Tanks guns and ammunition.

[BkktMkkt]

2 hours ago, Scav said:

Looks like M322, or Slpprj 95 in Swedish service.

http://www.imisystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/120mm-M322-APFSDS-T-Cartridge-.pdf

 

Also, @BkktMkkt what are you basing the tip of DM33 off?

Atleast according to the patent, it has a flat tip.

[Scav]

Ah yes, that picture.

We don't know if that's DM33 120mm though.
 

The Hülsendeckel on there isn't on production DM33 rounds, those also have two different kind of fins it seems like, one type like the ones shown here, but others are longer:

Spoiler

Also note that the attachment of the case to the sabot is different, as well as the tip being substantially thicker on production ones.

 

Closer to this diagram:

Spoiler

 

I'm not sure, but the schematic you posted looks more like that experimental 105mm DM53:

Spoiler

Granted, the fins are different, but the tip looks much closer, the rings on the sabot also match it closer, on 120mm DM33 there's a large open band that is for attaching the casing to it.

 

I kinda wonder why they would have a sharp tip inside of the fatter steel tip though, the point of that thicker tip in the first place was improved performance against composite armour like on the T-series, having a sharp tip underneath that would partially defeat the purpose.....
 

[TWMSR]

Scav,

 

Hülsendeckel, or consumable cone adaptor, must be and is a part of production rounds. You cannot assembly a round without it. It is a part that is being glued to cylidrical part of case after filling propellant. Yes, there are some novel ideas of partition of 120 mm cartridge, but DM 33 is not an example of that.

 

There are few patents that could be connected with 120 mm DM 33 project because of timeline and general similarity. That coloured diagram is from one of those - and it is just on, AFAIR, steel case around projo's tip. But there are few more, on making predetermined breaking points (present on DM 33 - check here), on changing tip properties via heat treatment, on fin section design etc. IMHO there is stron possibility that diagram posted by BkktMkkt's shows a projectile close or identical to DM 33.

 

As for your last notice, this could be an answer:

A surprising increase in the effectiveness when firing on multiply armored targets, especially on spring mounted armor plate, has been achieved by means of the proposed increase in the diameter in only one tip area, which has been proven through testing. Conservative estimates lead to the conclusion of an increase in effectiveness of more than 10% in connection with this improved kinetic energy projectile, compared with customary kinetic energy projectiles.

 

 

 

 

 

[Gun Ready]

On 9/2/2019 at 5:34 PM, BkktMkkt said:

This sketch shows indeed the DM33 and is extracted from the German Army ammunition identification sheet (Munitionsmerkblatt 1315-9213-3) which by the way is still classified "restricted - FOUO" (VS-NfD)

[LoooSeR]

Quote

Instructions for the Chinese APFSDS DTW-125 shell made out of tungsten-nickel alloy. It is in Chinese, but meaning of numbers should be intuitive.

[Lord_James]

17 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 

Penetration is 220mm at 68.5^o at >2km? Penetration at normal would be around 600mm, if I read that right. 

[Scav]

On 9/4/2019 at 9:06 PM, TWMSR said:

Hülsendeckel, or consumable cone adaptor, must be and is a part of production rounds. You cannot assembly a round without it. It is a part that is being glued to cylidrical part of case after filling propellant. Yes, there are some novel ideas of partition of 120 mm cartridge, but DM 33 is not an example of that.

I know this section is important, but the design in that schematic does not match production rounds.

 

On 9/4/2019 at 9:06 PM, TWMSR said:

There are few patents that could be connected with 120 mm DM 33 project because of timeline and general similarity. That coloured diagram is from one of those - and it is just on, AFAIR, steel case around projo's tip. But there are few more, on making predetermined breaking points (present on DM 33 - check here), on changing tip properties via heat treatment, on fin section design etc. IMHO there is stron possibility that diagram posted by BkktMkkt's shows a projectile close or identical to DM 33.

 

As for your last notice, this could be an answer:

A surprising increase in the effectiveness when firing on multiply armored targets, especially on spring mounted armor plate, has been achieved by means of the proposed increase in the diameter in only one tip area, which has been proven through testing. Conservative estimates lead to the conclusion of an increase in effectiveness of more than 10% in connection with this improved kinetic energy projectile, compared with customary kinetic energy projectiles.

