Jump to content

Can this be rigth?


Cutter
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

erm, half the people who have replied to your posts has served on an armoured vehicle at some point in time.

Volcanoman - M1A1

3star - M1A1

Ssnake - leopard 2A4

IrishHussar - challenger

12A - some canadian light recce vehicle.

Whats your point??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats your point??

To make us jealous of course :biggrin:. Take it easy young Padawan :)

Jealousy leads to attachment and attachment leads to fear and fear leads to anger and . . .(I'll complete the post when I remember)

Edit: and anger leads to the dark side.

Remember the dark side stronger it is not faster it is.

May you keep growing in the Force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats your point??

just wanted to clarify you on this:

for thoose who dont belive it I really dont care, I tend to trust a trained Leo2a5 gunner in the danish army, rather than some dude whos only experince with a Leo is in SB .

you're providing a 3rd person viewpoint to people who have first-hand experience with the 120mm L44, which is why people are taking your posting with a grain of salt.

don't mistake it for any hostile intent though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the risk of repeating myself.

Wheater some people belive me or not reguarding that 4000m - 6000m is for my sake not important, i know what i know and thats it, im not trying to convince anybody. :)

I could of course refere (that might be a piss smell......sorry miss spell :sonic: ) to my friend, and i could ask him to write here to confirm, but im not, becaurse I really dont care wheater some peoble belive it or not.

And you could write for days about how many peoble in here have fired the 120mm L44 in various different armoured vehicles, that really wont change the facts about the range issue.

Now...look at my first post, my question was not about the danish army doctrine, it was about ammo and armour model in SB, so could we please get back on topic.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the risk of repeating myself.

Wheater some people belive me or not reguarding that 4000m - 6000m is for my sake not important, i know what i know and thats it, im not trying to convince anybody. :)

I could of course refere (that might be a piss smell......sorry miss spell :sonic: ) to my friend, and i could ask him to write here to confirm, but im not, becaurse I really dont care wheater some peoble belive it or not.

And you could write for days about how many peoble in here have fired the 120mm L44 in various different armoured vehicles, that really wont change the facts about the range issue.

Now...look at my first post, my question was not about the danish army doctrine, it was about ammo and armour model in SB, so could we please get back on topic.

:)

Hi Cutter

the 4000 - 6000m engagement is absolutley possible. With tv cameras with upto x 15 zoom now replacing optics and upgraded fire control systems (FCS) Im sure that there are FCS that will compute the ballistic callculations that are needed for elevation and aimoff. The problem thereafter lies in observation. Firstly wether the target is freind or foe and secondly observing the fall of shot.

As for the 10000m+ engagements back in 1973, where no special observation devices or ballistic computers were in service, that is a totally different subject.

I would be interested in the actual mechanics of these engagements ie what initial point of aim was applied to achieve the required range when most KE graticules only go up to about 3200m. Thereafter if a fall of shot was reported how was the correction applied and so on etc. I do think this is an interesting subject that can enlighten not only those that who think they know best but also it could be done via constructive discussion/argument and without personal attacks.

Irish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

WRT the Israelis, they were using dismounted artillery observers with the field telephone connected to the crew to give corrections. WRT sources, search amazon for "water war", "jordan river diversion". It was in the interwar period 1968-1971 IIRC, and it's been mentioned in several books though with a varying degree of details.

From what I remember reading a while ago, the prime reason to use tanks was the strange logic that the UN security council was following those days. Using artillery would have been considered an "escalation" of hostilities by Israel while, apparently, tanks firing across the border on construction workers was not.

Apparently the Syrian Jordan river diversion started in 1964, so it was prior to the six days war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just wanted to clarify you on this:

you're providing a 3rd person viewpoint to people who have first-hand experience with the 120mm L44, which is why people are taking your posting with a grain of salt.

don't mistake it for any hostile intent though.

He is acually providing my viewpoint....

I've read the topic comments, and I can't decide exactly what people are saying; That they don't believe a Leo2 can shoot at stationary targets at up to 6000m or if it can.

The fact is in real life, the Danish Leopard 2A5DK can shoot at targets over 4000.

Using HEAT at over 4000 meters is also possible, but its a bit more complex and, unfortunately, classified...

What you do in SBpro PE, i can't say...

What the Israeli M60 did way back, has nothing to do with anything in this tread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

did some calculations with some numbers i found on a website for the ukrainian KBM2 L50 gun.

it says the dispersion is 0.2 mils.

turns out the dispersion amounts to abut 115cm@6km.

this is probably under lab conditions though, and doesnt take into account other dispersion factors.

i'd think the L44 would have a bit larger dispersion because of its shorter barrel.

i'm sure you can hit a tank at those ranges, if you carefully center the reticle on the target,

and it remains absolutely stationary during the 4 seconds it takes for the round to reach the target, and if the boresighting is perfect, there's no wind whatsoever, you've just updated the MRS for barrel droop, set the powder temperature perfectly, the airpressure doesn't change significantly over that range, and your range estimation is good enough, and basically, if all these factors doesnt make the round disperse more than 0.2 mils you will hit the target with 1 shot.

thats not a realistic shot by far though, its the holy grail of gunnery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is in real life, the Danish Leopard 2A5DK can shoot at targets up to 6000m.

