Armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectile. Types of projectiles and their principle of action Sub-caliber projectiles in the Second World War
home
Secrets of Russian artillery. The last argument of the kings and commissars [with illustrations] Shirokorad Alexander Borisovich
Focus 3rd - sub-caliber shells Work on creating sub-caliber shells began in our country at the end of 1918, and it is more convenient to talk about them in chronological order . The first domestic sub-caliber shells were manufactured in Petrograd at the beginning of 1919. By the way, in the documents of the Art Directorate of the Red Army 1918–1938. they were called combined. I use more modern name
for the convenience of readers. The "combined" projectile consisted of a sabot and an "active" projectile. The weight of the entire structure was 236 kg, and the active projectile of 203 mm caliber was 110 kg.
The combined shells were intended for 356/52 mm guns, which were to be armed with Izmail-class battlecruisers. Initially, the Maritime Department planned to order 76 356/52 mm guns, of which 48 were going to be installed on cruisers, 24 as spare ones for cruisers, and 4 on a naval range. 36 guns were ordered to the Vickers plant in England and 40 to the Obukhov steel plant.
The 356/52 mm MA guns should not be confused with the 356/52 mm guns of the ground department (SA). In 1912–1914 The GAU ordered the OSZ 17 356/52-mm SA cannons, which differed from naval guns in their greater weight and larger chamber volume.
Until October 1917, at least ten 356/52 mm guns were delivered from England, but the OSZ did not deliver a single one. Field tests of 356/52 mm guns began in 1917 on a special Durlyacher testing machine. In 1922, 8 finished Vickers guns and 7 unfinished OSZ guns were stored at the OSZ, of which 4 were 60% ready. As a result, by 1918, only one 356/52-mm cannon, installed on the Durlyakher machine gun on Rzhevka, could fire. On this installation, the barrels were constantly changed, and it was always ready to fire. In 1941–1944 A 356-mm range installation from a standard 356/52-mm barrel fired at the German troops besieging Leningrad. The Durlyakher installation is still located on Rzhevka (but at least
The Izmail-class battlecruisers were not completed. Several projects for the construction of naval monitors armed with 356 mm cannons were developed, but they were not implemented. In the mid-1930s, the TM-1-14 railway transporters (the first naval transporter with a 14-inch gun) were armed with 356/52-mm cannons. In total, two railway batteries were formed, each of which had three TM-1–14 transporters. One of these batteries was based near Leningrad, and the other two were based near Vladivostok.
But let's return to combined projectiles. During their firing at Rzhevka in 1919, an initial velocity of 1291 m/s was obtained at a pressure in the barrel bore of 2450 kg/cm2 (that is, slightly more than with a standard projectile - 2120 kg/cm2).
On October 15, 1920, the Perm plant received an order (in excess of the program) for 70 combined 356/203-mm shells for the Marine training ground. The first 15 shells were delivered to the customer in June 1921.
For several years, the projectile was designed by trial and error, and finally in June 1924, when firing a 203-mm active projectile weighing 110 kg at a speed of 1250 m/s, it was obtained maximum range 48.5 km. However, during these firings, large dispersion in accuracy and range was noted.
The test managers explained the dispersion by the fact that the steepness of the rifling of the standard 356/52-mm cannon of 30 calibers does not ensure the correct flight of projectiles.
In this regard, it was decided to drill out the barrel of the 356/52 mm gun to 368 mm with a steeper rifling. After calculating several options, the rifling steepness of 20 calibers was finally adopted.
The bore of the 368 mm gun No. 1 was bored in 1934 at the Bolshevik plant. At the beginning of December 1934, tests of gun No. 1 began, which were unsuccessful due to the quality of the shells.
At the beginning of 1935, the Bolshevik plant produced new 220/368-mm sub-caliber projectiles of drawings 3217 and 3218 with belt pallets, which were fired in June - August 1935. The weight of the structure was 262 kg, and the weight of the 220-mm active projectile - 142 kg, powder charge - 255 kg. During testing, a speed of 1254–1265 m/s was obtained. Received during shooting on August 2, 1935 average range 88,720 m at an elevation angle of about 50°. The lateral deviation during firing was 100–150 m.
To further increase the firing range, work began to reduce the weight of the pallet.
At the end of 1935, shells with belt pallets of drawing 6125 were fired. The weight of the active projectile was 142 kg, and the weight of the pallet was 120 kg, the firing range was 97,270 m at an angle of +42°. Average dispersion over four shots: lateral - 55 m, longitudinal - 935 m. Expected range at an angle of +50° - 110 km. The pallets fell at a distance of 3–5 km. A total of 47 shots were fired with projectiles of design 6125.
By that time, the conversion of the second 356mm gun into a 368mm gun had been completed. When testing the 368-mm gun No. 2 in 1936 - early 1937 with the projectile of drawing 6314, satisfactory results were obtained, and on their basis, in March 1937, tables were compiled for firing from a 368-mm cannon with projectiles of drawing 6314. Design of the projectile of drawing 6314 weighed 254 kg, of which the belt pallet accounted for 112.1 kg, and the active projectile accounted for 140 kg. The length of the 220 mm active projectile is 5 calibers. The explosive used was 7 kg of TNT and an RGM fuse. When firing a full charge of 223 kg, the initial speed was 1390 m/s and the range was 120.5 kg. Thus, the same range was obtained as that of the Paris Gun, but with a heavier projectile. The main thing was that an ordinary naval cannon was used, and the survivability of the barrel was much greater than that of the Germans. The 368-mm barrels were supposed to be installed on TM-1–14 railway transporters.
