0
What else can I help you with?
What are tank bullets called?
Tank bullets are commonly referred to as tank ammunition or rounds. The primary types include armor-piercing rounds, high-explosive rounds, and canister rounds, each designed for specific combat scenarios. The most recognized type of armor-piercing round is the APFSDS (Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot) round, which is designed to penetrate armored targets effectively.
What is the range of a modern tank cannon?
The range of a modern tank cannon typically varies between 2,000 to 4,000 meters (about 1.2 to 2.5 miles), depending on the specific model and type of ammunition used. For instance, the 120mm smoothbore cannon found on many Western tanks like the M1 Abrams can effectively engage targets at these distances. Advanced ammunition types, such as armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS), can enhance range and accuracy. However, effective engagement often depends on factors like terrain, weather, and the tank's targeting systems.
Between the Challenger 2 or Abrams M1A2 which is better?
It's highly unlikely they'll ever meet each other in battle, so there probably will never be a definite means of determining this. Each has their advantages and disadvantages, such as:M1 Abrams advantages:Lighter weight leaves it more suitable for transport by air. This is critical for any expeditionary military -> This is completely irrelevant, the same number of Challanger2 tanks can be carried by any air transport as the M1.*Smoothbore gun is more accommodating of various types of projectiles -> and also less accommodating with other various types of ammunition.Mobility - it's a much faster vehicle than the Challenger, and speed is critical in the modern battlefield -> The Challenger2 has a considerably more advanced suspension system than the M1 and will outperform over extreme terrain, it also means the Gyro-stabilizer doesn't have to work as hard to pull off an accurate shot while movingTurbine motor uses less moving parts than a traditional diesel motor, making maintenance and repair easier -> The turbine motor is no where near as reliable as the Diesel, this is a no-brainer!M1 Abrams disadvantages:Less armoured than the Challenger 2, although add-on armour can be installedTurbine motor has a considerably higher rate of fuel consumption, thus reducing the combat range of the vehicle. This is the reason why the Germans rejected this for the Leopard 2, also is not as reliable as the Challenger2 diesel engineTurbine motor produces high heat signatureLess manoeuvrable over extreme terrainSmoothbore gun means less accuracy for HE and HEAT rounds, also means HESH rounds cannot be firedChallenger 2 advantages:Diesel motor has a lower rate of fuel consumptionDiesel motor is also more reliableBetter armoured vehicleMore maneuverable over extreme terrainRifled gun means better accuracy and range with non FS roundsHigher average 1st hit kill rate, this of course is dependant on the skill of the tank crew, but having slightly better HK and IR targeting systems does helpChallenger 2 disadvantages:Slower speed increases vulnerability -> The Challenger2 uses Hydropneumatic and as a result is actually faster and considerably more manoeuvrable over extreme terrain*120mm rifled gun is proprietary, and not compatible with standard NATO munitions -> The British army does not use NATO standard rounds. The British army trialled a Challenger2 a few years back with a 120mm L55 smoothbore and decided to keep the rifled gun mainly because of the advantages in using HESH* In todays battlefield a tank will kill another tank using what is called an "APFSDS round", these rounds do NOT spin when in flight, they instead use a fin to stabilise the projectile much like an arrow does, this is more effective than a spinning round. An APFSDS round uses Kenetic Energy to defeat armour, NOT explosive used in HEAT, HE, HESH, etc, as a result the effectivness of the round relies on 2 things; accuracy and velocity. This means a rifled gun is pointless when used for this type of ammunition and creates a few problems:1) The spin MUST me stopped on the APFSDR round - The challenger achieves this by adding ball bearings to the Sabot used on the APFSDS rounds the Chally uses.2) What "pushes" the round out of the barrel of a gun, is the gas which builds up behind the projectile after the charge (explosive) is ignighted, a small ammount of this gas is lost through the grooves (rifling) when using a rifled gun. However 3rd generation APFSDS rounds are completely overkill and so the Challenger2 is still able to defeat any MBT armour in existance.3) Overtime the rifling will wear down from excessive use, this means a rifled gun requires more maintanance than a smoothbore.4) NATO standard ammunition is not compatble with a rifled gun, so whats the advantage of using NATO standard ammunition? - a lot of countries use it, this means it is cheaper (supply and demand). However, it does have the advantage of requiring other countries that make use of the main gun have to be supplied by the British manufacturers, as other tank round manufacturers are less likely to stock non-standard rounds.Just a quick run-through... time constraints prevent me from getting detailed. As you can see, each advantage the tanks have over the other comes at a trade-off. The only real way of determining which one is better would've required the Cold War scenario of a push at Fulda Gap to occur.But we could however look at the kill death ratio of the Challenger 1 and 2 and compare it to the M1 series.It should be noted that these tanks are designed according to different doctrine.Addendum:>1) The spin MUST me stopped on the APFSDR round - The challenger achieves this by adding ball bearings to the Sabot used on the APFSDS rounds the Chally uses.This part is incorrect (probably the author was thinking of HEAT rounds, and the French OBUS G ammunition). Challenger has no problem firing APFSDS round, nor is it necessary for them not to spin, although it is desirable. In the Challenger slip-rings are used to reduce the amount of spin imparted (but it still rotates at about 1200 rpm, which helps give a cleaner sabot separation).
What kind of bullets do tanks fire?
Tanks typically have 3 different kinds of guns- light and heavy machine guns, and the main cannon. The exact type of shell will vary with the type (and age) of the cannon. They may include high explosive shells that detonate on impact, an anti-personnel shell with small steel darts (known as flechettes) HEAT (high explosive anti-tank) HEP (High Explosive Plastic, known in Europe as High Explosive Squash Head - HESH) and a high velocity anti-tank shell that is a very hard, very heavy dart carried in a discarding "shoe" or sleeve (known as Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot - APFSDS ammunition). Some tanks have also been capable of firing a guided anti-tank missle from their cannon. This is a very brief answer to a very complex field of study.
Was the Howitzer an anti-tank gun?
In general, no. Most howitzers had a short barrel and light powder charge, mainly to make them light and manoeverable, such as for "mountain guns". They certainly weren't designed as anti-tank weapons but a hit from a howitzer round might disable a tank. In today's modern militaries, all field guns are now howitzers (the primary definition of a "howitzer" vs a normal gun is that a howitzer is capable of elevation about 45 degrees from horizontal). While their primary mission is long-range indirect fire, they all have direct-fire capability. They also come with a wide variety of ammunition. While they don't have the APFSDS-style kinetic penetrator typical of direct-fire guns, they do have both a variety of HEAT and HESH rounds that can be very effective, plus they are capable of firing a number of different guided weapons. So, the answer is: YES, the modern howitzer definitely has a significant anti-tank capability, though that is not their primary mission. When used in the anti-tank role, it is almost always via indirect fire dropping a variety of specialty rounds on the tops of tanks a considerable distance away. Using a howitzer in a direct-fire anti-tank role is generally a sign that something has gone seriously wrong with the tactical situation.
Which is best a m1a2 abrams tank or a t-90 tank?
Well, this is hard. Let`s just take a brief analysis of both tanks. First: the T90 The T90 has an autoloader, wich means crew is reduced to 3 and the rate of fire is higher. The T90 is smaller, more compact wich makes it a harder target to hit. It weights only 46,5 tonnes while the Abrams weights 67. This means the T90 is much lighter, mainly thanks to its smaller turret. The Abrmas has an composite armor made of depleted uranium and is much thicker than the T90`s but the T90 has its build-in upgraded Kontack 5 Dynamic protection (ERA). It gives extra protection against everything. In total the T90 has 800-830 mm against APFSDS 1150-1350 mm against HEAT. The T90 also has active/passive protection systems (shtora and Arena) wich are designed to protect against rocket propelled grenates and anti-tank guided missiles. Like most Russian tanks the T90 can fire guided missiles from its maingun wich can be a decisive advantage in longer ranges 2-5 km. Unlike the T72s in the gulf war, the T90 does not lack thermal sights. Now the M1 Its much heavier and this means extra armor. The big turret of the M1 has better ammo containment and this means the M1 is safer if any projectile manages to penetrate the armor. The M1 has a 1500 hp engine, wich is about 500hp more than the T90, but less fuel efficent. Finally I have to say that the M1 is combat proven In a few words: The M1 is a great tank, but personally I would go for the Russian T90
