The Best That Never Was 2 (Prototypes)

[pmulcahy11b]

Just offhand, I think that Old Moses vs M113 would produce only a medium-sized dent.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I agree, I don't think a 6-pounder ball propelled by blackpowder will have enough energy to penetrate the aluminium armour of the M113 - but will surely scare the living daylights out of anyone inside when it hits!

If you can score a hit on the tracks though you might achieve a mobility kill

Just offhand, I think that Old Moses vs M113 would produce only a medium-sized dent.

[CDAT]

The armor on the 113 is a lot tougher than most give it credit for.

[pmulcahy11b]

I agree, I don't think a 6-pounder ball propelled by blackpowder will have enough energy to penetrate the aluminium armour of the M113 - but will surely scare the living daylights out of anyone inside when it hits!

BONNNNGGGG!!

[Olefin]

BONNNNGGGG!!

Have a feeling it would scare the living hell out of anyone and make them back off until they figure out what the heck just hit them

[cawest]

I agree, I don't think a 6-pounder ball propelled by blackpowder will have enough energy to penetrate the aluminium armour of the M113 - but will surely scare the living daylights out of anyone inside when it hits!

If you can score a hit on the tracks though you might achieve a mobility kill

What about an arrow APFSDS but black powder powered.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

What about an arrow APFSDS but black powder powered.

Well... maybe But I'm thinking there still would not be enough energy for the projectile to do any real damage. I can imagine it getting embedded in the armour but not actually getting all the way through and still be capable of causing damage to the internals.

When I first joined the Aussie Army Reserve, my first unit was Armoured Recce (using the M113). The entrance to the vehicle compound had a crew door (from the rear ramp) mounted to the left of the gate. It had been damaged at some point and written off so somebody decided to take it to the range and test it against the small arms we were issued.

Specifically 9x19mm, 5.56mm, 7.62x51mm but as I recall it, only the 7.62 had the energy to penetrate and that was I believe at reasonably close range (somewhere below 300m). So based on that very hazy recollection, I figure you're going to need to get that arrow up to at least 850 m/s (2,800 ft/s) muzzle velocity with at least 3,470 J (2,559 ft⋅lbf) of energy. Black powder is a low explosive, is it going to generate enough force to give any projectile those levels of velocity and energy

[CDAT]

...

Specifically 9x19mm, 5.56mm, 7.62x51mm but as I recall it, only the 7.62 had the energy to penetrate and that was I believe at reasonably close range (somewhere below 300m). So based on that very hazy recollection, I figure you're going to need to get that arrow up to at least 850 m/s (2,800 ft/s) muzzle velocity with at least 3,470 J (2,559 ft⋅lbf) of energy. Black powder is a low explosive, is it going to generate enough force to give any projectile those levels of velocity and energy

This is interesting, back about twenty years or so now, we had a chance to do a live fire (mock assault breach) with war stock (AP, API and such) for my unit and most of the hard targets we got to shoot at were old M901's. After it was done we were had to go and police up the range where we had been, this gave us time to look at the vehicles. I do not know how long they had been out there, but do know that there was a British unit that went before us (their warriors were just leaving as we showed up). When we looked at the vehicles there was no penetrations that I or anyone I talked with saw. We were using M16A4, M249, M240, and M2HB's. I do not know what the warriors used but as they did not penetrate (we were guessing that the VERY LARGE dents were from their TP ammo) that it was not AP, and no HE was allowed on the range so know it was not that. This makes me wounder, we only shot the sides, my guess was that the front/back would be at least as tough (the door that I know is not solid) looked at least as much. But is it, or did they make changes to the metal of the armor as time went on, so one from 1960 is not a tough as one from 1970 I do not know, but makes me think as you could penetrate with things that we could not.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In an effort to refresh my hazy recollections, I spoke to one of the guys I joined the unit with and yes the passage of time does dull my memory far too much!
The inside section of the door was facing outwards, as in, the inner section was shot up. I believe the inner part of the door is steel and not the aluminium alloy armour plate of the outer hull. Wish I had taken a damned photograph of it now.
I thought it was the outer section but my mate has said it was the inner section - his recollection makes more sense.

Plus, they didn't just shoot it with 7.62x51, they also gunned it up with the .30cal L3 MGs (British version of the Browning M1919) that are normal armament on our M113A1) so what I thought were 7.62NATO holes are just as likely to have been .30-06. Not that that makes any difference in regard to the armour plate which a web search states for the M113A3, the armour can withstand up to 14.5mm (although I don't think there's that much difference between the armour on the A1 and the A3.)
He's pretty sure there were no penetrations of the outer section.