However, at this stage work with belt pallets was suspended, since preference was given to star pallets. But before moving on to shells with star-shaped trays, I’ll finish the story about ultra-long-range guns with conventional belt shells.
In 1930–1931 in the design bureau of the Bolshevik plant they designed a 152-mm ultra-long-range AB cannon, and in 1932 an agreement was concluded with the plant for the production of an experimental 152-mm AB cannon, or more precisely, for the conversion of the barrel of a 305/52-mm standard cannon. IN old trunk a new 152mm inner tube was inserted and a new muzzle was made. The outer dimensions of the clip were made according to the outlines of a 356/52 mm gun, since all tests were supposed to be carried out on a 356 mm Durlyacher system machine. The length of the AB gun was 18.44 m (121.5 caliber). The steepness of the rifling is 25 calibers, the number of rifling is 12, the depth of rifling is 3.0 mm. Remaking the barrel was delayed due to technological difficulties. Therefore, the AB cannon arrived from the Bolshevik to NIAP only in September 1935. According to calculations, when firing a light caliber projectile of drawing 5465 weighing 41.7 kg, the initial speed should have been 1650 m/s, and the range should have been 120 km.
The first firing from a 152-mm AB cannon with a projectile of drawing 5465 was carried out on June 9, 1936. A charge of B8 gunpowder weighing 75 kg was used. However, the initial speed was only 1409 m/s, and the estimated range was not obtained.
After testing, the shells were modified. But the machine at NIAP was occupied at least until October 1940 (as already mentioned, all experiments with heavy guns were carried out from a single Durlyakher machine). In addition, in 1940, new shells for the TM-1-14 railway installations were intensively fired from the standard 356/52-mm cannon. As a result, repeated testing of the AB gun was repeatedly postponed. The author does not have information about its testing in 1941.
It is interesting that, along with testing of ultra-long-range sabot shells for 356–368 mm guns, tests were carried out of sabot shells for 152 mm land guns with a capacity of 200 poods (model 1904). Such shells were supposed to be adopted for service with 6-inch guns with a capacity of 200 poods and 6-inch guns image. 1910 About two dozen 152 mm sub-caliber projectiles were designed. The weight of the entire structure was 17–20 kg, and the weight of the active projectile of 95 mm caliber was 10–13 kg, the rest was on the pallet. The estimated firing range was 22–24 km.
When firing at NIAP from 6-inch guns with 200 poods on October 21, 1927, 152/95-mm sub-caliber shells with a total weight of 18.7 kg and charges weighing 8.2 kg of C42 gunpowder at an elevation angle of 37, an initial speed of 972 m was achieved. With. An active projectile weighing 10.4 kg fell at a distance of 18.7 km (Fig. 5.3).
Rice. 5.3. 152/95 mm sub-caliber shells.
In 1935, at the ANII of the Red Army, under the leadership of P.V. Makhnevich, turbo pallets for 152/95-mm combined (sub-caliber) shells were developed. Shells with a turbo sump could be fired from both conventional rifled and smooth-bore guns. The turbo pan did not have copper or other belts, and its rotation was “provided by the action of jets moving along grooves milled on the outer surface of the pan.”
The total weight of the combined projectile of drawing 6433 was 20.9 kg, while the weight of the active projectile was 10.14 kg, and the turbo sump was 10.75 kg.
The first firing tests of the turbo sump were carried out on April 3, 1936 from a 152 mm (6-inch) gun mod. 1904. The weight of the charge was 7.5–8.4 kg, the initial velocity of the projectile was 702–754 m/s. The pan gave the projectiles a satisfactory spin rate. The separation of the projectile elements occurred at a distance of 70 m from the muzzle, and average distance The fall of the pallet was about 500 m.
Nevertheless, by mid-1936, the ANII recognized work on combined projectiles with turbo-pallets as unpromising and decided to stop them.
By that time, work was in full swing at the ANII on the so-called “star-shaped” pallet for combined projectiles, which had begun already in 1931.
Guns with star trays had a small number of riflings (usually 3–4) of great depth. The cross-sections of the shell trays repeated the cross-section of the channel. These guns can formally be classified as guns with rifled projectiles.
To begin with, ANII decided to test toothed pallets on a small-caliber gun. In the standard 76 mm barrel anti-aircraft gun arr. 1931, a 67/40 mm caliber liner was inserted (rifling/margin). The liner had 3 grooves with a depth of 13.5 mm. The weight of the active projectile is 1.06 kg, the weight of the pallet is 0.6 kg.
Work on the production of the liner began in 1936 at plant No. 8 (in Podlipki). When testing guns with a 67/40 mm liner, an initial speed of 1200 m/s was achieved at a pressure of 2800 kg/cm2; the range was not determined during the tests. The shells tumbled in flight (“had the wrong flight”). According to the commission, the 40-mm active projectiles did not receive the required rotation speed due to the rotation of the pallets relative to the projectiles.
The ANII conducted similar experiments with the standard 152-mm Br-2 cannon, into which a free tube of 162/100 mm caliber was inserted (along the rifling/along the margins). The pipe was cut using the CEA system at the Barrikady plant. During testing, a projectile with a total weight of 22.21 kg and an active projectile weight of 16.84 kg achieved an initial speed of 1100 m/s at a pressure of 2800 kg/cm2; the firing range was not determined, since the projectiles tumbled here too.
According to the resolution of the Council of Labor and Defense of October 10, 1935 No. S-142ss, the Barrikady plant was given the task of developing working drawings and converting the 368-mm gun No. 1 into a 305/180-mm cannon for firing sub-caliber shells with star-shaped trays. The deadline was set for May 1937.