Do you have something to back this up exept a gunners saying?

Like a regulation with firing ranges etc?

Im sure you CAN fire up to those ranges, but im curius if any army is sane enough to try to teach their conscripts to engage on those ranges as you have a poor hit probebility vs giving your position away and wasting ammo.

/KT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Sorry, but that's nonsense. During the "water war" Israel engaged Syrian bulldozers with 105mm APDS at ranges topping at about 10400m, with a hit rate of about 40%.

While I agree that target ID is difficult, often impossible, the Bundeswehr has procedures to engage targets beyond 4000m (lase, index HEAT, enter a range manually that has the equivalent superelevation, aim, fire), so I take the DK claim as absolutely serious.

Nonsense? Well, it guess it is up to interpretation. I am sure that none of the accounts in "water war" were exaggerated *sarcasm*. Personally I think 10km is a load of BS. But then again, maybe those big lumbering bulldozers were indeed finally hit after they launched several hundred HEAT rounds at it, or after someone further down range talked them onto the target. But I would think that would be the extreme.

As I mentioned, I believe that modern FCS and sights could allow 4-6km engagements, but I don't see someone *wasting* ammo by having a trigger point at those ranges, much less 10km. Hmm, lets fire off all our rounds so that when the enemy gets closer we won't have any! It just doesn't seem *practical* to me unless, I suppose, you are in a perfect world with a 20x gun sight, no crosswind, the target is on the exact same elevation, you have a 100% accurate and current barometric pressure reading, the planets and their associated moons are in alignment, and God himself bore sighted your tank with The Holy Muzzle Boresight Device +20. Oh, and lets not forget, you must not of fired a single round since God did his boresighting because you would then be required to begin the MRS updating process which of course is not a scientific method. It just seems to me that only a rail gun would provide *consistent* enough results in regards to shot dispersion to make such engagements *the norm*. But I guess if the discussion is "can a target be hit at a range of 4-10km?" then the answer is different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay lets take the topic back on track ie the KE to CE conversion. If somebody has taken the time and effort to fire KE rounds of certain points on the HEAT graticle and has came up with the fact a certain range when applied using the HEAT graticle equals 6000m when firing KE thats great. The problem which immediatley follows is what happens if your target is not at 6000m but maybe 500 short or plus what part of the graticle do you use then? And as youve already stated it is not done using a FCS therefore why havn't the sights been callibrated ie continued the graticle, for these

ranges?

Irish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

did some calculations with some numbers i found on a website for the ukrainian KBM2 L50 gun.

it says the dispersion is 0.2 mils.

turns out the dispersion amounts to abut 115cm@6km.

this is probably under lab conditions though, and doesnt take into account other dispersion factors.

You hit it with that last line. I did a little hunting around, and it seems the dispersion rate of M256 firing M829 is also on the order of under 0.2 mils. But that's from a benched cannon, not mounted in a tank's turret. Combined with everything else, an 'Accurate' M1A1 (i.e. it's been screened) will have an acceptable dispersion rate on the order of 0.8 mils as evidenced by the fact that you have to get rounds within a 1.2m target at 1,500m to pass with all the 'real-world' factors included. Dispersion only increases with range as variable unknown conditions such as wind variance have more time to take effect. Even the refraction of light could be a problem over greater distances.

I guess the important question for Gilbert is really "At what range, and at what sized target do you screen your Leo2A5s in the Danish Army?" (If I didn't make it clear, "Screening" in the American context is the act of firing real rounds downrange to make sure you are, in fact, correctly boresighted and that all the FCS systems work accordingly)

To answer the very original question, however:

Now if that is normal procedure, shouldnt the KE-WA2 ammo have totally destroyed that Leo2a5 as i mentioned above.

Is it the ammo that is wrong modelled or the armour of the Leo2a5 that is wrong modelled?

What makes you think that anything is wrongly modelled? Leo2a5 has some pretty thick armour on the front, which may well be able to stop KE-WA2.

NTM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have something to back this up exept a gunners saying?

Like a regulation with firing ranges etc?

Im sure you CAN fire up to those ranges, but im curius if any army is sane enough to try to teach their conscripts to engage on those ranges as you have a poor hit probebility vs giving your position away and wasting ammo.

/KT

He is a trained gunner in the danish army, in the Leo2a5, so I think he knows what they train, and to please your couriosity, the danish army teaches that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think that anything is wrongly modelled? Leo2a5 has some pretty thick armour on the front, which may well be able to stop KE-WA2.

