Armor-piercing projectile calibers. Armor-piercing piercing sub-caliber projectile. Feathered shells of anti-tank guns

Immediately after the appearance of armor protection for military equipment, designers artillery weapons began work on the creation of tools capable of effectively destroying it.

An ordinary projectile was not quite suitable for this purpose, its kinetic energy was not always enough to overcome a thick barrier made of heavy-duty steel with manganese additives. The sharp tip was crushed, the body was destroyed, and the effect turned out to be minimal, in best case- deep dent.

The Russian engineer-inventor S. O. Makarov developed the design of an armor-piercing projectile with a blunt front. This technical solution provided high level pressure on the metal surface at the initial moment of contact, while the place of impact was subjected to strong heating. Both the tip itself and the area of the armor that had been hit melted. The remaining part of the projectile penetrated the resulting fistula, causing destruction.

Sergeant major Nazarov did not have theoretical knowledge of metallurgy and physics, but intuitively came to a very interesting design, which became the prototype of an effective class of artillery weapons. His sub-caliber projectile differed from the usual armor-piercing in its internal structure.

In 1912, Nazarov suggested inside conventional ammunition to introduce a strong rod, which is not inferior to armor in its hardness. Officials of the War Ministry dismissed the importunate non-commissioned officer, considering, obviously, that an illiterate retiree could not invent anything sensible. Subsequent events clearly demonstrated the harmfulness of such arrogance.

The Krupa firm received a patent for a sub-caliber projectile already in 1913, on the eve of the war. However, the level of development of armored vehicles at the beginning of the 20th century made it possible to do without special armor-piercing means. They were needed later, during the Second World War.

The principle of operation of a sub-caliber projectile is based on a simple formula known from the school physics course: a moving body is directly proportional to its mass and the square of its speed. Therefore, to ensure the greatest destructive ability, it is more important to disperse the striking object than to make it heavier.

This simple theoretical position finds its practical confirmation. A 76mm sub-caliber projectile is twice as light as a conventional armor-piercing projectile (3.02 and 6.5 kg, respectively). But to provide striking power, it is not enough just to reduce the mass. Armor, as the song says, is strong, and additional tricks are needed to break through it.

If a steel bar with a uniform internal structure hits a solid barrier, it will collapse. This process, in slow motion, looks like the initial crushing of the tip, an increase in the contact area, strong heating and spreading of molten metal around the impact site.

Armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile works differently. Its steel body shatters upon impact, taking on some of the thermal energy and protecting the heavy-duty interior from thermal destruction. The ceramic-metal core, having the shape of a somewhat elongated thread spool and a diameter three times smaller than the caliber, continues to move, punching a small-diameter hole in the armor. In this case, a large amount of heat is released, which creates a thermal distortion, which, in combination with mechanical pressure, produces a destructive effect.

The hole, which forms a sub-caliber projectile, has the shape of a funnel, expanding in the direction of its movement. It does not require damaging elements, explosives and a fuse, fragments of armor and core flying inside the combat vehicle pose a mortal threat to the crew, and the released one can cause detonation of fuel and ammunition.

Despite the diversity of anti-tank weapons, sabots, invented over a century ago, still have their place in the arsenal of modern armies.

This article will look at the various types of ammunition and their armor penetration. Photographs and illustrations of the traces of armor remaining after being hit by a projectile are given, as well as an analysis of the overall effectiveness of various types of ammunition used to destroy tanks and other armored vehicles.
When studying this issue, it should be noted that armor penetration depends not only on the type of projectile, but also on the combination of many other factors: firing range, muzzle velocity, type of armor, armor slope angle, etc. mm armor plates of various types. The shelling was carried out with 75-mm armor-piercing shells in order to show the difference in the resistance of armor of the same thickness, but of different types.

The iron armor plate had a brittle fracture of the rear surface, with numerous spalls in the area of the hole. The impact speed is chosen in such a way that the projectile is stuck in the plate. Penetration is nearly achieved with a projectile speed of just 390.3 m/s. The projectile itself was not damaged at all, and will certainly work properly, breaking through such armor.

Iron-nickel armor, without hardening according to the Krupp method (that is, in fact - structural steel) - demonstrated plastic failure with a classic "envelope" (cross-shaped tear on the rear surface), without any traces of fragmentation. As you can see, close to the previous test, the projectile impact speed no longer even leads to through penetration (hit No. I). And only an increase in speed to 437 m / s leads to a violation of the integrity of the rear surface of the armor (the projectile did not penetrate the armor, but a through hole was formed). To achieve a result similar to the first test, it is necessary to bring the speed of the projectile to the armor up to 469.2 m/s (it would not be superfluous to recall that the kinetic energy of the projectile grows in proportion to the square of the speed, i.e. almost one and a half times!). At the same time, the projectile was destroyed, its charging chamber was opened - it will no longer be able to work properly.

