140mm main gun for tanks?

[Slater]

If this actually results in a production contract, will the Abrams follow suit?


"Nexter has fit a 140 mm gun on a Leclerc main battle tank (MBT) to gather data for the Franco-German Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) programme to replace it and the Leopard 2, Jane's learned at the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) 2019 conference held in London on 21-24 January.

This is understood to be the first time that a 140 mm gun has been successfully integrated onto a 50-tonne MBT and conducted over 200 firings. It is expected to provide a 70% increase in firepower over a NATO standard 120 mm gun."


https://www.janes.com/article/85934/iav-2019-nexter-tests-140-mm-gun-on-leclerc-mbt

[hotrodder636]

I am kind of surprised that going from 120mm to 140mm will give a 70% increase in firepower.

[kwelz]

I am kind of surprised that going from 120mm to 140mm will give a 70% increase in firepower.

It isn't just about the diameter. But I would like to know how they come up with that 70% number. Are we taking penetration? Is that for sloped or flat penetration. What kind of penetrator is being used? Tank firepower is not like small arms. There are complicated calculations I can't even start to do that figure how effective a round is. And it changes a lot based on the enemy armor type and configuration.

I actually tried to figure it out one time. And I quit pretty quickly.

[Business_Casual]

What tank war are they anticipating?

A drone with an EFP copper round could just fly over a tank and pop it like a balloon.

$5K for a for a drone vs $1M per tank...

[Whiskey_Bravo]

What tank war are they anticipating?

A drone with an EFP copper round could just fly over a tank and pop it like a balloon.

$5K for a for a drone vs $1M per tank...


If they only cost 1 million

[MountainRaven]

What tank war are they anticipating?

A drone with an EFP copper round could just fly over a tank and pop it like a balloon.

$5K for a for a drone vs $1M per tank...

I believe Russia has a tank destroyer with a 125mm gun. So I'd guess they're worried about the same tank war Russia is.

[Coal Dragger]

What tank war are they anticipating?

A drone with an EFP copper round could just fly over a tank and pop it like a balloon.

$5K for a for a drone vs $1M per tank...

You’re grossly underestimating the effectiveness of reactive armor against threats like a drone with a copper EFP pose.

[sgtrock82]

I believe Russia has a tank destroyer with a 125mm gun. So I'd guess they're worried about the same tank war Russia is.

Pretty sure the eastern block has been rocking a 125mm in their MBTs since the 1970s. When we had 105mms to edge past their 100mm, they brought out 110mm or 115mm and on and on. We've been 120 vs. 125 for over 30 years.

Im fairly suprised as well that we are back at playing this game again, I too thought Drones and infantry weapons like Javelin made all this rather passe'

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

[hotrodder636]

I know it is not just diameter. My thoughts were related to still being an MBT round, which would have some level of size restraints and achieving that 70% number—and what that refers to; range, penetration, etc.


It isn't just about the diameter. But I would like to know how they come up with that 70% number. Are we taking penetration? Is that for sloped or flat penetration. What kind of penetrator is being used? Tank firepower is not like small arms. There are complicated calculations I can't even start to do that figure how effective a round is. And it changes a lot based on the enemy armor type and configuration.

I actually tried to figure it out one time. And I quit pretty quickly.

[Slater]

Pictures:

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2017/05/07/140mm-leclerc/

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Only 70%? It better be pretty leathal since you're turning a tank into a six gun shooter....

Look at those round sizes/lengths? At what point do you have to have an assistant loader and a crazy sized magazine?

[soulezoo]

Seeing the picture comparison, it's not hard to see where that 70% is coming from. It's like comparing a .338 Weatherby mag vs a .22-250.

I agree with the above, there's going to be some serious compromises with internal storage and feeding. After 10 minutes of firing, it's going to need resupply. Logistics will necessarily change.

[Slater]

The current French Leclerc tank uses an autoloader. That may (or may not) be an issue with this new round.

[soulezoo]

This is definitely going to have to use an auto-loader. It’s going to take some creative engineering for the loader and for ammo storage

[Averageman]

There is a point of diminishing return on ammunition capabilities vs the size of the entire cartridge.
You're going to be severely limiting the amount of ammunition you carry in your ready and semi-ready racks. You're going to deal with engineering and auto-loader which is a maintenance heavy piece of equipment. If you go with an auto-loader you're now losing 25% of your crew. The entire turret needs a redesign, plus you're limiting the available space inside the turret even more. You're likely, due to increased weight and mass inside the turret to need a new power train to push that Tank above speeds of 30 mph.
Unless your optics, both day and night support the 140mm Maingun, what is the advantage?
You're kind of hoping for a pool table flat piece of un-obscured piece of ground to fight on, and that's just not likely to happen in most of central Europe.
Just because you can something doesn't mean it is needed or even smart. If you really wanted to improve the Abrams you would co-axially mount an M2 HB caliber .50.

