How does German and American top Sabot ammunition compare?

[Skybird03]

The sim lists the German DM53 with a P0 of 840, a PDF included says it is a tungsten core and has an LD of 31:1.

The American M829A3 is listed in the sim with an only slightly improved P0 of 850,and is described in the PDF with an LD of 33:1, having an depleted uranium penetrator, of course.

Both rounds are listed of having a range of 4000m.

When having red about German and American ammo (randomly), I sometimes stumbled over this value: that the American round, due to it’s DU-penetrator, does the same amount of damage like the German one – but at around 20-25% longer range. I am not sure, though, if it were these two types of rounds that the authors referred to. But what I have quoted above gives me the impression that the difference between both rounds in performance is far smaller than I assumed. Is the German Tungsten-round really THAT close to the American DU-round?

For the T-80, the sim lists China-made 125-2 with a P0 of 690 – tougher than the Russian made 3BM42M with a P0 of 630. Both rounds with a range of “just” 3500 m.

Does higher P0-values and LD-ratios directly translate into higher destruction power (or penetration power), assuming same range, target aspects and armour type, or are there intermediating variables that mess up such a linear quotation? Velocity and speed is already included in the calculation of the P0, or am I wrong?

[ShotMagnet]

The question, to my still-incomplete understanding, centers more around density and material properties of the penetrator. dU has twice the density of lead, and is pyrophoric. At temperatures above 600 deg C dU ignites, something that I'd assume would happen with routine frequency where regards penetrator striking plate.

You can imagine the fun and games surrounding the impact of a dU penetrator which does just that, then ignites as a result of friction with the target plate. Flaming bits of metal flung inside a tank can't be good for anything or anyone.

The Germans probably use tungsten as it's probably more readily machined in comparison to dU.

Data taken from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/


Shot

[Storm91]

Now for the grunts crazy reply.American & German ammo compare like beer.Like American beer-budweiser 5% to German beer Licher 8%.

Let's not forget the germans make the best beer,handguns, beautiful women in the world.Long black hair green eyes from hell nuff said.

Prime example WW2 88mm flak gun anti aircraft/anti tank out to 1500m-2000m back then.Panther E,F,G, another bad ass piece of machinery- sweet gun long tube- fine rifling..........

[Ssnake]

There is no standard, easy formula. dU offers the biggest advantage at impact speeds of around 1100-1300m/s (and recedes beyond impact speeds of 2200m/s). It also works better if compared to tungsten carbide or heavy alloy (WHA) penetrators; they tend to mushroom on impact, requiring that a bigger cavity needs to be drilled through the armor material (thus reducing the possible crater depth).
The 120mm DM53/63 from Rheinmetall has a considerably higher muzzle velocity which alone closes the gap to dU material advantages a bit. Another element is that "Rheinmetall WHA IV", as they call it, has adiabatic shear like dU, and mitigates the mushrooming problem to a large degree.

The old 70's formula "like tungsten, plus 10%" does no longer apply under these conditions. Material science has made some progress since then.

[Skybird03]

I expect that SBP calculates the impact on basis of those values that are listed in the arming options for the vehicles (or on comparable simplificated numbers). So when those values are that much close, would you say that this realistically reflects an almost non-existing difference between the two described DU and Tungsten rounds in reality, armour penetration described as 850 and 840 mm?

What round is cheaper to produce, DU, or Tungsten? Since the Americans need to equip a larger tank force than Germany, I would assume that the DU-rounds are cheaper, else financial reason would demand to switch to Tungsten rounds...? (if the industrial DU lobby would like it is something different).

[cobrabase]

I expect that SBP calculates the impact on basis of those values that are listed in the arming options for the vehicles (or on comparable simplificated numbers). So when those values are that much close, would you say that this realistically reflects an almost non-existing difference between the two described DU and Tungsten rounds in reality, armour penetration described as 850 and 840 mm?

What round is cheaper to produce, DU, or Tungsten? Since the Americans need to equip a larger tank force than Germany, I would assume that the DU-rounds are cheaper, else financial reason would demand to switch to Tungsten rounds...? (if the industrial DU lobby would like it is something different).


How many nuclear power plants does America have? How much used Uranium do we produce each year... (still better than any other power source btw tree huggers) factor that in as well. I have no idea how readily available Tungsten is in the US... you'd figure I would since once of the subjects I teach is Geology. Guess I'd better get studying.