I've seen that before, and they probably used a similar design on many of their ammunitions (105 and 120 alike).

 

If you were to look at the schematic's tip and the tip on actual production ammunition you'll see how much thicker it is on the latter.

Ontop of that, the schematic shows a smooth middle part of the sabot, production DM33 does not have that, it has a small step in it.

 

It might be a schematic for DM33, but it looks closer to what 105 DM53 ended up like.

Either way, the design changed from the schematic quite a bit.

[Gun Ready]

1 hour ago, Scav said:

I know this section is important, but the design in that schematic does not match production rounds.

 

I've seen that before, and they probably used a similar design on many of their ammunitions (105 and 120 alike).

 

If you were to look at the schematic's tip and the tip on actual production ammunition you'll see how much thicker it is on the latter.

Ontop of that, the schematic shows a smooth middle part of the sabot, production DM33 does not have that, it has a small step in it.

 

It might be a schematic for DM33, but it looks closer to what 105 DM53 ended up like.

Either way, the design changed from the schematic quite a bit.

As I stated yesterday the schematic shows precisely the DM33 120 mm x 570. No doubt!!!

[TWMSR]

Scav,

Hülsendeckel of DM 33 looks precisely like that on scheme, not like on pictures of mocked up JM33s.

Look closely at 105 mm DM 53 fins - those do not fit into those from scheme.

.

 

 

[Scav]

5 hours ago, Gun Ready said:

As I stated yesterday the schematic shows precisely the DM33 120 mm x 570. No doubt!!!

I guess a picture for proof isn't possible?
 

4 hours ago, TWMSR said:

Scav,

Hülsendeckel of DM 33 looks precisely like that on scheme, not like on pictures of mocked up JM33s.

Look closely at 105 mm DM 53 fins - those do not fit into those from scheme.

Spoiler

So, this isn't correct?

Everything besides the fins matches 105mm DM53 more closely than 120mm DM33 though...
I know it's just a schematic, but ....

 

 

Also, in that X-ray picture you posted, there's one frontal tip segment, on the schematic there's two.

It could be that the first one was completely destroyed on impact and isn't visible for that reason, or it could be there was only one.

[LoooSeR]

   Saw those on otvaga.

 

[Domichan]

A production 120mm DM33 on top of Munitionsmerkblatt 1305-9213-4. Shape of the tip and fins is exactly the same.

If you look at number 22 in the bottom picture, that is the  Hülsendeckel and "a" indicates where it is glued to the rest of the Hülsenmantel.

Hope this helps.

 

[Jackvony]

New here, but I've followed this thread (and Mech Warfare) for a good while.

 

I attend the United States Military Academy and it is branch week here. Armor brought an M1A2 SEPv2 which, while awesome and cool to get inside of, was nothing new. However, they had a cutaway of a M829A4 round, which was on public display so it's not breaking OPSEC. Thought it would interest you guys.

 

 

Edit: I have no official measurements but I've looked at some photos of M829A3 and the penetrator definitely seems longer based on the sabot petals seeming to be longer at the top.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Jackvony

[CaptainBallistic]

9 hours ago, Jackvony said:

New here, but I've followed this thread (and Mech Warfare) for a good while.

 

I attend the United States Military Academy and it is branch week here. Armor brought an M1A2 SEPv2 which, while awesome and cool to get inside of, was nothing new. However, they had a cutaway of a M829A4 round, which was on public display so it's not breaking OPSEC. Thought it would interest you guys.

 

 

 

 

Edit: I have no official measurements but I've looked at some photos of M829A3 and the penetrator definitely seems longer based on the sabot petals seeming to be longer at the top.

Thats amazing and completely unexpected. btw do you have a picture of the cartridge with the tip of the penetrator not cut off from rest of photo?

 

[Militarysta]

I'm seriously doubt if this is real M829A4 cut-view. IMHO it's preapared mock-up for sucht shows and exibitions and some parts are  removed. For example - where is  data link?

Igniter from M829A3 whit no changes? etc..

[CaptainBallistic]

3 minutes ago, Militarysta said:

I'm seriously doubt if this is real M829A4 cut-view. IMHO it's preapared mock-up for sucht shows and exibitions and some parts are  removed. For example - where is  data link?

Igniter from M829A3 whit no changes? etc..

