login   |    register
Armor/AFV: Modern Armor
Modern armor in general.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Challenger II with 130mm main gun,
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,198 posts
Armorama: 1,075 posts
Posted: Friday, July 31, 2020 - 09:43 PM UTC
Not a model, seen here, https://www.armyrecognition.com/defense_news_july_2020_global_security_army_industry/rheinmettall_unveils_new_leopard_tank_mbt_with_130mm_cannon.html would make for a great kit, nonetheless. How many iterations of the Challenger are there now, Streetfighter, Black Knight, TES, the Rheinmettall turreted 120mm version. Which version will make it into service, if any?
Johnnych01
Visit this Community
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: June 29, 2019
KitMaker: 539 posts
Armorama: 459 posts
Posted: Friday, July 31, 2020 - 10:59 PM UTC
Black knight and Street fighter aren't really versions of it. Black Knight was a working example offered by BAE showing bits that they thought the Army would like or need.
Street fighter was just a nickname the crews gave to their updated Chally 2s as part of the LEPs program when they begun getting updated and issued. The TES is probably going to be the issued one now most of the trails and development has been completed and wagons will be retro fitted on a base overhaul.
I would see no reason why gunnery gurus at Lulworth would want to replace the Chally 2 120mm charm main gun as it's pretty awesome anyway.
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,191 posts
Armorama: 6,078 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 02:38 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Black Knight was a working example offered by BAE showing bits that they thought the Army would like or need.



Along the same vein BAE has an M109A8 Paladin in the works. Since I've just purchased another Panda version on the M109A7, even though it's rife with inaccuracies, I'll use it for the basis.
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,102 posts
Armorama: 2,489 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 05:30 AM UTC
I wonder how many rounds a MBT with a 130mm cannon will hold in the turret bustle. 40 rounds seems the norm with a 120mm cannon.

I doubt tank crews would want less than 40 rounds with 130mm. That in itself might require a new turret bustle, obviously, as the diameter of the round is larger.

Another question would be...how heavier would the 130mm round be over the 120mm round? Remember, some of these tankers are just mere kids to young adults. Sure, they can lift rounds, but who would want to lift heavier 130mm rounds? Would the loading of the turret bustle and loading of the main gun be reduced because the 130mm round is heavier than the 120mm round, even with a new turret bustle and interior? All this has to be tested and factored in. 5-6 seconds per round fired is the norm for 120mm. If it now takes 8-10 seconds to load and fire a 130mm round...is that worth the upgrade?

And of course...how big of a turret bustle explosion would all those rounds hit with a tank round, RPG, AND a ATGM be at 130mm storage compared to 120mm? MBTs turret bustles were tested at 40 120mm rounds stored and exploded. Would exploding 130mm rounds in a bustle damage anything and anyone nearby compared to 120mm rounds in a turret bustle? Would the hit MBT survive with 130mm rounds?

All this testing is what makes the military so expensive (and thorough). We're talking about several 130mm MBTs that need to be tested (and destroyed).

Peter
2805662
Visit this Community
Australian Capital Territory, Australia
Joined: March 27, 2008
KitMaker: 543 posts
Armorama: 538 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 07:02 AM UTC
The Challenger 2 with the new RBSL turret & Rheinmetall smoothbore 120mm that’s been around for the last 18 months or so only carries 31 rounds for its main armament.

At least if the 130mm is adopted, the UK will (narrowly) avoid having standardised on NATO tank ammunition, continuing the proud tradition of being unique since the retirement of their105mm-equipped Centurions.
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,198 posts
Armorama: 1,075 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 01:11 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Along the same vein BAE has an M109A8 Paladin in the works. Since I've just purchased another Panda version on the M109A7, even though it's rife with inaccuracies, I'll use it for the basis.



Is that the one with L55 XM1299 ERCA, auto-loader, and armor panels on the hull sides? I’ve read it was based on an A6 turret, and contemplated doing one with an AFV Club kit. Comes in any colour as long as it’s sand...
HermannB
Visit this Community
Bayern, Germany
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,079 posts
Armorama: 4,047 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 01:16 PM UTC
Rheinmetall video of the 130mm Challenger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=47&v=J8Sa_q-Lz6g&feature=emb_logo
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,198 posts
Armorama: 1,075 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 01:20 PM UTC
Hi Peter,

Yeah, it’s a balance between auto-loader, AI, and mechanics with loading and firing a main gun round with a first round hit that destroys the target. Complicated by new armour and APS. I’d expect rearming a tank would be done using cassettes of ammo in the next generation MBT with an unmanned turret. There have been some great concept vehicles out there with this feature. I think it was the Swedish who lead the way with a 140mm main gun back in the day (last century).