My point is... You've got to look at "cheapness" in terms of what each country has. Overall, while the process of forming DU penetrators is expensive, its a hell of a lot LESS expensive HERE than in other countries.

[Skybird03]

Availability finds it's way into the calculation of financial costs, doesn't it. I am not so sure that Germany is autark in it's supply with Tungsten. Major parts of western military and hitech production, especially aero- and space technology, is depending of precious rare ore imports, from Africa for example. Sometimes, a threat to the flowing of these supplies from overseas, even can trigger serious political and intel action, and supporting this or that side in local civil wars. It's a vital business for Western nations, the more so, the more precious the goods in question are.

but all that is not so much part of the original question.

[Homer]

Here you go Skybird.... the basics of large calibre ballistics.

[Froggy]

USA has so many DU that France buy some in the 90' to make our OFL 120 F2. But after Kosovo war, it has been proved that the round were radio-active, and so the 60000 rounds have to be destroyed, thus we only have DM43 like rounds for now, until the PROCIPAC is fielded.

[Skybird03]

Here you go Skybird.... the basics of large calibre ballistics.

Well, don'T understand that kind of stuff, I am no engineer or mathematical smarthead, but thanks anyway.All I wanted to know is if the minor, almost non-existant difference between the two most modern German and US rounds modelled in SBP reflects a fact in reality, or maybe is missing something, since I would have expected DU-ammunition to have a more obvious advantage. :(

[Homer]

In these types of manuals, just read the summary of findings to get the short version.

"Thus the muzzle velocity is not dominant for the long rod penetration power for a given weapon and energy input.
Therefore other penetrator design criteria can be considered for the final design:

- High system efficiency, high energy EP of the penetrator
- High bending stiffness of the penetrator to achieve a high resistance to fracture"

[Skybird03]

Okayokay, but all this still does not answer my simple question. The two rounds are listed in SBP with P0s of 850 and 840 mm. Does this mean that the sim treats them as almost equal, and does this reflect the way they compare in reality? You people tell me all that background stuff how things are calcuated and what variables play a role, that is appreciated, but I still have no answer to my question. I may be wrong, but the P0 value already has taken into account material, velocity, and such things, or not? So I feel tempted to say that it marks pretty much the penetration power of the projectile against a defined type of armour at a defined range. And if two rounds differ obnly by 10 mm the one round can penetrate more than the other in this defined situation, then I am tempted to conclude that both rounds are almist of equal destructive force. Becasue the one round would manage to penetrate only 10mm more of armour, while both already have driven through 840 mm.

[RecceDG]

I don't know about you, but if that extra 10mm of armour was between me and the bad guy, that makes a serious difference to me....

DG

[Ssnake]

...my simple question. The two rounds are listed in SBP with P0s of 850 and 840 mm. Does this mean that the sim treats them as almost equal
Yes.
The rounds may behave more differently at longer ranges, depending on their ballistic parameters (e.g. aerodynamic drag coefficient...). But at the muzzle STeel Beasts treats them almost identically.

The P0 figures are supposed to give you a rough idea about the relative power of these rounds if you're not familiar with the aamo type codes/designations (and who, aside from specialists and nerdy freaks like us, is?).

[Maj.Hans]

In the future, perhaps something other than P0 and P2500 would be nice...
Include a PMax so we know how hard it hits at the end of it's arc?

Also, WTF does the whole "DM" code stand for, since we're being nerdy. I know what DMX2 is HEAT, DMX3 is AP, etc, but what about 0,1,4,etc?
And what does DM itself stand for BTW?

Now, I thought one of the advantages of DU rods, besides the fact that they burned once inside a target, was that supposedly the round would constantly shear off to be sharp at it's tip?

"Adiabadic Shear" or something like that.

[Ssnake]

Rheinmetall says that their latest "tungsten heavy alloy IV" has adiabatic shear, too. Not totally sure if DM stands for "Deutsche Munition" or something similar, but it's the German code prefix for all kinds of explosives, propellants, munition parts and complete cartridges. The last number designates the type of ammunition:
0: Exercise ammunition (totally inert, for loading & handling drills)
1: High explosive
2: Hollow charge
3: Armor piercing
4: Incendiary
5: Smoke
6: Illumination
7: ???
8: Practice munition (e.g. with indert warheads)
9: other