This sounds rather interesting. I know of many modern European IFV developments, so more than likely we'll likely see this 35 mm airburst round come off as a hit.
Calibre of the IFV gun
- Thread starter Mangusta CBT
- Start date
The second article you link to (dated 29-Aug-2005) says "Following qualification by Canada in 1996/7 and subsequent deployment for their LLAD Air Defence Programme of the 35 mm Ahead ABM System and Ammunition, some 10 customers worldwide have also upgraded their Skyguard 35 mm Air Defence Systems with the "Ahead" ABM capability." I think that means it's in service, & has been for some years.
And - "In parallel, a 35 mm x 228 KETF ABM System and Ammunition is being qualified for the Dutch Army for their new CV9035 IFV fitted with the Bushmaster III Chain Gun. This 35 mm x 228 KETF ABM nature has a sub-projectile payload optimised for the ground to ground target defeat role in comparison to the standard 35 mm Ahead round which is optimised for the air defence role."
AFAIK, the ground-target optimised 35mm AHEAD round is now fully qualified. It differs from the original in the spread pattern. Bigger spread, & can be fired to burst above targets in defilade. The AA AHEAD has a cone-shaped spread - but that doesn't stop it being used against the same ground targets as a 20mm, it just means it lacks the extra capacity (which no 20-25mm has, or is likely to get soon) to attack soft targets behind hard cover.
BTW, the US (marines or army? Can't remember) tested AHEAD rounds as far back as 2000. The report's publicly available.
Do you know if it will be installed for the Wiesel 1 and 2?
There are no official plans to do so.
The original Wiesel 1 in our service use a 20mm or a TOW launcher+MG3 so there is no ABM available and none of the Wiesel 2 is going to have a gun (They are used for mortar, recce, fire control, medical units, etc.).
But there is a prototype with the recoiless 30mm (Rheinmetall RMK 30) for which also ABM could be purchased.
But so far the Wiesel didn't achieved any exports so it remains just an option.
And I really don't understand that nobody wants it.
This vehicle is lovely for airborn/airmobile/mountain/light infantry.
The original Wiesel 1 in our service use a 20mm or a TOW launcher+MG3 so there is no ABM available and none of the Wiesel 2 is going to have a gun (They are used for mortar, recce, fire control, medical units, etc.).
But there is a prototype with the recoiless 30mm (Rheinmetall RMK 30) for which also ABM could be purchased.
But so far the Wiesel didn't achieved any exports so it remains just an option.
And I really don't understand that nobody wants it.
This vehicle is lovely for airborn/airmobile/mountain/light infantry.
The U.S. could use a secondary IFV, the M2 Bradley is a very effective IFV but in most narrow or rural bound villages that U.S. forces we need a smaller vehicle for Light Infantry or even Special Forces.
I think our infantry in Helmand could use some.
We have them in A-stan.
These small vehicles are really nice when it comes to troops needing bigger firepower when being deployed by helicopters or when operating during terrain were other vehicles do not work (Like heavy wood, mountains, small streets, etc.)
@Sgt. Barnes
IFV is the wrong word for it. Weapons carrier is the right one. The Wiesel 1 is not able to carry infantry (There is an unarmed Wiesel 2 APC version) but with a 20mm or a TOW it gives light infantry a punch normally not available to them.
These small vehicles are really nice when it comes to troops needing bigger firepower when being deployed by helicopters or when operating during terrain were other vehicles do not work (Like heavy wood, mountains, small streets, etc.)
@Sgt. Barnes
IFV is the wrong word for it. Weapons carrier is the right one. The Wiesel 1 is not able to carry infantry (There is an unarmed Wiesel 2 APC version) but with a 20mm or a TOW it gives light infantry a punch normally not available to them.
Let's hope Angela manages to get your RoEs changed, so your troops can do more. Not many chances to use their Wiesels under current rules, I think.
Yeah, they are not that good suited for patrols like Dingos, Fenneks and Fuchs and so are not used that often in firefights.
