FineScale.com forums are FREE. If you wish to participate you must
LOGIN | REGISTER.
|
Armor
Started by Manstein's revenge at 07-06-2007 6:00 PM. Topic has 2968 replies.
  
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
 07-06-2007, 6:00 PM
|
Manstein's revenge
 
Joined on 05-15-2007
Eastern front
Posts 7,491
|
|
|
 waynec wrote: | | technically the M-551 sheridan is an Armored Reconnaissance Airborne Assault vehicle. |
|
...okay...technically, I say it is still a tank...lol
ERIC VON 
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 6:03 PM
|
Manstein's revenge
Joined on 05-15-2007
Eastern front
Posts 7,491
|
|
|
|
| Gun Tech wrote: | | I hope this one will be a bit harder than my last one. ID this: |
|
...that is a french cannon on a carriage, 105mm, I believe...used by a lot of Luft Field Divisions...DML has a kit of this but I am not gonna bother to look up the nomenclature...
ERIC VON
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 6:07 PM
|
waynec
Joined on 04-27-2006
colorado
Posts 228
|
|
|
|
concur though i find it amusing that so many reporters and journalists think anything with a turret is a tank. i got a "tanks" calendar as a gift one year and my frau looked at the pictures on the back and said "these aren't tanks." of course she was correct as there was a bradlely, an m-109 sp, and possibly a stryker picture among the mbt's.
"if the little things really annoy you, maybe it's because the big things are going well."
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 7:26 PM
|
Gun Tech
Joined on 08-06-2006
Edmonton, Canada
Posts 2,119
|
|
|
|
No, I will post a more revealating picture in 15 mins. There is not a lot of war pictures of this one I believe ![Big Smile [:D]](/emoticons/icon_smile_big.gif)
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 7:51 PM
|
Gun Tech
Joined on 08-06-2006
Edmonton, Canada
Posts 2,119
|
|
|
|
Here's a more revealing shot. I blurred out the name ![Wink [;)]](/emoticons/icon_smile_wink.gif)
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 8:24 PM
|
Manstein's revenge
Joined on 05-15-2007
Eastern front
Posts 7,491
|
|
|
|
...whew, finally...okay, new question: "When did the field application of zimmerit begin?" JUST KIDDING !!! Seriously, "What color are German WW2 fire extinguishers?" JUST KIDDING, AGAIN !!! Alright, "Which Main Battle Tank was the first to carry a smooth-bore gun, what are the advantages of it over a rifled gun, and how is the projectile stabilized in the smooth bore?"
ERIC VON
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 8:34 PM
|
ww2modeler
Joined on 11-01-2006
United States
Posts 981
|
|
|
|
The T-62, this explains the rest. To reliably penetrate the thick armor of modern armored vehicles, a very long, thin kinetic energy projectile is required. The longer the projectile is in relation to its diameter, the higher the twist rate must be to provide stability. Practical rifling can only stabilize projectiles of a certain length to diameter ratio, and these modern rounds are just too long. These rounds are instead formed into a dart shape, using fins for stabilization. With the fins for stability, rifling is no longer needed and in fact the spin imparted by rifling will degrade the accuracy of a finned projectile. Because of the increasing use of the highly effective kinetic energy penetrator projectiles by tank guns, many modern tanks have smoothbore barrels.(This is from wikepedia, to lazy to copy it myself)![Zzz [zzz]](/emoticons/icon_smile_zzz.gif) David
On the bench:
1/72 Hurricane Mk.IIC-needs paint
1/35 Tamiya M5 Stuart-40%
1/35 Tamiya M1A1 AIM-still staring at instructions
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 8:37 PM
|
Manstein's revenge
Joined on 05-15-2007
Eastern front
Posts 7,491
|
|
|
|
BINGO...but sort of begs the question: If large bores are no longer needed, then why are they still around? I mean, why not put a 20mm cannon on the Abrams to fire the "darts"? I don't know the answer, but let me guess at my own question: Because the larger bore is needed for HE rounds???
ERIC VON
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 9:00 PM
|
Gun Tech
Joined on 08-06-2006
Edmonton, Canada
Posts 2,119
|
|
|
|
| Mansteins revenge wrote: | | BINGO...but sort of begs the question: If large bores are no longer needed, then why are they still around? I mean, why not put a 20mm cannon on the Abrams to fire the "darts"? I don't know the answer, but let me guess at my own question: Because the larger bore is needed for HE rounds??? |
|
Seems quite plausible......... geez, I wish I wasn't so tired when I had that conference at the ammo dump ![Laugh [(-D]](/emoticons/icon_smile_newlaugh.gif)
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 9:03 PM
|
ww2modeler
Joined on 11-01-2006
United States
Posts 981
|
|
|
|
Probobly because the electronics,warhead,and other stuff can't fit in a smaller shell. OK, now my next question: When were the first tanks used in combat, which battle, which war, which side. David
On the bench:
1/72 Hurricane Mk.IIC-needs paint
1/35 Tamiya M5 Stuart-40%
1/35 Tamiya M1A1 AIM-still staring at instructions
|
|
|
|
Report Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
FineScale.com Forums » Modeling Subjects » Armor
|
Forum Jump:
|
|