Krupp armor - the front layer of high hardness contributed to the splitting of shells, while the softer base of the armor deformed, absorbing the energy of the projectile. The first three shells collapsed almost without even leaving marks on the armor plate. Projectile No. IV, which hit the armor at a speed of 624 m / s, also completely collapsed, but this time almost squeezing out the “cork” in its caliber. We can assume that with a further, even a slight increase in the speed of the meeting, a through penetration will occur. But to overcome the Krupp armor, the projectile had to be given more than 2.5 times more kinetic energy!

Armor-piercing projectile

The most massive type of ammunition used against tanks. And as the name implies, it was created specifically for breaking through armor. According to their design, armor-piercing shells were solid blanks (without an explosive charge in the body) or shells with a chamber (inside which an explosive charge was placed). Blanks were easier to manufacture and hit the crew and mechanisms of an enemy tank only at the point of penetration of the armor. Chamber shells were more difficult to manufacture, but when armor was pierced, explosives exploded in the chamber, causing more damage to the crew and mechanisms of an enemy tank, increasing the likelihood of detonation of ammunition or arson of fuel and lubricants.

Also, the shells were sharp-headed and blunt-headed. Equipped with ballistic tips to give the correct angle when meeting with sloped armor and reduce ricochet.

HEAT projectile

Cumulative projectile. The principle of operation of this armor-piercing ammunition is significantly different from the principle of operation of kinetic ammunition, which includes conventional armor-piercing and sub-caliber projectiles. A cumulative projectile is a thin-walled steel projectile filled with a powerful explosive - RDX, or a mixture of TNT and RDX. At the front of the projectile, explosives have a goblet-shaped recess lined with metal (usually copper). The projectile has a sensitive head fuse. When a projectile collides with armor, an explosive is detonated. At the same time, the lining metal is melted and compressed by an explosion into a thin jet (pestle), flying forward at an extremely high speed and penetrating armor. Armored action is provided by a cumulative jet and splashes of armor metal. The hole of the HEAT projectile is small and has melted edges, which has led to a common misconception that HEAT projectiles “burn through” the armor. The penetration of a HEAT projectile does not depend on the velocity of the projectile and is the same at all distances. Its production is quite simple, the production of the projectile does not require the use a large number scarce metals. The cumulative projectile can be used against infantry and artillery as a high-explosive fragmentation projectile. At the same time, cumulative shells during the war years were characterized by numerous shortcomings. The manufacturing technology of these projectiles was not sufficiently developed, as a result, their penetration was relatively low (approximately corresponded to the caliber of the projectile or slightly higher) and was characterized by instability. The rotation of the projectile at high initial speeds made it difficult to form a cumulative jet, as a result, the cumulative projectiles had a low initial velocity, a small effective range and high dispersion, which was also facilitated by the non-optimal form of the projectile head from the point of view of aerodynamics (its configuration was determined by the presence of a notch). The big problem was the creation of a complex fuse, which should be sensitive enough to quickly undermine the projectile, but stable enough not to explode in the barrel (the USSR was able to work out such a fuse suitable for use in powerful tank and anti-tank guns, only at the end of 1944). The minimum caliber of a cumulative projectile was 75 mm, and the effectiveness of cumulative projectiles of this caliber was greatly reduced. Mass production of HEAT shells required the deployment of large-scale production of hexogen. The most massive HEAT shells were used by the German army (for the first time in the summer-autumn of 1941), mainly from 75 mm caliber guns and howitzers. The Soviet army used cumulative shells, created on the basis of captured German ones, from 1942-43, including them in the ammunition of regimental guns and howitzers that had a low muzzle velocity. The British and American armies used shells of this type, mainly in heavy howitzer ammunition. Thus, in the Second World War (in contrast to the present time, when improved projectiles of this type form the basis of the ammunition load of tank guns), the use of cumulative projectiles was quite limited, mainly they were considered as a means of anti-tank self-defense of guns that had low initial speeds and low armor penetration by traditional projectiles (regimental guns, howitzers). At the same time, other anti-tank weapons were actively used by all participants in the war. cumulative ammunition- grenade launchers (illustration No. 8), air bombs, hand grenades.

