rail guns. They take too long to set up, move, and set up again that they are sitting ducks and are quickly destroyed once they are fired.



You mean like with "Anzio Annie"? http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol133lw.html

You can always increase range drastically by using subcalibre ammunition, but this will obviously decrease the payload.
LonCray1
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: November 28, 2018
KitMaker: 55 posts
Armorama: 42 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 - 03:34 AM UTC
Gino, what do you think of electromagnetic railgun technology? Do you think it will replace bagged powder someday?
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,334 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 - 04:07 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

That begs the question...for the toted 1,000 mile supergun, I wonder how they're going to propel the shell. If the gun is mounted on a 8X8 or 10X10 HEMETT that is long enough to accommodate a new longer cannon, then perhaps there would be such a thing as a 1,000 mile cannon. On a M109A8, I kind of doubt it can hold a long cannon, but we'll all see.



Nothing short of a giant rail gun or fixed position is going to achieve that kind of range. Then you have the same problem as the Germans did in WWII with their rail guns. They take too long to set up, move, and set up again that they are sitting ducks and are quickly destroyed once they are fired.



Hi, All!

Permit me to show my ignorance:

Haven't "we", (and our potential "enemies") already possessed "long-range artillery", i.e, specialized manned-aircraft, specialized drones, specialized satellites, thousands upon thousands of different "alphabet and acronym missiles" which are designed for "specialized-missions", whether they are land or ship-based, and of course the ones that are laser-guided and launched from aircraft, "smart-bombs", "dumb-bombs", "stupid-smart bombs", the various types of cruise-missiles, and God-knows-what-all-else, FOR QUITE SOME TIME..?

WHY even BOTHER with an unconventional 1,000-mile range "rail-gun"-type of artillery piece, when "our" and NATO's Artillery are already the finest there is..? Don't "we" have all of the other "GEE-WHIZ" stuff (and more) which I've mentioned above on hand in order to "take care" of anything that "short-range" artillery can't reach..?

How FAST would/does a "rail-gun's" projectile travel? Fast enough not to be detected by "enemy" radar and or satellites? A THOUSAND MILES is a long way, so this "magic projectile" would STILL need to cover that distance in a reasonably fast time in order to be effective, no..?

Would this potential "enemy" have enough TIME to take any "precautionary" or even "practical" action AGAINST such a weapon..?
Pongo_Arm
Visit this Community
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: January 27, 2017
KitMaker: 133 posts
Armorama: 133 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 04, 2019 - 04:38 AM UTC
not exactly the sveltest installation of that equipment
exgrunt
Visit this Community
Massachusetts, United States
Joined: December 17, 2013
KitMaker: 289 posts
Armorama: 289 posts
Posted: Friday, June 07, 2019 - 04:05 AM UTC
Per the article, it's not the actual system, just a mockup to see if there are any issues with the physical layout / weight. Gotta believe that there will be problems with this gear if the tank is moving through forests, I'd expect a lot of the bits to be damaged or stripped off. As noted on another post, it's not exactly the best installation.

On a related note, this seems to have struck a nerve with the Russians, there was a flurry of article on Russian state media going into details on how the Trophy system sucks and is no match for the latest Russian ATGMS.
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,124 posts
Armorama: 1,008 posts
Posted: Friday, June 07, 2019 - 07:25 AM UTC

Quoted Text

On a related note, this seems to have struck a nerve with the Russians, there was a flurry of article on Russian state media going into details on how the Trophy system sucks and is no match for the latest Russian ATGMS.



You know that means they are worried...
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,030 posts
Armorama: 2,428 posts
Posted: Friday, June 07, 2019 - 04:40 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

On a related note, this seems to have struck a nerve with the Russians, there was a flurry of article on Russian state media going into details on how the Trophy system sucks and is no match for the latest Russian ATGMS.



You know that means they are worried...



Not quite. If you read the article, the U.S. Army should be worried because the Russians may be onto something. The Kornet missile system on a 4X4 truck is a laserbeam rider, meaning two or more Kornet missiles can be launched one behind the other riding the laser (the 4X4 mounts eight ATGMs). Trophy APS may not be able to shoot down all of them in quick succession. For that, you need something like 20mm Phalanx CIWS mounted on a tank (or similar).

For U.S. TOW on HMMWV or JLTV, you just have one ATGM in the tube before it needs to be reloaded.

Unproven claim, yes, but I'd be worried if I was in a MBT. That is why the M1A2D with laser-warning receivers better get a kickstart, if not make a SHORAD for M1A2D. Like I posted many times over the years, I just think the M1A2 needs a completely new redesigned turret instead of adding this and that to it. It needs something like the Leclerc or Leopard 2 "Next Generation" turret with integrated defenses and countermeasures all around. The article's photo can be countered if the M1A2 has a new turret with new features which I won't discuss here.

https://defence-blog.com/army/russian-media-report-kornet-completely-trashes-latest-version-of-abrams-tank.html
exgrunt
Visit this Community
Massachusetts, United States
Joined: December 17, 2013
KitMaker: 289 posts
Armorama: 289 posts
Posted: Saturday, June 08, 2019 - 01:06 AM UTC

Quoted Text

That is why the M1A2D with laser-warning receivers better get a kickstart, if not make a SHORAD for M1A2D.



Gotta believe the Army will be including a laser-warning device for it's tactical vehicles. These are fitted to all their helicopters and are pretty small, shouldn't be a huge issue to integrate them. As far as countering 4 or more ATGM's launched in quick succession, I have no idea if Trophy can do this (I'd guess probably not from the info I've seen out there). Best way to do this is to detect the guidance laser and quickly deploy smoke.
Removed by original poster on 06/09/19 - 18:09:42 (GMT).