Exactly, especially when we're talking KE rounds here at 4 & 6km. The farther the distance to the target, the less energy they have to penetrate armour.

I know for a fact that in denmark the normal doctrin is that moving targets will be engaged at 4000m and stationairy at 6000m (in Leo2a5´s).

Can you be more specific on the type of target that is being engaged (tanks, PC's, trucks)? I'd be surprised if normal doctrine is to engage tanks with KE at those ranges considering the amount of damage that could be done seems rather minor if the round even hits the tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FCS of the Leclerc allows precise fire at 4000m on a 2*2m target.

During a training in UAE, on a firing range, a gunner fired at a T55 at 4800m, using a wrong parameter (temperature was set to -30°C instead of + 40°C) and performed a "virtual" kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have something to back this up exept a gunners saying?

Like a regulation with firing ranges etc?

Im sure you CAN fire up to those ranges, but im curius if any army is sane enough to try to teach their conscripts to engage on those ranges as you have a poor hit probebility vs giving your position away and wasting ammo.

/KT

If you have any knowledge of everyday military operations, you should know that military regulations are classified..

..And don't EVER call me a conscript again.

I guess the important question for Gilbert is really "At what range, and at what sized target do you screen your Leo2A5s in the Danish Army?" (If I didn't make it clear, "Screening" in the American context is the act of firing real rounds downrange to make sure you are, in fact, correctly boresighted and that all the FCS systems work accordingly)

1500 meters minimum

Can you be more specific on the type of target that is being engaged (tanks, PC's, trucks)? I'd be surprised if normal doctrine is to engage tanks with KE at those ranges considering the amount of damage that could be done seems rather minor if the round even hits the tank.

If i say, "If we can see it, we can shoot it"..

Target priority is down to the individual commander

For proof of my occupation, here is a vid i made a couple of weeks ago

http://www.stage6.com/user/Gilbertdk/video/2170322/Leopard-2A5-DK---Unit-Training

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relax people... no need to get all worked up.

Kingtiger. The danish army doesn't use conscripts as tankers, unlike the swedish army.

We believe that that experience counts for much, and you can't get much experience as a conscript.

So all danish tankers are professionels.

And to Gilbert and Cutter try to relax, no one has said that they don't believe you..they are just asking some questions.

There's a lot of present and former tankers in here.....so don't just take people here for virtual geeks (no offence)

just tone down your attitude a bit.. you're new on this forum :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1500 meters minimum

OK, so in order to verify that your tank is accurate, you shoot at a target at 1,500m, maybe a bit more. How big is this target at the specified range?

I think you can see where I'm going. From determining what is an 'acceptable' real-world deviation in Danish tank gunnery standards, we can extrapolate to the appropriate ranges (4km, 6km) and make a rough estimate as to what percentage of hits on a target the Danish Army thinks it will get at 6km, and thus is acceptable by its doctrine. This should avoid the inherent problems caused by the difference between US and Danish ammunition, hydraulic vs electric traverse/elevation which results from extrapolating the same information from the American standards firing the same gun.

Just to make it clear, this is not an attempt to say that you're wrong about anything. If you say the Danish Army teaches shooting at 6km and still attain an acceptable hit rate, I believe you. What I'm trying to understand, and it seems a few others like Volcano, is 'why', because the experience we have using the same gun is such that we have no reason to believe that what we would consider acceptably reliable hits at such a range are possible (note the subjectiveness of this criterion). Thus, all we're worried about, as a matter of purely professional curiousity, is what 'acceptable' is to the Danish Army.

To show just how subjective it is, even at 4km, I'd still likely reach for the radio to call for artillery before reaching for the fire button, but the US Army has craploads of artillery and air support making this an acceptable option.

NTM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point 3Star.

I would like to know what led to this doctrine.Was it gained from the purchase of the Leo2A5 from the Leo1's, or lesson learned data from (Afgan, Balkins) recent tank duty.

We too have under gone such a leap forwards in MBT's and I haven't heard of any new engagement ranges that would come close to what your army is doing.

At 4km I would think there would be very few MBT's that could detect you or even have the ability to hit/engage a Leo2.

3Star I personally would not call the arty, after all someone (you) has to adjust their fire after missing the target, and telling them YES I want you to fire on 1 tank.....lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kingtiger. The danish army doesn't use conscripts as tankers, unlike the swedish army.

We believe that that experience counts for much, and you can't get much experience as a conscript.

So all danish tankers are professionels

Cool, you just stated another reason why Scania should go back to denmark

But like 3Star finly write it (wich I cant) I still just dont understand how/why they train to fire on 4km and 6km ranges, because my math says you will hit like maybe 1 out of 10 rounds if your lucky.

/KT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...