The final version of the project was carried out by the ANII under the leadership of M. Ya. Krupchatikov with the assistance of E. A. Berkalov. The caliber of the CEA channel was changed from 305/180mm to 380/250mm, and the number of riflings was changed from three to four. The drawings were signed at the ANII on June 4, 1936, and were received by the Barrikady plant only in August 1936. At the end of autumn 1936, the forging of the inner pipe was being annealed. The barrel of the 368-mm gun No. 1 was delivered from NIAP to the plant. However, the work was delayed, and a new deadline for the delivery of the barrel was set - February 1, 1938 (Fig. 5.4).
Rice. 5.4. 380/250 mm rifled projectile.
Calculations were carried out for a chamber volume of 360 dm3 and a charge of NGV gunpowder weighing 237 kg. The length of the channel is the same as that of the standard 356/52 mm gun. The barrel is fastened at the breech in 5 layers. The bolt is standard from a 356/52 mm gun. Increasing the number of rifling to four was done to strengthen the barrel and better center the active projectile.
According to calculations, the TM-1–14 installation was supposed to withstand fire from a 380/250 mm cannon.
January 17, 1938 Artillery Directorate notified Barricades of the suspension of work on the 380/250 mm barrel.
From the book Battle for the Stars-2. Space Confrontation (Part I) author Pervushin Anton IvanovichProjectile aircraft “Navaho”, “Snark”, “Regulus II” For a long time in the Soviet Union, decisions on the development of certain promising military projects were made according to the “logic” of the arms race: if the enemy has some new “toy”, then we should do the same
From the book Battle for the Stars-2. Space Confrontation (Part II) author Pervushin Anton IvanovichProjectile aircraft “Tu-121” (“S”) “Tu-123” (“D”) In 1956, a new division “Department K” was created at Tupolev OKB-156, whose task was to develop unmanned aircraft for various purposes. Gradually this new unit turned into a full-fledged
From the book Inventions of Daedalus by Jones David“Space” shells by Gerald Bull As you know, everything new is well forgotten old. Using the example of the material in the previous chapter, we were convinced that the development of technology is largely based on this well-known consideration. Time after time, design thought on the next From the book Rockets and space flights by Leigh Willie
Focus 1 - polygonal shells In the late 1920s - early 1930s, an attempt was made in the USSR to rearm the entire land and naval artillery for polygonal guns. Official military historians will be indignant - not in any of the many books on our history
From the book 100 Great Achievements in the World of Technology author Zigunenko Stanislav NikolaevichFocus 2 - rifled projectiles As already mentioned, in the 50s–70s of the 19th century, dozens of systems were manufactured whose projectiles had rifling or protrusions. In Soviet artillery systems for rifled projectiles, the channel design differed little from the conventional channels of the 1877 model,
From the author's bookGuns and shells When six hundred years ago, at the beginning of the 14th century, firearms, the first cannons fired spherical projectiles - cannonballs. At first they were hewn from stone, and then, at the end of the 15th century, cast from cast iron. There were no plants and factories then. Cannons and cannonballs
From the author's bookAnti-aircraft guided missiles "Reintochter I" and "Reintochter"
From the author's bookII. US missiles and missiles as of 1956 General information. The Corporal, Dart, Nike and Redstone missiles are in service with the Army; the Lacrosse missile is in service with the army and corps Marine Corps; missiles "Bomark", "Falcon", "Matador", "Raskle", "Snark" and
From the author's bookProjectiles for defense A projectile, as a rule, is more commonly classified as an attribute of an offensive weapon. However, Honored Inventor of Russia V.A. Odintsov came up with shells that can be classified as self-defense weapons. Member of the Committee's scientific expert council State Duma By
And a passive one (pallet), made according to the caliber of a gun. In the first BPS, the sabot was an integral part of the projectile, but already in 1944, British ammunition designers developed a modern modification - an armor-piercing sabot projectile with a separating pan from the active part after it exits the barrel. A BPS with a detachable tray is the main anti-tank projectile in the ammunition loads of modern tanks. Armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles with an integral sabot also continue to be used, but to a greater extent as ammunition for automatic small-caliber guns, where the implementation of a sabot separating from the active part is difficult or impossible. There are BPS stabilized in flight by rotation and tail.
English designations of BPS types
In foreign, and subsequently in domestic publications on the relevant topic, the following abbreviations of English designations for BPS types are often used:
- APCR - A rmour- P iercing C composite R igid (armor-piercing compound rigid) - BPS with an integral pan and a harder active part (core);
- APCNR - A rmour- P iercing C composite N on- R igid (armor-piercing composite non-rigid) - BPS with an integral crushable pallet and a harder active part (core) for artillery pieces with a conical bore;
- APDS - A rmour- P iercing D iscarding S abot (armor-piercing sub-caliber with a detachable tray);
- APFSDS, APDS-FS - A rmour- P iercing D iscarding S abot- F in- S tabilized (armor-piercing finned sub-caliber with a detachable tray).
Armor-piercing finned sabot projectiles (BOPS, OBPS)
With the adoption of the T-62 medium tank, the USSR became the first country in the world to massively use armor-piercing fins in tank ammunition. sub-caliber ammunition(BOPS). Thanks extremely high speed and a long direct shot range.
Armor-piercing shells to the 115-mm cannon U-5TS (2A20) were superior in armor penetration at an angle of 60 degrees. from the normal, the best sub-caliber shells for rifled guns were 30% higher and had a direct shot range 1.6 times greater than the standard ones. However, unitary shots for the GSP U-5TS did not allow the full potential of the rate of fire and reduction of the internal armored volume of the promising tank to be fully realized, in addition, due to increased gas contamination fighting compartment T-62 designers were forced to resort to a mechanism for removing spent cartridges, which somewhat reduced the tank's rate of fire. Thus, the problem of automating the process of loading a tank gun became relevant, which, along with increasing the rate of fire, made it possible to significantly reduce the internal volume, and, consequently, security.
At the beginning of 1961, work began on the creation of 115-mm separate-loading rounds with OBPS, cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation shells for the D-68 (2A21) cannon.
The completion of work on the creation of separate loading rounds for the D-68 cannon installed in a new medium tank with mechanized loading was successfully completed, and the newly created ammunition was launched into mass production in 1964.
In 1966, the T-64 tank with the D-68 cannon and new rounds for it was put into service.
However, for a number of reasons, the 115 mm caliber gun of the T-64 tank was considered insufficient to ensure guaranteed destruction of promising foreign tanks. Perhaps the reason was an overly inflated estimate of the armor resistance of the new, most powerful English tank at that time, the Chieftain, as well as fears of the imminent entry into service of the promising American-German MBT-70 tank, which was never put into service. For these reasons, an improved version of the T-64 tank was created, designated T-64A and put into service Soviet army in May 1968. The tank was armed with a 125 mm D-81T (2A26) cannon, developed in 1962 at plant No. 172 (Perm) in OKB-9 under the leadership of F.F. Petrova.
Subsequently, this gun, which earned many positive reviews for its high technical and operational characteristics, underwent numerous upgrades aimed at further increasing its characteristics. Upgraded versions of the D-81T (2A26) gun such as 2A46M, 2A46M-1, 2A46M-2, 2A46M-4 are the main weapons domestic tanks to this day.
The beginning of the 60s and the end of the seventies, the adoption of OBPS stabilized by plumage.
The period of the late 60s and late seventies was characterized evolutionary development foreign tanks, the best of which had homogeneous armor protection within 200 (Leopard-1A1), 250 (M60) and 300 (Chieftain) millimeters of armor. Their ammunition included a BPS for the 105 mm L7 guns (and its American counterpart M68) and the 120 mm L-11 rifled gun of the Chieftain tank.
At the same time, the USSR entered service with a number of OBPS for 115 and 125 mm GSP tanks T-62, T-64 and T-64, as well as 100 mm smoothbore anti-tank gun T-12.
Among them were shells of two modifications: solid-body and having a carbide core.
Solid-body OBPS 3BM2 for PTP T-12, 3BM6 for GSP U-5TS tank T-62, as well as solid-body OBPS for 125 mm GSP 3BM17, which was intended primarily for export and crew training.
OBPS with a carbide core included 3BM3 for GSP U-5TS of the T-62 tank, 125 mm OBPS 3BM15, 3BM22 for T-64A/T-72/T-80 tanks.
Second generation (late 70s and 80s)
In 1977, work began aimed at increasing the combat effectiveness of tank artillery rounds. The organization of this work was associated with the need to defeat new types of enhanced armor protection, the new generation M1 Abrams and Leopard-2 tanks being developed abroad. The development of new design schemes for OBPS has begun, ensuring the destruction of monolithic combined armor in a wide range of angles where the projectile hits the armor, as well as overcoming remote sensing.
Other objectives included improving the aerodynamic qualities of the projectile in flight to reduce drag, as well as increasing its initial speed.
The development of new alloys based on tungsten and depleted uranium with improved physical and mechanical characteristics continued. The results obtained from these research projects made it possible at the end of the 70s to begin the development of new OBPS with an improved leading device, which ended with the adoption of OBPS “Nadezhda”, “Vant” and “Mango” for the 125-mm GSP D-81.
One of the main differences between the new OBPS compared to those developed before 1977 was a new driving device with “clamping” type sectors using aluminum alloy and polymer materials.
Previously, OBPS used leading devices with steel sectors of the “expanding” type.
In 1984, the 3VBM13 “Vant” OBPS with the 3BM32 projectile of increased efficiency was developed; “Vant” became the first domestic monoblock OBPS made of a uranium alloy with high physical and mechanical properties.
OBPS "Mango" was designed specifically to destroy tanks with combined and dynamic protection. The design of the projectile uses a highly efficient combined core made of tungsten alloy placed in a steel casing, between which there is a layer of low-melting alloy.
The projectile is capable of penetrating dynamic protection and reliably hitting the complex composite armor of tanks that entered service in the late 70s and until the mid-80s.
In terms of the development of BOPS, a lot of work has been carried out since the late nineties, the basis of which was the BOPS 3BM39 "Anker" and 3BM48 "Lead". These projectiles were significantly superior to such BOPS as “Mango” and “Vant”; the main difference was the new principles of the guidance system in the barrel bore and a core with a significantly increased elongation.
New system guiding projectiles in the barrel not only made it possible to use longer cores, but also made it possible to improve their aerodynamic properties.
It was these products that served as the basis for the creation of modern domestic OBPS of a new generation. The results obtained from these works served as the basis for the creation of new, modern projectiles.
After the collapse of the USSR in the early 90s, a sharp degradation of the domestic military-industrial complex began, which had a particularly painful impact on the industry for the production of new types of ammunition. During this period, the issue of modernizing the ammunition load of both domestic tanks and those exported became acute. The development, as well as small-scale production of domestic BPS, continued, but mass introduction and large-scale production of new generation BPS samples was not carried out. Positive trends in some aspects of this issue have emerged only recently.
Due to the lack of modern BPS, a number of countries with a large fleet of domestic tanks armed with a 125 mm cannon have made their own attempts to develop a BPS.
BOPS (Armour-piercing finned sabot projectiles)
With the adoption of the T-62 medium tank, the USSR became the first country in the world to massively use armor-piercing finned sub-caliber ammunition (BOPS) in tank ammunition. Thanks to its extremely high speed and long direct shot range.
Armor-piercing shells for the 115-mm U-5TS (2A20) gun were superior in armor penetration at an angle of 60 degrees. from the normal, the best sub-caliber shells for rifled guns were 30% higher and had a direct shot range 1.6 times greater than the standard ones. However, unitary rounds for the GSP U-5TS did not make it possible to fully realize the potential for rate of fire and reduce the internal armored volume of a promising tank; in addition, due to the increased gas contamination of the T-62 fighting compartment, the designers were forced to resort to a mechanism for removing spent cartridges, which somewhat reduced tank's rate of fire. Thus, the problem of automating the process of loading a tank gun became relevant, which, along with increasing the rate of fire, made it possible to significantly reduce the internal volume, and, consequently, security.
At the beginning of 1961, work began on the creation of 115-mm separate-loading rounds with OBPS, cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation shells for the D-68 (2A21) cannon.
The completion of work on the creation of separate loading rounds for the D-68 cannon installed in a new medium tank with mechanized loading was successfully completed, and the newly created ammunition was put into mass production in 1964.
In 1966, the T-64 tank with the D-68 cannon and new rounds for it was put into service.
However, for a number of reasons, the 115 mm caliber gun of the T-64 tank was considered insufficient to ensure guaranteed destruction of promising foreign tanks.
Perhaps the reason was an overly inflated estimate of the armor resistance of the new, most powerful English tank at that time, the Chieftain, as well as fears of the imminent entry into service of the promising American-German MBT-70 tank, which was never put into service.
For these reasons, an improved version of the T-64 tank was created, designated T-64A and adopted by the Soviet Army in May 1968. The tank was armed with a 125 mm D-81T (2A26) cannon, developed in 1962 at plant No. 172 (Perm) in OKB-9 under the leadership of F.F. Petrova.
Subsequently, this gun, which earned many positive reviews for its high technical and operational characteristics, underwent numerous upgrades aimed at further increasing its characteristics.
Modernized versions of the D-81T (2A26) gun such as 2A46M, 2A46M-1, 2A46M-2, 2A46M-4 are the main armament of domestic tanks to this day.
BPS burning cylinder with tubular powder (SC) - Right
Burning cartridge (SG) - Left
Core - In the middle
As you can see in the pictures, a burning cylinder (SC) with tubular gunpowder is put on the BPS; the SC is made of cardboard impregnated with TNT and during the shot it completely burns out and nothing remains of it. The burning cartridge case (SG) is made using a similar technology; after the shot, a metal tray remains from it. The means of ignition is the galvanic impact bushing GUV-7, which differs from the usual one in that it has an incandescent bridge that ignites the gunpowder when the striker touches it, but it can also work like a regular one from impact.
The domestic BPS consists of a leading ring consisting of three sectors with a parting plane at 120 degrees, fastened with a sealing belt made of copper or plastic. The second support is the stabilizer feathers, equipped with bearings.
When leaving the barrel, the ring is divided into three sectors and the sectors fly up to 500 m at high speed; it is not recommended to be in front of the firing BPS tank. The sector can damage lightly armored vehicles and injure infantry.The separating sectors of the BPS have significant kinetic energy within 2° of the shot (at a distance of 1000 m)
A burning cylinder (SC) with tubular gunpowder is put on the OBPS; the SC is made of cardboard impregnated with TNT and during the shot it completely burns out and nothing remains of it. The burning cartridge case (SG) is made using a similar technology; after the shot, a metal tray remains from it. The means of ignition is the galvanic impact bushing GUV-7.
The beginning of the 60s and the end of the seventies, the adoption of OBPS stabilized by plumage.
The period of the late 60s and late seventies was characterized by the evolutionary development of foreign tanks, the best of which had homogeneous armor protection within 200 (Leopard-1A1), 250 (M60) and 300 (Chieftain) millimeters of armor.
Their ammunition included a BPS for the 105 mm L7 guns (and its American counterpart M68) and the 120 mm L-11 rifled gun of the Chieftain tank.
At the same time, the USSR entered service with a number of OBPS for 115 and 125 mm GSP tanks T-62, T-64 and T-64, as well as 100 mm smoothbore anti-tank gun T-12.
Solid-body OBPS 3BM2 for PTP T-12, 3BM6 for GSP U-5TS of the T-62 tank, as well as solid-body OBPS for 125 mm GSP 3BM17. OBPS with a carbide core included 3BM3 for GSP U-5TS of the T-62 tank, 125 mm OBPS 3BM15, 3BM22 for T-64A/T-72/T-80 tanks.
3VBM-7 projectile (3BM-15 projectile index; projectile index With throwing charge3BM-18 ) (approx. 1972)
The active part of this projectile is slightly elongated compared to the 3BM-12, which did not affect the overall length of the projectile due to the greater penetration of the active part into the additional charge. Despite the fact that the projectile had not been used in the Soviet Army for a long time, it remained until the collapse of the USSR the most modern OBPS available to recipients of Soviet export T-72 tanks. The BM-15 and its local analogues were produced under license in many countries.