Sub-caliber projectile

Sub-caliber projectile. This projectile had a rather complex design, consisting of two main parts - armor-piercing core and pallet. The task of the pallet, made of mild steel, was to disperse the projectile in the bore. When the projectile hit the target, the pallet was crushed, and the heavy and hard sharp-headed core made of tungsten carbide pierced the armor. The projectile did not have a bursting charge, ensuring that the target was hit by fragments of the core and fragments of armor heated to high temperatures. Sub-caliber shells had a significantly lower weight compared to conventional armor-piercing shells, which allowed them to accelerate in the gun barrel to significantly higher speeds. As a result, penetration sub-caliber shells turned out to be significantly higher. The use of sub-caliber shells made it possible to significantly increase the armor penetration of the existing guns, which made it possible to hit more modern, well-armored armored vehicles even with outdated guns. At the same time, sub-caliber shells had a number of disadvantages. Their shape resembled a coil (there were shells of this type and streamlined shape, but they were much less common), which greatly worsened the ballistics of the projectile, in addition, the light projectile quickly lost speed; as a result, at long distances, the armor penetration of sub-caliber shells dropped dramatically, turning out to be even lower than that of classic armor-piercing shells. Sub-caliber shells did not work well on sloped armor, because under the action of bending loads the hard but brittle core easily broke. The armor-piercing effect of such shells was inferior to armor-piercing caliber shells. Sub-caliber projectiles of small caliber were ineffective against armored vehicles that had protective shields made of thin steel. These shells were expensive and difficult to manufacture, and most importantly, scarce tungsten was used in their manufacture. As a result, the number of sub-caliber shells in the ammunition load of guns during the war years was small, they were allowed to be used only to destroy heavily armored targets at short distances. The German army was the first to use sub-caliber shells in small quantities in 1940 during the fighting in France. In 1941, faced with well-armored Soviet tanks, the Germans switched to the widespread use of sub-caliber shells, which significantly increased the anti-tank capabilities of their artillery and tanks. However, the shortage of tungsten limited the release of shells of this type; as a result, in 1944, the production of German sub-caliber shells was discontinued, while most of the shells fired during the war years had a small caliber (37-50 mm). Trying to get around the problem of tungsten, the Germans produced Pzgr.40(C) sub-caliber projectiles with a steel core and Pzgr.40(W) surrogate projectiles, which were a sub-caliber projectile without a core. In the USSR, a fairly mass production of sub-caliber shells, created on the basis of captured German ones, began at the beginning of 1943, and most of the shells produced were of 45 mm caliber. The production of these shells of larger calibers was limited by the shortage of tungsten, and they were issued to the troops only when there was a threat of an enemy tank attack, and a report was required for each spent shell. Also, sub-caliber shells were used to a limited extent by the British and American armies in the second half of the war.

high-explosive projectile

High-explosive fragmentation projectile. It is a thin-walled steel or steel-cast iron projectile filled with an explosive (usually TNT or ammonite), with a head fuse. Unlike armor-piercing shells, high-explosive shells did not have a tracer. Upon hitting the target, the projectile explodes, hitting the target with fragments and a blast wave, either immediately - a fragmentation action, or with some delay (which allows the projectile to go deeper into the ground) - a high-explosive action. The projectile is intended mainly to destroy openly located and covered infantry, artillery, field shelters (trenches, wood-and-earth firing points), unarmored and lightly armored vehicles. Good armored tanks and self-propelled guns are resistant to action high-explosive fragmentation projectiles. However, the impact of large-caliber shells can cause the destruction of lightly armored vehicles, and damage to heavily armored tanks, consisting in cracking of armor plates (illustration No. 19), jamming of the turret, failure of instruments and mechanisms, injuries and shell shock to the crew.

Literature / useful materials and links:

Artillery (State Military Publishing House of the People's Commissariat of Defense of the USSR. Moscow, 1938)
Artillery Sergeant's Manual ()
Artillery book. Military publishing house of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR. Moscow - 1953 ()
Internet materials

What affects tanks besides grenade launchers and anti-tank systems? How does armor-piercing ammunition work? In this article, we will talk about armor-piercing ammunition. The article, which will be of interest to both dummies and those who understand the topic, was prepared by our team member Eldar Akhundov, who once again pleases us with interesting reviews on the topic of weapons.

Story

Armor-piercing shells are designed to hit targets protected by armor, as their name implies. They first began to be widely used in naval battles in the second half of the 19th century with the advent of ships protected by metal armor. The effect of simple high-explosive fragmentation projectiles on armored targets was not enough due to the fact that during the explosion of a projectile, the energy of the explosion is not concentrated in any one direction, but is dissipated into the surrounding space. Only part shock wave affects the armor of the object trying to break through / bend it. As a result, the pressure created by the shock wave is not enough to penetrate thick armor, but some deflection is possible. With the thickening of the armor and the strengthening of the design of armored vehicles, it was necessary to increase the amount of explosives in the projectile by increasing its size (caliber, etc.) or developing new substances, which would be costly and inconvenient. By the way, this applies not only to ships, but also to land armored vehicles.