What do you mean, mere kids to young adults? Haven’t you heard, the new mantra is anyone can do anything! It’s about being diverse and inclusive these days, not strong and capable!
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,191 posts
Armorama: 6,078 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 02:08 PM UTC
Kylie,
They are indeed based on A6/7 turrets. The first one was based on an A6 hull, but I want to do the one based on the A7 hull. There was a lot of buzz about this April of last year when I went to the 40 level FA course.
Bonaparte84
Visit this Community
Hessen, Germany
Joined: July 17, 2013
KitMaker: 330 posts
Armorama: 323 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 10:33 PM UTC
Here is a German Wikipedia article on the gun:
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_130-mm-Waffenanlage_L/51

It says the new gun will have 50 % more muzzle energy (is that a word?) than the 120 mm gun (L44 or L55, i don't know). If that's true, that is a significant improvement. Rounds measure 1,30 m and weigh 30 kilo, which is why plans call for the use of an autoloader.
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,932 posts
Armorama: 3,362 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 01, 2020 - 11:59 PM UTC
Given that Challenger's 120mm uses two-part ammo with all the explosives stored below the turret ring and bagged charge with no metal case to eject, switching to the RM 130mm would be a major change indeed! I wonder if the UK would look instead to adapt the 130 to fire two-part ammo so as to require the bare minimum of turret and hull alterations? Divided ammo would reduce the extra size/weight problem to a trifle, and using UK production facilities would mean high-value jobs in the UK rather than sending money overseas...

Up-gunning is always attractive - a big enough HE shell would defeat any armour by simply dis-assembling it with a big enough burst! If it was possible to fit a 155mm gun you could probably do away with all the complex AP solutions.
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,191 posts
Armorama: 6,078 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 12:13 AM UTC

Quoted Text

...muzzle energy (is that a word?)...



For many of us yes. For you it'd probably be something like Gemesstehaubitzerohrendeenergie. And if they could somehow fit the words Gemeinschaft or
Genemigung
into it and still have it make sense I'm sure they'd try...
Lest anyone look up muzzle in German on Google or whatever, I reserve the word Schnauze for people I find annoying, so I won't use it here.
RobinNilsson
Staff MemberTOS Moderator
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,571 posts
Armorama: 5,465 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 01:45 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

...muzzle energy (is that a word?)...



For many of us yes. For you it'd probably be something like Gemesstehaubitzerohrendeenergie. And if they could somehow fit the words Gemeinschaft or
Genemigung
into it and still have it make sense I'm sure they'd try...
Lest anyone look up muzzle in German on Google or whatever, I reserve the word Schnauze for people I find annoying, so I won't use it here.



These are the three first alternatives suggested by Google Translate:
die Schnauze: snout, muzzle, spout, lip, gob

der Maulkorb: muzzle (put around the snout of aggressive dogs)

die Mündung: muzzle, mouth, estuary, end (the right choice for the business end of a gun)

I would use "Schnauze!" as a short form for "Schnauze zu!" meaning Shut Up! A Schnauzer is a breed of dog ....
18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,191 posts
Armorama: 6,078 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 02:01 AM UTC
Ah, but I didn't enter Schnauze - that's what you get when you enter muzzle. And I've used in that context many times. There's also Halt die Klappe! or simply Klappe!, but I prefer Schnauze, ee!

Interestingly my made up word translated into Measured dust pipe end energy which wasn't too far off base from what I wanted it to mean.

It's tough to top Rechtsschutzversicherungsgesellschaften, and that's not even the longest German word. It does manage to use Gesellschaft rather than Gemeinschaft. For some reason Germans love to work that in.
RobinNilsson
Staff MemberTOS Moderator
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,571 posts
Armorama: 5,465 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 02:15 AM UTC
The two first alternatives starting from Schnauze:

snout: Schnauze, Rüssel(elephants carry these), Spitzel, Zinken, Knaster

muzzle: Schnauze, Maulkorb, Mündung , Maul, Lauf, Muffel

If you want to be really rude (as in eff-off) you can say
'Du kannst mich mal .." with the hinted "am Arsch lecken" (kiss my butthole) or the somewhat older "den Buckel runterrutschen" (slide down my backside).
In some dialects Buckel is written Puckel.

For more than one object of displeasure the wording is
"Sie können mich mal ..."
My grandfather (Opa) used that expression about the NSDAP and someone promptly told the Polizei. A few days later my Opa found out that the little rat had stolen a sack of potatoes. When the rat was given the choice of changing his tale and say that he had misheard OR go to koncentration camp for theft he changed his story ....


