OFL 120 F1 and OFL 120 F2 rounds

[lavictoireestlavie]

How do OFL 120 F1 (V_m = 1790 m/s) and OFL 120 F2 (V_m = 1740 m/s) rounds fired from a L52 CN-120-26 gun compare to L44/L55 fired M829A2, M829A3 , DM33, DM53 rounds? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated !

[GSprocket]

What I've seen suggests that the OFL 120 F1 is 'similar' to if not the same round as DM43A1/LKE1 (which unless I misunderstand is KEW-A1)

Fired from an L52 barrel it will do marginally better than from the L44, but in practice the difference in velocity is minimal, and the variation in perforation with the small change in velocity is also small (as it is WHA it matters a little bit more than it would for DU ~ though DU retains perforation better over range in consequence of it's relative insensitivity to impact velocity).

OFL 120 F2 is a DU rod, without further information I'd not be sure about a good analogue, but M829A2 is probably a good candidate (higher velocity 'equivalent' to the M829A1, with minimal technological improvements to the penetrator (US attention was primarily on reducing parasitic mass to enable the same propellant to throw the same rod at higher velocity with lower pressure and to keep wear increases minimal).

The M829A3 is much larger with even more carefully tuned parasitic mass.

I'd avoid using the L55 Leopards, as there isn't much flexibility with penetrator types (and CL3141 or DM53(L55) are probably modelled significantly better than F2 would be).

[kalash]

the orange rounds on picture are 'inerte' training rounds without any propelant or holow charge. Its for train reload the autoloader. I don't know about any diference between this apfsds , and I never see the ofl f2 , in UAE I was lucky to fire ofl rounds but only f1 model

[DarkLabor]

Well, the F2 was produced in small quantity by the producer in order to test it.

Unfortunately the F2 development was tarnished with the presence of radioactive elements in the DU bought.

Rumors claim that the ammo batch was destroyed due to this problem in the DU material.

With Scorpion, the Leclerc will receive a number of new ammunitions.

Like the 120 EXPL F1, 120 OEFC F1 aaand the 120 OFLE F2.

[DarkLabor]

You can add 1410m/s for the 120 OEFC F1 and 1050m/s for the old OE 120 F1 (wich should be equivalent to the 120 EXPL F1).

(I intended to take a picture of all my stubs but the v0 for the export OFL 120 F1 is not written on it, so..., pointless... )

[Froggy]

120 OFLE F1A has the same penetrator than the DM43, but a different propulsive powder.

The added velocity is not marginal, as it is 50m/s, so you have @3000m the same penetration than the DM43 @2000m.

For the 120 OFLE F2, the penetrator is similar to M829A2, but again, with a different propulsive powder. The gain in speed is 100m/s, which give it roughtly the same penetration @4000m than the M829A2 @2000.

120 EXPL F1 is similar to DM11

120 EXPL F2 (?) is similar to DM11 with 3 mode of fuse.

120 OEFC F1 is similar to M1028 canister

[GSprocket]

120 OFLE F1A has the same penetrator than the DM43, but a different propulsive powder.

The added velocity is not marginal, as it is 50m/s, so you have @3000m the same penetration than the DM43 @2000m.

For the 120 OFLE F2, the penetrator is similar to M829A2, but again, with a different propulsive powder. The gain in speed is 100m/s, which give it roughtly the same penetration @4000m than the M829A2 @2000.

120 EXPL F1 is similar to DM11

120 EXPL F2 (?) is similar to DM11 with 3 mode of fuse.

120 OEFC F1 is similar to M1028 canister

I stand by 'marginal'.

The difference in penetration over 1000m for a DM43 class weapon / 50m/s is on the order of half an inch/13mm.

I'd class this as marginal improvement. Useful? Yes, but dramatic... not really.

The M829A2 class round might see around 1" extra penetration, which is more significant ~ this is a 'generation' improvement, equivalent to (and for the same reasons (i.e. increased velocity)) as that between M829A1 and M829A2, but is lower than the increases from M829 to M829A1 or from M829A2 to M829A3, which were caused by increased rod sizes (albeit at lower velocity).