Initially, the first tanks during the First World War could be fought with high-explosive fragmentation shells, since the tanks had bulletproof thin armor only 10-20 mm thick, which was also connected with rivets, since at that time (early 20th century) welding technology solid armored hulls of tanks and armored vehicles has not yet been worked out. It was enough 3 - 4 kg of explosives with a direct hit to put such a tank out of action. In this case, the shock wave simply tore or pressed the thin armor inside the vehicle, which led to damage to equipment or the death of the crew.

An armor-piercing projectile is a kinetic means of hitting a target - that is, it ensures defeat due to the energy of the impact of the projectile, and not the explosion. In armor-piercing projectiles, energy is actually concentrated at its tip, where a sufficiently large pressure is created on a small area of the surface, and the load significantly exceeds the tensile strength of the armor material. As a result, this leads to the introduction of the projectile into the armor and its penetration. Kinetic ammo were the first mass anti-tank weapon, which began to be used in series in various wars. The impact energy of the projectile depends on the mass and its speed at the moment of contact with the target. The mechanical strength, the density of the material of an armor-piercing projectile are also critical factors on which its effectiveness depends. For many years of wars, various types of armor-piercing shells have been developed, differing in design, and for more than a hundred years there has been a constant improvement of both shells and the armor of tanks and armored vehicles.

The first armor-piercing shells were all-steel solid projectile(blank) penetrating armor with impact force (thickness approximately equal to the caliber of the projectile)

Then the design began to get more complicated and for a long time the following scheme became popular: a rod / core made of hard hardened alloy steel covered in a shell of soft metal (lead or mild steel), or light alloy. The soft shell was needed to reduce wear on the gun barrel, and also because it was not practical to make the entire projectile from hardened alloy steel. The soft shell was crushed when hitting an inclined barrier, thereby preventing the projectile from ricocheting / slipping on the armor. The shell can also serve as a fairing at the same time (depending on the shape) that reduces air resistance during the flight of the projectile.

Another design of the projectile involves the absence of a shell and only the presence of a special soft metal cap as a projectile tip for aerodynamics and to prevent ricochet when hitting sloped armor.

The device of sub-caliber armor-piercing shells

The projectile is called sub-caliber because the caliber (diameter) of its combat / armor-piercing part is 3 less than the caliber of the gun (a - coil, b - streamlined). 1 - ballistic tip, 2 - pallet, 3 - armor-piercing core / armor-piercing part, 4 - tracer, 5 - plastic tip.

The projectile has rings around it made of soft metal, which are called leading belts. They serve to center the projectile in the barrel and obturate the barrel. Obturation is the sealing of the barrel bore when a gun (or a weapon in general) is fired, which prevents the powder gases (accelerating the projectile) from breaking through into the gap between the projectile itself and the barrel. Thus, the energy of the powder gases is not lost and is transferred to the projectile to the maximum possible extent.

Left- the dependence of the thickness of the armored barrier on its angle of inclination. A plate of thickness B1 inclined at some angle, a has the same resistance as a thicker plate of thickness B2 at right angles to the movement of the projectile. It can be seen that the path that the projectile must pierce increases with the increase in the slope of the armor.

On right- blunt projectiles A and B at the time of contact with sloping armor. Below - sharp-headed arrow-shaped projectile. Due to the special shape of projectile B, its good engagement (biting) on sloping armor is visible, which prevents ricochet. The pointed projectile is less prone to ricochet due to its sharp shape and very high contact pressure upon impact with armor.

The damaging factors when such projectiles hit the target are fragments and fragments of armor flying at high speed from its inner side, as well as the flying projectile itself or its parts. Particularly affected equipment located on the trajectory of breaking through the armor. In addition, due to the high temperature of the projectile and its fragments, as well as the presence of a large amount of flammable objects and materials inside the tank or armored vehicle, the risk of fire is very high. The image below shows how this happens:

A relatively soft projectile body is visible, crushed during impact and a hard-alloy core that penetrates armor. On the right, a stream of high-velocity fragments is visible from the inside of the armor as one of the main damaging factors. In all modern tanks, there is a tendency for the most dense placement of internal equipment and crew to reduce the size and weight of tanks. The flip side of this coin is that if the armor is penetrated, it is almost guaranteed that some important equipment will be damaged or a crew member will be injured. And even if the tank is not destroyed, it usually becomes incapacitated. On modern tanks and armored vehicles, a non-combustible anti-fragmentation lining is installed on the inside of the armor. As a rule, this is a material based on Kevlar or other high-strength materials. Although it does not protect against the core of the projectile itself, it retains some of the armor fragments, thereby reducing the damage done and increasing the survivability of the vehicle and crew.