Note:
For anyone not familiar with the M113, the crew door in the rear ramp is a two piece affair with the outer section made of armour plate and the inner section made to withstand troopies pounding on it has they disembark when the ramp is down.
This photo from Vietnam shows what I mean.

[Legbreaker]

WSo based on that very hazy recollection, I figure you're going to need to get that arrow up to at least 850 m/s (2,800 ft/s) muzzle velocity with at least 3,470 J (2,559 ft⋅lbf) of energy. Black powder is a low explosive, is it going to generate enough force to give any projectile those levels of velocity and energy

The simple answer is no, it's not going to get up to the required speed. https://www.practicalmachinist.com/v...powder-325903/

[rcaf_777]

EX-41 Launcher

The EX 41 grenade launcher, also called the Shoulder-Fired Weapon (SFW), was a prototype multi-shot grenade launcher that was never adopted by the United States military. nstead of the standard low-velocity 40--46mm grenade used by the M203 and M79 grenade launchers or the standard high-velocity 40--53mm grenade used by the Mk 19, the EX 41 used a hybrid of the two developed by Indiana Ordnance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EX_41_grenade_launcher

http://www.fbodaily.com/cbd/archive/1995/11(November)/02-Nov-1995/55sol001.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watchv=dmoKSwtbJlg

[Vespers War]

A case of taking two old weapons systems and mashing them together was the Yugoslavian SO-122. In the 1950s, Yugoslavia received 599 M4A3E4 and 1 M4A3E8 (which makes page 39 of the Soviet Combat Vehicle Handbook hilarious in hindsight). In 1956, they began looking at how to replace the 76mm gun, which was rapidly becoming obsolescent. Their solution was a number of M1931 (A-19) cannon that Yugoslavian partisans had captured from German forces during WW2 (which had in turn captured the guns during the invasion of the Soviet Union). They built a new turret and shoehorned the same 122mm gun used on the IS-2 and IS-3 heavy tanks into a Sherman. The prototype also replaced the M4's engine with the engine from the T-34-85, but this was not planned for production models in order to keep the conversion quick.

The prototype was ready by 1965. Its weight had increased to 33.5 tons, but the overall performance was similar - acceleration had dropped slightly, maximum speed increased slightly to 50 km/h, and fuel consumption was roughly halved by using the V-2R engine. 100 of these were supposed to be built, but the retirement of the M4 hull in 1966 put an end to those plans.

The SO-122 in-game:
Use the M4A3E8 on page 39 of the Soviet Combat Vehicle Handbook. Replace the 76mm with the following:

122mm A-19 (Rng 400 for all shells)
AP Dam 27, Pen 55/47/40/26
HVAP Dam 27, Pen 71/62/52/34
HE C:15 B:27, Pen 11C
HEAT C:10 B:22, Pen 42C

Ammo load should probably be around 40 shells. The tank appears to have kept both internal machine gun mounts, though they would likely have taken something like a PK/PKT rather than the M1919A4.

With their lack of armor and big, slow-firing gun (Rld 1), this falls into the "eggshell with a sledgehammer" category of armored vehicles. Working as a tank destroyer from ambush would likely be their best strategy.

[Vespers War]

When a Nock Gun just isn't enough volleying for you:

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/perdition-to-conspirators-magnificent-14-barrel-flintlock/

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And from the same museum in Liege, there's this interesting piece: -

https://www.grandcurtius.be/en/museums-collections/weapons/7-barrel-flint-machine-gun-superimposed-loads

[Vespers War]

The museum website has some information Ian didn't cover (most notably barrel length), so here's a rough guesstimate at the 14-barrel rifle's stats:

7.5x30mm Conical Black Powder
Mass 6.09 kg
Magazine 2(14), Rld 2 per barrel (14 per lock, 28 total), Dam 1, Pen Nil, Bulk 6, ROF 7, Recoil 2, Range 50

The weight of 14 barrels plus 2 locks plus 1 stock plus ammunition comes to 24.4 kilograms, but I divided it by 4 to get something closer to how the gun's mass appears when Ian handled it. Range is maximized at 52 meters if it's a 31mm black powder charge, but I rounded both because I could. I used a conical round rather than ball because of the polygonal rifling. It's not very powerful, but it is intimidating.



The Chambers machine gun is terrifying because of the potential for flashback detonating multiple rounds at once.