[vicious_cb]

If this actually results in a production contract, will the Abrams follow suit?


"Nexter has fit a 140 mm gun on a Leclerc main battle tank (MBT) to gather data for the Franco-German Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) programme to replace it and the Leopard 2, Jane's learned at the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) 2019 conference held in London on 21-24 January.

This is understood to be the first time that a 140 mm gun has been successfully integrated onto a 50-tonne MBT and conducted over 200 firings. It is expected to provide a 70% increase in firepower over a NATO standard 120 mm gun."


https://www.janes.com/article/85934/iav-2019-nexter-tests-140-mm-gun-on-leclerc-mbt

No, because there is no way a larger main gun is going to fit into the existing Abrams gun mantlet form factor since they couldnt even get the 120mm L/55 to work. The entire turret would have to be redesigned, while you are doing that you might as well design a whole new tank. The closest thing we have to replacing the current 120mm L/44 is the XM360 from the canceled FCS program thats just a lighter 120mm with datalink.

[sundance435]

No, because there is no way a larger main gun is going to fit into the existing Abrams gun mantlet form factor since they couldnt even get the 120mm L/55 to work. The entire turret would have to be redesigned, while you are doing that you might as well design a whole new tank. The closest thing we have to replacing the current 120mm L/44 is the XM360 from the canceled FCS program thats just a lighter 120mm with datalink.

Yeah, highly unlikely this would work for an Abrams, even if they designed a whole new drop-in turret. It would probably add anywhere from 6-10 tons to the Abrams, which already isn't the quickest MBT out there and has documented issues on roads that aren't the greatest. Main guns using traditional tank shells are close to maxed out. You'd have to move into rocket assisted shells to get to the next level...at which point you've basically just built another self-propelled gun.

Also, Re: the Russian 125mm, I've read that the 120mm smoothbore on the Abrams and Leopard II outperform it. The increase of 5mm doesn't equate to a performance increase, at least with their current guns/munitions.

[Averageman]

No, because there is no way a larger main gun is going to fit into the existing Abrams gun mantlet form factor since they couldnt even get the 120mm L/55 to work. The entire turret would have to be redesigned, while you are doing that you might as well design a whole new tank. The closest thing we have to replacing the current 120mm L/44 is the XM360 from the canceled FCS program thats just a lighter 120mm with datalink.



Yeah, highly unlikely this would work for an Abrams, even if they designed a whole new drop-in turret. It would probably add anywhere from 6-10 tons to the Abrams, which already isn't the quickest MBT out there and has documented issues on roads that aren't the greatest. Main guns using traditional tank shells are close to maxed out. You'd have to move into rocket assisted shells to get to the next level...at which point you've basically just built another self-propelled gun.

Also, Re: the Russian 125mm, I've read that the 120mm smoothbore on the Abrams and Leopard II outperform it. The increase of 5mm doesn't equate to a performance increase, at least with their current guns/munitions.

A lot of truth in the above.
There would have to be a near complete redesign.

[hotrodder636]

Oh $hit....picture is worth a thousand words...i can see the 70% increase.


Only 70%? It better be pretty leathal since you're turning a tank into a six gun shooter....

Look at those round sizes/lengths? At what point do you have to have an assistant loader and a crazy sized magazine?

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Part of me wonders if this is to goad the Russians to going to a 145mm....

[Slater]

The Russians have tested a 152mm main tank gun (the 2A83), and there have been rumors that it might constitute future armament for their T-14 Armata. Seems rather unlikely, though. It weighs over twice as much as their standard 125mm gun.

[trackmagic]

Part of me wonders if this is to goad the Russians to going to a 145mm....

Thats so they can shoot our ammo in their tanks, but we cant shoot thiers in ours:jester:

[sundance435]

Part of me wonders if this is to goad the Russians to going to a 145mm....

I would expect the announcement from Comrade Shoigu within the month.


The Russians have tested a 152mm main tank gun (the 2A83), and there have been rumors that it might constitute future armament for their T-14 Armata. Seems rather unlikely, though. It weighs over twice as much as their standard 125mm gun.

They've been "working" on that for at least a decade. At their current pace, they might have enough Armatas for a battalion by the end of 2025. But, since it's Russia, they'll probably announce the 152mm gun now and get certain quarters of the Pentagon worked up about the "armor gap", even though they'll never build more than a handful of them. The most capable tank they can field in any numbers for the foreseeable future is an updated T-72.

[Averageman]

If you've never loaded a tank cannon, you should give it a try. 105's were relatively easy in comparison to the 120's. If we go any larger you're going to need an auto loader and they have a sketchy reputation for reliability.
The crew compartments are amazingly crowded when you aren't shooting. the simple matter of keeping track of everything going on around you and staying out of the way of a autoloader and a recoiling breech is going to be difficult.