Above, on the example of an armored vehicle, one can see the armored effect of the projectile and fragments with and without the lining installed. On the left, fragments and the shell itself that pierced the armor are visible. On the right, the installed lining delays most armor fragments (but not the projectile itself), thereby reducing damage.

Even more efficient view shells are chamber shells. Chamber armor-piercing projectiles are distinguished by the presence of a chamber (cavity) inside the projectile filled with explosives and a delayed detonator. After penetrating the armor, the projectile explodes inside the object, thereby significantly increasing the damage dealt by fragments and a shock wave in a closed volume. In fact, this is an armor-piercing landmine.

One of the simple examples of a chamber projectile scheme

1 - soft ballistic shell, 2 - armor-piercing steel, 3 - explosive charge, 4 - bottom detonator, working with slowdown, 5 - front and rear leading belts (shoulders).

Chamber shells are not used today as anti-tank shells, since their design is weakened by an internal cavity with explosives and is not designed to penetrate thick armor, that is, a tank-caliber shell (105 - 125 mm) will simply collapse when it collides with a modern frontal tank armor(equivalent to 400 - 600 mm of armor and above). Such shells were widely used during the Second World War, since their caliber was comparable to the thickness of the armor of some tanks of that time. In naval battles of the past, chamber shells were used from a large caliber of 203 mm to a monstrous 460 mm (the battleship of the Yamato series), which could well penetrate thick ship steel armor comparable in thickness to their caliber (300 - 500 mm), or a layer of reinforced concrete and stone several meters.

Modern armor-piercing ammunition

Despite the fact that various types of anti-tank missiles were developed after the Second World War, armor-piercing ammunition remains one of the main anti-tank weapons. Despite the indisputable advantages of missiles (mobility, accuracy, homing capabilities, etc.), armor-piercing shells also have their advantages.

Their main advantage lies in the simplicity of design and, accordingly, production, which affects the lower price of the product.

In addition, an armor-piercing projectile, unlike an anti-tank missile, has a very high approach speed to the target (from 1600 m / s and above), it is impossible to “leave” it by maneuvering in time or hiding in a shelter (in a certain sense, when launching a rocket, such there is a possibility). Besides, anti-tank projectile does not require the need to keep the target at gunpoint, like many, though not all, anti-tank systems.

It is also impossible to create radio-electronic interference against an armor-piercing projectile due to the fact that it simply does not contain any electronic devices. In the case of anti-tank missiles, this is possible; such complexes as Shtora, Afghanit or Zaslon * are created specifically for this.

A modern armor-piercing projectile widely used in most countries of the world is actually a long rod made of a high-strength metal (tungsten or depleted uranium) or composite (tungsten carbide) alloy and rushing to the target at a speed of 1500 to 1800 m / s and higher. The rod at the end has stabilizers called plumage. The projectile is abbreviated as BOPS (Armor Piercing Feathered Sub-caliber Projectile). You can also just call it BPS (Armor Piercing Sub-caliber Projectile).

Almost all modern armor-piercing ammunition shells have the so-called. "Plumage" - tail flight stabilizers. The reason for the appearance of feathered shells lies in the fact that the shells of the old scheme described above after the Second World War exhausted their potential. It was necessary to lengthen the shells for greater efficiency, but they lost their stability when big length. One of the reasons for the loss of stability was their rotation in flight (since most of the guns were rifling and informed the shells rotary motion). The strength of the materials of that time did not allow the creation of long projectiles with sufficient strength to penetrate thick composite (puff) armor. The projectile was easier to stabilize not by rotation, but by plumage. An important role in the appearance of plumage was also played by the appearance of smooth-bore guns, the shells of which could be accelerated to higher speeds than when using rifled guns, and the problem of stabilization in which began to be solved with the help of plumage (we will touch on the topic of rifled and smooth-bore guns in the next material).

especially important role materials play in armor-piercing shells. Tungsten carbide** (composite material) has a density of 15.77 g/cm3, which is almost twice that of steel. It has great hardness, wear resistance and melting point (about 2900 C). AT recent times heavier alloys based on tungsten and uranium have become especially widespread. Tungsten or depleted uranium has a very high density, which is almost 2.5 times higher than that of steel (19.25 and 19.1 g/cm3 versus 7.8 g/cm3 for steel) and, accordingly, greater mass and kinetic energy while maintaining minimum dimensions. