New Type98/99 MBT thread

TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Not quite sure its cheap. The main alternative is tungsten which seems to work well from a longer gun.

MBT3000 is a export tank. When you read MBT#000 it means Chinese export tank and is usually considered inferior.
 
V

valapak

New Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Not quite sure its cheap. The main alternative is tungsten which seems to work well from a longer gun.

MBT3000 is a export tank. When you read MBT#000 it means Chinese export tank and is usually considered inferior.
Click to expand...

maybe not cheap but waste without mutch use....

so they use DU because it didnt work on the L/44? Why the americans dont buy the better L/55? their licensed L/44 cant even fire ATGM
tungsten is primary in use for the longer L/55?
 
Last edited:
kwaigonegin

kwaigonegin

Colonel
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Not quite sure its cheap. The main alternative is tungsten which seems to work well from a longer gun.

MBT3000 is a export tank. When you read MBT#000 it means Chinese export tank and is usually considered inferior.
Click to expand...

Not to get OT but I understand the material of choice for rail guns is tungsten or some tungsten alloy.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
valapak said:
maybe not cheap but waste without mutch use....

so they use DU because it didnt work on the L/44? Why the americans dont buy the better L/55? their licensed L/44 cant even fire ATGM
tungsten is primary in use for the longer L/55?
Click to expand...

No DU works well on L44's. The Reason is The need. by 2000 the USSR was a bad memory The primary mission of the MBT seemed to have vanished. Most Mission planers were forecasting low intensity Asymmetric conflicts The US was not going to invest therefore in the higher price to retrofit it's tanks for something that's advantage is considered a lower priority and can be made up for with the DU round. the dirence is length. by keeping the L44 the Abrams is 3 feet shorter in length then it would be with a L55.

Theoretically the Abrams L44 can fire any L44, L55, IWI MG251, MG253 or Even French Leclarc Rounds Including the IWI LAHAT( Laser Homing Attack or Laser Homing Anti-Tank) it's just that the Us never adopted one
 
V

valapak

New Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
No DU works well on L44's. The Reason is The need. by 2000 the USSR was a bad memory The primary mission of the MBT seemed to have vanished. Most Mission planers were forecasting low intensity Asymmetric conflicts The US was not going to invest therefore in the higher price to retrofit it's tanks for something that's advantage is considered a lower priority and can be made up for with the DU round. the dirence is length. by keeping the L44 the Abrams is 3 feet shorter in length then it would be with a L55.

Theoretically the Abrams L44 can fire any L44, L55, IWI MG251, MG253 or Even French Leclarc Rounds Including the IWI LAHAT( Laser Homing Attack or Laser Homing Anti-Tank) it's just that the Us never adopted one
Click to expand...


sry i mean they use DU because it works on the L/44... and tungsten not
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
valapak said:
sry i mean they use DU because it works on the L/44... and tungsten not
Click to expand...
You can Fire Tungsten Rounds form a L44 Think of it like a rifle. A M16A2 produces a muzzle velocity of 3,110 ft/s (948 m/s) Form a 20 inch barrel the M4 Almost identical save for a Shorter barrel at 14.5 inches and gas system fires the same round at 2900 ft/sec (884 m/sec).
the L55 is 20 feet long a full 2.7 feet longer then the L44. so a tungsten round fired form the L44 would be slower then the same round form a L55. the two metals have similar density but DU penetrates better be cause of it's Self Sharpening characteristics.
Basically the US chose to use DU as it's optimized for penetration. It offers the best chance of a kill from the shorter barrel.
now the US has researched Tungsten based alloys as alternatives but Ironically the tungsten-cobalt or tungsten-nickel-cobalt alloys which offer best quality have been found to be more carcinogenic.
 
Last edited:
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Not quite sure its cheap. The main alternative is tungsten which seems to work well from a longer gun.

MBT3000 is a export tank. When you read MBT#000 it means Chinese export tank and is usually considered inferior.
Click to expand...

Pound for pound DU might not be significantly dearer, but if you factor in the cost savings of not having to dispose of it as nuclear waste, the cost savings of using DU is likely to be significant cheaper compared to tungsten.
 
V

valapak

New Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
You can Fire Tungsten Rounds form a L44 Think of it like a rifle. A M16A2 produces a muzzle velocity of 3,110 ft/s (948 m/s) Form a 20 inch barrel the M4 Almost identical save for a Shorter barrel at 14.5 inches and gas system fires the same round at 2900 ft/sec (884 m/sec).
the L55 is 20 feet long a full 2.7 Inches longer then the L44. so a tungsten round fired form the L44 would be slower then the same round form a L55. the two metals have similar density but DU penetrates better be cause of it's Self Sharpening characteristics.
Basiclly the US chose to use DU as it's optimized for penetration. It offers the best chance of a kill from the shorter barrel.
now the US has researched Tungsten based alloys as alternatives but Ironically the tungsten-cobalt or tungsten-nickel-cobalt alloys which offer best quality have been found to be more carcinogenic.
Click to expand...


so all tank rounds are toxic and carcinogenic?? any alternatives?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top