But the 40mm auto-grenadelauncher of the Fennek works very well and is giving nice firepower against the ambushes (It is not totally quiet in the north
).
But back to topic.
But the 40mm auto-grenadelauncher of the Fennek works very well and is giving nice firepower against the ambushes (It is not totally quiet in the north
).But back to topic.
Oh, I forgot to say you 'thanks' for this exellent info, oskarm! It's first time I saw a professional judgment about the BMP-3 frontal protection. It's worth to bring it here separately: BMP-3 =150mm RHE, BMP-3+ (modernised)=175mm RHE, BMP-2+ (modernised) =100mm RHE. Of course it means the hull bcz I still think, the turret has traditionaly weaker armor on the Russian vehicles.
How many troops could APC verson of the Wiesel hold in theory?
Also some efforts in the direction of caliber rising on their wheeled platform do make the Chinese :Very interesting - thanks for the information.
Citation: "Wheeled Fighting Vehicles. For about three years the PLA has been evaluating a new class of wheeled fighting vehicles. Two factories under Norinco have developed similar families of 6 and 8-wheeled vehicles, armed with 105mm and 120mm guns. These vehicles present the PLA with new power-projection options as their light weight means more can be carried by sea and airborne transports. Their main difference was in their choice of hull. Once company used a hull based on the WZ551 family of APC, which has a front-mounted engine, while the other uses a unique hull design with the engine in the rear of the hull. The latter offered a lower profile and thus had stability advantages over the former. Perhaps for the first time a Norinco spokesman disclosed that the PLA has chosen one of these families and will be putting them into service. The chosen family is that based on the widely used WZ551 APC family. Norinco is also now marketing this version. It appears that the cost and logistic advantages of proceeding with the proven APC design swayed the PLA’s choice. To compensate for their light armor, they will be armed with a co-produced version of the Russian Bastion gun-launched, laser-guided anti-tank missile. Its 5km range is greater than that of most conventional tank gun rounds." http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.48/pub_detail.asp
Thank`s Extern - as alway`s some good information.
The Wiesel 2 APC is able to carry up to five soldiers + commander and driver. It's armed with a MG3.
But I would think that it is really cramped for five soldiers with full gear.
Told ya, BMP-3 is frontally protected against 30mm. And someone here was trying to convince what newer 20mm rounds will penetrate it... As you can see, 30mm is BAD for anti-IFV purpose. It is also not enouth (alone) for infantry support - at least, not for main frontline IFV . There is a VERY good reason why russians got away from sinlge 30mm cannon on they prime front-line IFV's like BMP-3 and BMD. Infanrty need all the support it can get.
Are talking about my statements?
I only stated that the 20mm of the Marder was able to penetrate ex-NVA BMP-1 and 2 (Without ERA) all over the front. Nothing more and nothing less.
And if a 30mm is not enough why do the BMP-3 uses it as its main ant-IFV weapon?
I only stated that the 20mm of the Marder was able to penetrate ex-NVA BMP-1 and 2 (Without ERA) all over the front. Nothing more and nothing less.
And if a 30mm is not enough why do the BMP-3 uses it as its main ant-IFV weapon?
Seems Pretty good.
Maskirovka
Banned Member
The swedish army have used 3P (programable ammo , airburst etc) ammo for at least ten years in their CV90´s. Offcourse, they use use the CV9040 with a 40mm gun.
As a example, look at this video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUsgZZeJqhE
This thread just keeps getting better!
The 40mm grenade launcher might make a good co-ax (secondary armament) for a full-sized APC. It would have to have an indepandant elevation, but I think it would be handy in an APC with a large enough turret. The BMP-2 my unit captured in Iraq had a very large turret ring, it would seem to be a good candidate to test the idea with.
I wonder what the Chinese are up to...
The 40mm grenade launcher might make a good co-ax (secondary armament) for a full-sized APC. It would have to have an indepandant elevation, but I think it would be handy in an APC with a large enough turret. The BMP-2 my unit captured in Iraq had a very large turret ring, it would seem to be a good candidate to test the idea with.
I wonder what the Chinese are up to...