I'd say they are at the bottom of the cartridge

 

What changes would be nessacary for the igniter to deviate much from the a3? Where is a picture of the A3's igniter for comparison? 

[Militarysta]

That's  not the point - the point is that cut-viev have no single part accoding to infos about data-link.

Why?

IMHO it's just censored version for exibition not real M829A4. Thats all.

 

ps. OK, there are minor changes at ignitor case

 

 

and whole M829A3 for compare:

 

 

 

 

[Lord_James]

15 hours ago, Jackvony said:

New here, but I've followed this thread (and Mech Warfare) for a good while.

 

I attend the United States Military Academy and it is branch week here. Armor brought an M1A2 SEPv2 which, while awesome and cool to get inside of, was nothing new. However, they had a cutaway of a M829A4 round, which was on public display so it's not breaking OPSEC. Thought it would interest you guys.

 

 

Edit: I have no official measurements but I've looked at some photos of M829A3 and the penetrator definitely seems longer based on the sabot petals seeming to be longer at the top.

 

Welcome to Sturgeon’s House  great first post! 

[Jackvony]

6 hours ago, CaptainBallistic said:

Thats amazing and completely unexpected. btw do you have a picture of the cartridge with the tip of the penetrator not cut off from rest of photo?

 

I can try to take more pictures today, especially to compare with photos of M829A3. I mentioned the hypothesis stated earlier in this thread that the datalink is used to program some kind of precursor to fly infront of the round to defeat heavy ERA to the Master Sergeant in charge of the display. He asked me if my parents worked for the military and when I said no, shook his head, smiled, and told me I knew too much. I know this is "heresay" but to me, it's pretty good confirmation you guys are on the right track.

[Lord_James]

49 minutes ago, Jackvony said:

I can try to take more pictures today, especially to compare with photos of M829A3. I mentioned the hypothesis stated earlier in this thread that the datalink is used to program some kind of precursor to fly infront of the round to defeat heavy ERA to the Master Sergeant in charge of the display. He asked me if my parents worked for the military and when I said no, shook his head, smiled, and told me I knew too much. I know this is "heresay" but to me, it's pretty good confirmation you guys are on the right track.

 

Lol, never let your superiors know you’re smart unless they ask you if you’re smart. Learned that in ROTC before I was unable to continue. 

[Ramlaen]

7 hours ago, Militarysta said:

I'm seriously doubt if this is real M829A4 cut-view. IMHO it's preapared mock-up for sucht shows and exibitions and some parts are  removed. For example - where is  data link?

Igniter from M829A3 whit no changes? etc..

 

It is probably a recycled M829A3 display.

[Jackvony]

29 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

It is probably a recycled M829A3 display.

 

I disagree. Look at the sabot petals. They extend up a good further on the upper part of the projectile. The tip also seems to have a more fluid shape compared to M829A3. I'm going to take a less distorted picture today and then use the width of the round to estimate penetrator length.

[Ramlaen]

54 minutes ago, Jackvony said:

 

I disagree. Look at the sabot petals. They extend up a good further on the upper part of the projectile. The tip also seems to have a more fluid shape compared to M829A3. I'm going to take a less distorted picture today and then use the width of the round to estimate penetrator length.

 

Take a picture of the base if you can.

[Scav]

@Domichan

Thanks for those pictures, still not sure though... DM53 looks very close.

 

20 hours ago, Jackvony said:

Edit: I have no official measurements but I've looked at some photos of M829A3 and the penetrator definitely seems longer based on the sabot petals seeming to be longer at the top.

Nice pics, from my measurements it's the same length as M829A3 though the sabot looks a bit different as you pointed out.

If we assume the core goes halfway into the windshield (which you can actually see fairly well, it's very thin), it's about 785mm long.

 

Though I have to agree with @Militarysta, it very much looks like some kind of mockup or steel shell.

Maybe you could hang around long enough to watch them move it to see how heavy it is  

[TWMSR]

M829A3 uses stick propellant. M829A4 is said to use SCDB propellant (and KET, as an option), which AFAIK come in granular form.

And for sure it is mockup, a good one. It could be seen propellant containment bag, used in US 120 mm ammunition to prevent spillage. And new type of skive joint, near the bottom of combustible part of case.

 

Nice pictures, tank u!