Edit: You were REALLY close: Gemessene haubitzenrohrendenergie
TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,717 posts
Armorama: 1,638 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 11:10 AM UTC
Two part rounds reminds me of the 25 foot tall rocket of flames coming out of a T72 turret.
TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,717 posts
Armorama: 1,638 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 11:29 AM UTC
What is the realistic upper limit to gun size for a tank? We may have reached it. The weight of the tank increases because they try to design the tank to survive a hit from its own main gun. The size increases as the equipment size increases. We could be looking at 80 tones. A larger engine, more fuel...As the size and complexity increases, so does the cost to buy and maintain it. We could be looking at a modern dinosaur.
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,932 posts
Armorama: 3,362 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 12:05 PM UTC

Quoted Text

What is the realistic upper limit to gun size for a tank? We may have reached it. The weight of the tank increases because they try to design the tank to survive a hit from its own main gun. The size increases as the equipment size increases. We could be looking at 80 tones. A larger engine, more fuel...As the size and complexity increases, so does the cost to buy and maintain it. We could be looking at a modern dinosaur.



Indeed there are upper limits to the size and weight of an MBT, since they do need shipped to the battlefield. And it seems they are only really a good investment if you have air superiority and great all-arms cooperation, since they are so vulnerable to cheap RPGs and drones these days. There have been rumblings to this effect around budget-time in recent years...
joepanzer
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: January 21, 2004
KitMaker: 799 posts
Armorama: 736 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 12:33 PM UTC
Here's a silly question:

Would Rifling in the barrel of the 120 give it more muzzle velocity? I know that it improves accuracy.
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,102 posts
Armorama: 2,489 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 12:51 PM UTC

Quoted Text

What is the realistic upper limit to gun size for a tank? We may have reached it. The weight of the tank increases because they try to design the tank to survive a hit from its own main gun. The size increases as the equipment size increases. We could be looking at 80 tones. A larger engine, more fuel...As the size and complexity increases, so does the cost to buy and maintain it. We could be looking at a modern dinosaur.



The latest M1A2 SEP V3 with TUSK II and Trophy APS already exceeds 80 tons.

I think tank gun size can go higher than 130mm with an autoloader. The French have tested a 140mm main tank gun on their Leclerc.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26170/france-tests-huge-140mm-tank-gun-as-it-pushes-ahead-with-germany-on-a-new-tank-design

Bear in mind that tank weight is attributed to the armor package that is found on the front of the turret and hull of many NATO tanks. The UK, Germany, and the USA use the Burlington sandwich composite armor which is exceptionally heavy (and with Depleted Uranium armor), but offers exceptional HEAT and kinetic penetration resistance. Burlington is what gives the NATO MBTs the slab sides as Burlington (or Chobham armor) cannot be rolled or bent.

However, if you look at the Russian T-14 Armata with its remote 125mm main gun turret that has no crew inside (the three-man crew sits in the hull) and the Leopard 2 Next Generation MBT with such a small frontal angled turret, then it is possible to increase the diameter of the main gun and not allocate so much armor thickness weight to protect the turret front, meaning not so much Burlington if there is no crew inside. The M1A2's flat angled frontal turret shape is "old school" compared to some of the newer tank designs that have "chiseled" fronts and narrower profiles.

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/leopard_2ng_images.htm

ERA, APS, remote turret, jammers, smoke, the crew sitting in the hull, and chiseling the frontal armor are all aspects that can reduce the weight of tanks and devote less armor to protecting the front of the turret.

You can see how large the main gun size can increase with this old 1990s FMBT design against a M1 Abrams. Nothing became of the FMBT except some mockup.

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/414351-i-found-this/
ALBOWIE
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: February 28, 2006
KitMaker: 1,604 posts
Armorama: 1,564 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 02, 2020 - 02:00 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Two part rounds reminds me of the 25 foot tall rocket of flames coming out of a T72 turret.

Unlike Russian ones the british 2 part are well protected in the lower hull with Wet stowage, very survivable not having them in the turret or an autoloader
TopSmith
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,717 posts
Armorama: 1,638 posts
Posted: Monday, August 03, 2020 - 11:34 AM UTC
Maybe an auto loader in an M1a2 with 1 round every 2 seconds and a computer with auto correction. 2 hits in 2 seconds pretty much puts a whammy on something.
barkingdigger
Staff MemberAssociate Editor
ARMORAMA
#013
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: June 20, 2008
KitMaker: 3,932 posts
Armorama: 3,362 posts
Posted: Monday, August 03, 2020 - 10:04 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Here's a silly question:

Would Rifling in the barrel of the 120 give it more muzzle velocity? I know that it improves accuracy.



Hmm - probably not. The smooth-bore guns still need a tight gas seal to work, so all rifling would do is add more friction surface that if anything slows the round down. The 120mm in Challenger is rifled, but then the British aren't as dependent on fin-stabilised rounds that need a smooth-bore to work properly.