It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

APFSDS for Sniper rifles possible.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   


those of u that play Halo/Halo2 will know this rifle. DO u think its possible for a rifle to have APFSDS rounds and is there any advantage if u can. Just wondering.




posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Not really, in answer to both of your questions.


An APFSDS concept, miniaturized, is a flechette. Not nearly as effective as their larger counterparts. Too unstable, and the APFSDS designation would be a bit of a misnomer, because the small size of the projectile makes it poorly suited to piercing armor. Not enough kinetic energy.

I think for small arms, the bullet has worked best so far. The manufacturers wouldn't have stuck with it, if there had been a better option.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158



those of u that play Halo/Halo2 will know this rifle. DO u think its possible for a rifle to have APFSDS rounds and is there any advantage if u can. Just wondering.


Here you go mate.


The Steyr AMR / IWS 2000 Sniper rifle uses that method. Check it out:

world.guns.ru...

The tech has been around for ages. I guess its to do with NATO stanards people are too scared to introduce new technology/calibres/ammo. Im sure with todays technology, computer, simulation software etc... they could perfect this gun and ammo 100%. But then again since we only fight "terrorists" nowadays a gun like this would be over kill when basic terroists can't even afford to buy shoe's let alone a level II(2) bullet proof vest this gun/ammo would even go through level 4/5 armour.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   

The tech has been around for ages. I guess its to do with NATO stanards people are too scared to introduce new technology/calibres/ammo.


Not really, they have the M82 which can fire armor piercing rounds. Care to guess what level of armor that can penetrate?



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

The tech has been around for ages. I guess its to do with NATO stanards people are too scared to introduce new technology/calibres/ammo.


Not really, they have the M82 which can fire armor piercing rounds. Care to guess what level of armor that can penetrate?



are you talking about this :
world.guns.ru...

i don't understand your question. What are you asking?


Well im sure the .50 AP cannot even compare to the Steyr AMR in AP capability. All major sniper .338,.50bmg,12.7x108,.408,14.5mm etc..... rifles can easily pierce any human form of body armour. These discard sabot fin stabalised guns are for anti-material purposes and are superiour to any .50BMG M82 in armour penatration.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Yes thats the one, and actually the M82 is classified as an anti material weapon too, it can take out several type’s of APC’s, and perhaps even helicopters. Wall’s wont save you either as it can penetrate 1 meter of concrete, if that's not enough for you then anything more is just overkill.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:20 PM
link   
this would be one hell of a gun if manufactured for the Us. Imagine if we used it in Operation Iraqi Freedom against the iraqi's it wouldve been awesome. This would be great for attacking troops hidden behind walls or something like that. However instead of tungsten they should use DU since it self sharpens while tungsten tends to blunt. Great find though thanks for the link.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:26 PM
link   
WestPoint, a .50 cal rifle can take out helicopters and other aircraft, as well as penetrating masonry walls and remaining lethal on the other side.

Why would it make sense to up the cost per-bullet to retain approximately the same capabilities?

That doesn't make sense.

It's great having the capabilities of DU for special situations, but really, is it wise to make nuclear waste the defacto material for munitions? It seems like beligerent overkill to me, for a couple of reasons.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   
In the world of Halo you are fighting aliens with powerful exo-skeletons and that's why they aparently developed such a monstrous weapon, the manual describes it as a 14.5mm APFSDS round, in effect this would just be a large Flechette, in the game they can take multiple hits of this weapon...as if...

These aliens are also nearly impervious to 7.62x51mm rounds of the Halo Assualt Rifle...

Everything is over-sized in that game really, even the pistol's round is in similar dimensions to a .50AE round.

In all reality the .50BMG round is more than enough to take on anything the terrorist/insurgents throw at us, but for operations that require you to fire through heavy armor it might be useful, even though a 14.5mm round would not dent most battle tanks, you have LAWs, RPGs and other rocket-based weaponry for that task...



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
this would be one hell of a gun if manufactured for the Us. Imagine if we used it in Operation Iraqi Freedom against the iraqi's it wouldve been awesome. This would be great for attacking troops hidden behind walls or something like that. However instead of tungsten they should use DU since it self sharpens while tungsten tends to blunt. Great find though thanks for the link.


For "wall shooting" you would
a. Need to be able to look THROUGH the wall;
b. definately NOT use DU because of its pyrophoric features - you dont want to accidentally start a fire that tears down half a block just because you want to penetrate that ONE wall - and IF you are willing to accept that collateral damage, a missile, tank shell or bomb can do the job safer, more reliable and thorough.

Besides, IMO "awesome" is definately not the right word to describe the effectivity of a weapon. We are stilling talking about ways to KILL people.



[edit on 16/4/2006 by Lonestar24]



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   
The reason why the U.S.A. uses DU rounds is that it's cheaper than proper tungsten-carbide rounds which NORMAL countries use. But the DU lies from america are gaining quite a following. Also handy for GENOCIDE.