Shot 3VBM-8 (projectile index 3BM-17; projectile index With throwing charge3BM-18) (from approx. 1972)
A simplified version of the 3BM-15 projectile;
There is no tungsten carbide core; instead, the size of the armor-piercing cap has been increased to compensate for the drop in armor penetration. Presumably used for export and training purposes only. With throwing chargeShot 3VBM-9 (projectile index 3BM-22; projectile index
.
and is still approved for use
External view of the core of one projectile variant.
Second generation (late 70s and 80s)
In 1977, work began aimed at increasing the combat effectiveness of tank artillery rounds. The organization of this work was associated with the need to defeat new types of enhanced armor protection, the new generation M1 Abrams and Leopard-2 tanks being developed abroad.
The development of new design schemes for OBPS has begun, ensuring the destruction of monolithic combined armor in a wide range of angles where the projectile hits the armor, as well as overcoming remote sensing.
Other objectives included improving the aerodynamic qualities of the projectile in flight to reduce drag, as well as increasing its initial speed.
The results obtained from these research projects made it possible at the end of the 70s to begin the development of new OBPS with an improved leading device, which ended with the adoption of OBPS “Nadezhda”, “Vant” and “Mango” for the 125-mm GSP D-81.
One of the main differences between the new OBPS compared to those developed before 1977 was a new driving device with “clamping” type sectors using aluminum alloy and polymer materials.
Previously, OBPS used leading devices with steel sectors of the “expanding” type.
In 1984, the 3VBM13 “Vant” OBPS with the 3BM32 projectile of increased efficiency was developed; “Vant” became the first domestic monoblock OBPS made of a uranium alloy with high physical and mechanical properties.
OBPS "Mango" was designed specifically to destroy tanks with combined and dynamic protection.
The design of the projectile uses a highly efficient combined core made of tungsten alloy placed in a steel casing, between which there is a layer of low-melting alloy.
The projectile is capable of penetrating dynamic protection and reliably hitting the complex composite armor of tanks that entered service in the late 70s and until the mid-80s. With throwing chargeShot 3VBM-11 (projectile index 3BM-26; projectile index
3BM-27) (p/v 1983)
Theme "Nadezhda-R". This OBPS was the first in a series of projectiles with a new leading device. This ammunition was also the first to be developed and tested specifically for the purpose of parrying advanced multi-layer barriers used on promising tanks
NATO.
Used with the main propellant charge 4Zh63.9. 3BM-2"Nadfil-2", OBPS with a uranium core (1982)
similar in design to 3BM-26. With throwing chargeShot 3VBM-13 (projectile index 3BM-32; projectile index8 3BM-3
) (p/v 1985)
Research topic "Vant". The first Soviet monolithic uranium OBPS. With throwing chargeShot 3VBM-17 (projectile index 3BM-42; projectile index
3BM-44) (p/v 1986)
The research topic "Mango" was opened in 1983. A projectile of increased power, designed to destroy modern multi-layer armored barriers. It has a very complex design, including a solid ballistic and armor-piercing cap, an armor-piercing damper, and two high-strength tungsten alloy cores of high elongation. The cores are fixed in the projectile body by means of a low-melting alloy jacket; during the penetration process, the jacket melts, allowing the cores to enter the penetration channel without wasting energy on separation from the body. VU - further, used with OBPS 3BM-26, is made of V-96Ts1 alloy with improved characteristics. The projectile is widely distributed and was also exported as part of Russian and Ukrainian T-80U/T-80UD and T-90 tanks delivered abroad in the last decade.
OBPS "Lead" (projectile index 3BM-46; projectile index With throwing charge3BM-48) (p/v 1986)
A modern OBPS with a monolithic high-aspect ratio uranium core and sub-caliber stabilizers, using a new composite VU with two contact zones. The projectile has a length close to the maximum permissible for standard Soviet automatic loaders.
The most powerful Soviet 125-mm OBPS, exceeding or corresponding in power to the OBPS adopted by NATO countries until relatively recently.Shot with
increased power
A high-power projectile with a high-elongation tungsten core and sub-caliber stabilizers, using a four-section composite explosive device with two contact zones. In Rosoboronexport literature, this projectile is referred to simply as a “high-power projectile.”
The developers of this ammunition were the first to create a high elongation projectile with a new firing pattern.
The new BPS is designed to fire from the D-81 tank gun at modern tanks equipped with complex composite armor and dynamic protection.
Compared to the 3BM42 BOPS, due to the elongated tungsten alloy body and a charge made from higher-energy powders, a 20% increase in armor penetration is ensured. |
|||||||||
Performance characteristics summary table |
Shot index |
3VBM-7 |
3 V BM-8 |
3VBM-9 |
3VBM-11 |
3VBM- 10 |
3VBM-13 |
3VBM-17 |
3VBM-20 |
3VBM-17M |
Projectile index |
3BM-16 |
3BM-1 7 |
3BM-2 6 |
3BM-29 |
||||
3BM-46 |
Index of projectile with additional charge |
3BM-18 |
3VBM- 1 8 |
3BM-3 |
3BM-27 |
3BM- 30 |
3BM-38 |
3BM-44 |
3BM-48 |
3BM-44M |
Cipher |
Barrette |
Nadezhda-R |
Nadfil-2 |
Guy |
Mango |
Lead |
||
Mango-M Initial |
1780 |
1780 |
1760 |
1720 |
1692...1700 |
1692...1700 |
1692...1700 |
1650 |
1692...1700 |
speed, m/s |
|||||||||
Core length, mm |
3900 |
3900 |
3900 |
4800 |
4800 |
4850 |
4850 |
5200 |
5000 |
Weight (without VU), g |
Core (alloy based) |
Steel |
Tungsten |
Depleted uranium Lean |
Steel |
Depleted uranium Lean |
Steel |
||
Uranus |
Management scheme |
Ring-type control unit made of steel, expansion type and tail |
Aluminum alloy clamping unit and tail unit |
||||||
Double-support VU |
110…150 |
||||||||
In terms of the development of BOPS, a lot of work has been carried out since the late nineties, the groundwork for which was the BOPS "Anker" and 3BM48 "Lead". These projectiles were significantly superior to such BOPS as “Mango” and “Vant”; the main difference was the new principles of the guidance system in the barrel bore and a core with a significantly increased elongation. The new system for guiding projectiles in the barrel not only made it possible to use longer cores, but also improved their aerodynamic properties.
After the collapse of the USSR, the industry for the production of new types of ammunition began and continues to lag behind. The issue of modernizing the ammunition load of both domestic tanks and those exported became acute. The development, as well as small-scale production of domestic BPS continued, but mass introduction and mass production of new generation BPS samples was not carried out.
Due to the lack of modern BPS, a number of countries with a large fleet of domestic tanks armed with a 125 mm cannon have made their own attempts to develop a BPS.
Comparison of 125 mm caliber OBPS 3BM48, 3BM44M, M829A2 (USA), NORINCO TK125 (PRC)
and OBPS caliber 120 mm DM53 (Germany), CL3241 (Israel).
OBPS 125 mm caliber developed in the 90s in China and other countries of Eastern Europe: NORINCO TK125,
TAPNA (Slovakia), Pronit (Poland).MOSCOW, July 23 – RIA Novosti, Andrey Kots. If modern tank fire with an armor-piercing "blank" from the Second World War, then, most likely, only a dent will remain at the point of impact - through penetration is practically impossible. The “layered” composite armor used today confidently withstands such a blow. But it can still be pierced with an awl. Or “crowbar,” as the tankers themselves call armor-piercing finned sabot projectiles (BOPS). Read about how these munitions work in the RIA Novosti article.
An awl instead of a sledgehammer
From the name it is clear that sub-caliber ammunition is a projectile with a caliber noticeably smaller than the caliber of the gun. Structurally, it is a “coil” with a diameter equal to the diameter of the barrel, in the center of which is the same tungsten or uranium “crowbar” that hits the enemy’s armor. When leaving the barrel bore, the coil, which has provided the core with sufficient kinetic energy and accelerated it to the required speed, is divided into parts under the influence of incoming air currents, and a thin and durable feathered pin flies towards the target. In a collision, due to its lower specific resistance, it penetrates armor much more effectively than a thick monolithic blank.
The armor impact of such “scrap” is colossal. Due to its relatively small mass - 3.5-4 kilograms - the core of a sub-caliber projectile immediately after the shot accelerates to a significant speed - about 1500 meters per second. When it hits the armor plate, it punches a small hole. The kinetic energy of the projectile is partially used to destroy the armor, and partially turns into thermal energy. Hot fragments of the core and armor exit into the armored space and spread like a fan, striking the crew and the internal mechanisms of the vehicle. In this case, numerous fires arise.
An accurate hit from a BOPS can disable important components and assemblies, destroy or seriously injure crew members, jam a turret, pierce fuel tanks, undermine ammunition racks, and destroy chassis. Structurally, modern sabots are very different. Projectile bodies can be either monolithic or composite - a core or several cores in a shell, as well as longitudinally and transversely multilayered, with various types plumage.
The leading devices (the same “coils”) have different aerodynamics; they are made of steel, light alloys, and also composite materials - for example, carbon composites or aramid composites. Ballistic tips and dampers can be installed in the head parts of the BOPS. In short, for every taste - for any gun, for certain tank battle conditions and specific goal. The main advantages of such ammunition are high armor penetration, high approach speed, low sensitivity to impact dynamic protection, low vulnerability to complexes active protection, which simply do not have time to react to a fast and inconspicuous “arrow”.
"Mango" and "Lead"
Back in Soviet times, a wide range of feathered “armor-piercing guns” were developed for the 125-mm smoothbore guns of domestic tanks. They were taken up after the appearance of M1 Abrams and Leopard-2 tanks from a potential enemy. The army desperately needed shells capable of hitting new types of reinforced armor and overcoming reactive armor.
One of the most common BOPS in the arsenal Russian tanks T-72, T-80 and T-90 - the ZBM-44 "Mango" high-power projectile adopted for service in 1986. The ammunition has a rather complex design. A ballistic tip is installed in the head part of the swept body, under which there is an armor-piercing cap. Behind it is an armor-piercing damper, also playing important role in penetration. Immediately after the damper are two tungsten alloy cores held inside by a light alloy metal jacket. When a projectile collides with an obstacle, the jacket melts and releases the cores, which “bite” into the armor. In the tail part of the projectile there is a stabilizer in the form of an empennage with five blades, and at the base of the stabilizer there is a tracer. This “crowbar” weighs only about five kilograms, but is capable of penetrating almost half a meter of tank armor at a distance of up to two kilometers.