The Swiss have always had the most terrifying weapons :-) The Swiss halberds wreaked havoc on the medieval battlefields, and this 14.5 mm rifle is the modern day equivalent, a good piece of kit, but it's designed to be broken apart and carried by TWO men, not one like the 12.7x99mm class antimaterial rifles, but it has greater uses. That 14.5 mm subcaliber will go through into the ammunition storage of the tanks and mobile artillery quite easily. Again, don't fool yourselves when dealing with war, because the only ones you hurt with that kind of a mind set is yourself, when you fail to take proper precautions while facing the appropriate threats.

Never underestimate your enemy. But ok, I know it's hard, FOR SOME...!

Saw a nice post about a russian tank that was under development, with no turret, It's not a joke, it's made for forest-combat, something the americans in here wouldn't know about, since they only pick on countries that are flat with open terrain. Sweden had a class of tanks like that, but then scrapped it after 20-30 years use I think. When their defense picture changed. But it had tremendous advantages. If I was to build a tank, I would certainly seat the operators between the belts (and behind the engine, like the israeli tanks). Greatest survivability.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   

The reason why the U.S.A. uses DU rounds is that it's cheaper than proper tungsten-carbide rounds which NORMAL countries use. But the DU lies from america are gaining quite a following. Also handy for GENOCIDE.


The US used DU rounds because DU is denser then other metals which gives you better penetration capably and DU tends to self-sharpen or focus to a point upon impact with armor rather then blunting out. And DU has excellent pyrophoric properties, meaning that upon penetration of the armor it tends to explode and incinerate anything inside a tank.


That 14.5 mm subcaliber will go through into the ammunition storage of the tanks and mobile artillery quite easily.


No it wont, no 14.5 mm rifle will penetrate a modern day MBT armor to reach the ammo storage box. As for self propelled artillery it depends on the type, some don't have very thick armor however other will not be so easy to penetrate.

Also, note that the topic is APFSDS rifle rounds.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 08:25 PM
link   
14.5 subcaliber rounds are APFSDS rounds... and correctly placed 14.5 fletchette will penetrate MBT armour at it's weakest points.



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 12:37 AM
link   

14.5 subcaliber rounds are APFSDS rounds... and correctly placed 14.5 fletchette will penetrate MBT armour at it's weakest points.


The way I see it your best bet would be shooting the top of turret where the armor is weakest, there are other weak areas but those shots can be tricky.



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

The reason why the U.S.A. uses DU rounds is that it's cheaper than proper tungsten-carbide rounds which NORMAL countries use. But the DU lies from america are gaining quite a following. Also handy for GENOCIDE.


The US used DU rounds because DU is denser then other metals which gives you better penetration capably and DU tends to self-sharpen or focus to a point upon impact with armor rather then blunting out. And DU has excellent pyrophoric properties, meaning that upon penetration of the armor it tends to explode and incinerate anything inside a tank.


That 14.5 mm subcaliber will go through into the ammunition storage of the tanks and mobile artillery quite easily.


No it wont, no 14.5 mm rifle will penetrate a modern day MBT armor to reach the ammo storage box. As for self propelled artillery it depends on the type, some don't have very thick armor however other will not be so easy to penetrate.

Also, note that the topic is APFSDS rifle rounds.




It is AS DENSE AS other very dense and heavy metals, but CHEAPER!


I AM talking about APFSDS! Did you SLEEP your way through west point?!!


It will certainly go through your crappy american aluminium-skinned tanks! And I'll be laughing all the way.


[edit on 17-4-2006 by Christian IX]



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

It will certainly go through your crappy american aluminium-skinned tanks! And I'll be laughing all the way.


Oh yes, if American tanks were made of aluminum then you have good chance, however you might have more success against APC's.



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   
You can't "destroy" an MBT with any "hand held" rifle, but you can disable one by taking out it's observation and communication systems...



posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Not really, in answer to both of your questions.


An APFSDS concept, miniaturized, is a flechette. Not nearly as effective as their larger counterparts. Too unstable, and the APFSDS designation would be a bit of a misnomer, because the small size of the projectile makes it poorly suited to piercing armor. Not enough kinetic energy.

I think for small arms, the bullet has worked best so far. The manufacturers wouldn't have stuck with it, if there had been a better option.


Are you sure??? world.guns.ru...


Originally posted by fritz What is this? Who makes it? Got any pic link to it?


no problemworld.guns.ru...



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
To address the DU issue: The US military determined DU to be relatively equal to Tungsten, but because of the already large quantities of DU produced in the manufacture of nuclear weapons (almost half a million tons of it), it was cheaper to produce AP rounds than to continue to store it. As to its density, look at the periodic table. Uranium is the MOST dense of any element not created in a particle accelerator.

To address the American tank issue: there has never been an Abrams MBT destroyed in combat. Infact, only a small handfull have ever been disabled (dont quote me but 12-15 mabye). Without massive penitrating power you dont have much of a chance.

Finally, the flachette idea: Flachette rounds are usually small in diameter and mass, and so can reach extreamly high velocities and so can penetrate greater than any other form of bullet. Unfortuniatly, because it is so small it does so little damage that the shot would have to hit an extremely limited area to be effective.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:17 PM
link   
The great thing about DU is that it causes chromosomal damage to both the soldiers and marines who use them as well as the combatants upon whom they are used, the children who play near spent rounds, expectant mothers, etc. It's the gift that keeps on giving. Ask a Gulf War I vet.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join