The newer ZBM-48 "Lead" was put into service in 1991. Standard Russian tank automatic loaders are limited in the length of the projectiles, so Svinets is the most massive domestic tank ammunition of this class. The length of the active part of the projectile is 63.5 centimeters. The core is made of uranium alloy, it has a high elongation, which increases penetration and also reduces the impact of dynamic protection. After all, the greater the length of the projectile, the smaller part of it interacts with passive and active barriers at a certain point in time. Sub-caliber stabilizers increase the accuracy of the projectile, and a new composite “coil” driving device is also used. The Svinets BOPS is the most powerful serial projectile for 125 mm tank guns, capable of competing with leading Western models. Average armor penetration on a homogeneous steel plate from two kilometers - 650 millimeters.
This is not the only similar development of the domestic defense industry - the media reported that especially for the newest tank T-14 "Armata" was created and tested BOPS "Vacuum-1" with a length of 900 millimeters. Their armor penetration is close to a meter.
It is worth noting that likely enemy also does not stand still. Back in 2016, Orbital ATK launched full-scale production of an advanced armor-piercing finned sabot projectile with the fifth-generation M829A4 tracer for the M1 tank. According to the developers, the ammunition penetrates 770 millimeters of armor.
The term "sabot projectile" is most often used in tank forces. These types of shells are used along with cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation shells. But if earlier there was a division into armor-piercing and sub-caliber ammunition, now it makes sense to talk only about armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles. Let's talk about what a sub-caliber is and what its key features and principle of operation are.
basic information
The key difference between sub-caliber shells and conventional armored shells is that the diameter of the core, that is, the main part, is smaller than the caliber of the gun. At the same time, the second main part - the pallet - is made according to the diameter of the gun. The main purpose of such ammunition is to defeat heavily armored targets. Usually this heavy tanks and fortified buildings.
It is worth noting that the armor-piercing sabot projectile has increased penetration due to its high initial flight speed. The specific pressure when breaking through armor has also been increased. For this purpose, it is advisable to use materials as a core that have as much specific gravity. Tungsten and depleted uranium are suitable for these purposes. Stabilization of the projectile's flight is achieved by fins. There is nothing new here, since the principle of flight of an ordinary arrow is used.
Armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile and its description
As we noted above, such ammunition is ideal for shooting at tanks. It is interesting that the sub-caliber does not have the usual fuse and explosive. The principle of operation of the projectile is entirely based on its kinetic energy. If you compare it, it is something similar to a massive high-velocity bullet.
The subcaliber consists of a reel body. A core is inserted into it, which is often 3 times smaller than the caliber of the gun. High-strength metal-ceramic alloys are used as core material. If previously it was tungsten, today depleted uranium is more popular for a number of reasons. During the shot, the entire load is taken by the pallet, thereby ensuring the initial flight speed. Since the weight of such a projectile is less than that of a conventional armor-piercing projectile, by reducing the caliber it was possible to achieve an increase in flight speed. We are talking about significant values. Thus, a finned sabot projectile flies at a speed of 1,600 m/s, while a classic armor-piercing projectile flies at 800-1,000 m/s.
The effect of a sub-caliber projectile
Quite interesting is how such ammunition works. During contact with the armor, it creates a small diameter hole in it due to high kinetic energy. Part of the energy is spent on destroying the target’s armor, and projectile fragments scatter into the armored space. Moreover, the trajectory is similar to a diverging cone. This leads to the machinery and equipment breaking down and the crew being injured. Most importantly, due to the high degree of pyrophoricity of depleted uranium, numerous fires occur, which in most cases leads to the complete failure of the combat unit. We can say that the sub-caliber projectile, the principle of operation of which we have examined, has increased armor penetration at long distances. Evidence of this is Operation Desert Storm, when the US Armed Forces used sub-caliber ammunition and hit armored targets at a distance of 3 km.
Types of PB shells
Currently, several effective designs of sub-caliber projectiles have been developed that are used by the armed forces. various countries. In particular, we're talking about about the following:
- With non-detachable tray. The projectile travels the entire path to the target as a single whole. Only the core is involved in penetration. This solution has not received sufficient distribution due to increased aerodynamic drag. As a result, the indicator of armor penetration and accuracy decreases significantly with the distance to the target.
- With non-detachable tray for conical implement. The essence of this solution is that when passing along a conical barrel, the pallet is crushed. This reduces aerodynamic drag.
- A sub-caliber projectile with a detachable tray. The point is that the pallet is torn off by air forces or centrifugal forces (with a rifled gun). This allows you to significantly reduce air resistance in flight.
About cumulative
Such ammunition was first used by Nazi Germany in 1941. At that time, the USSR did not expect the use of such projectiles, since their principle of operation was known, but they were not yet in service. The key feature of such projectiles was that they had high armor penetration due to the presence of instantaneous fuses and a cumulative notch. The problem encountered for the first time was that the projectile rotated during its flight. This led to the dispersion of the cumulative arrow and, as a result, reduced armor penetration. To eliminate the negative effect, it was proposed to use smooth-bore guns.
Some interesting facts
It is worth noting that it was in the USSR that arrow-shaped armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles were developed. This was a real breakthrough, as it was possible to increase the length of the core. Almost no armor protected against a direct hit from such ammunition. Only a successful angle of inclination of the armor plate and, consequently, its increased thickness in the reduced state could help out. In the end, BOPS had the advantage of a flat flight path over a range of up to 4 km and high accuracy.
Conclusion
A cumulative sabot projectile is somewhat similar to a conventional sabot projectile. But it has a fuse in its body and explosive. When armor is penetrated by such ammunition, it provides a destructive effect on both equipment and manpower. Currently, the most common shells for cannons are 115, 120, 125 mm, as well as artillery shells 90, 100 and 105 mm. In general, this is all the information on this topic.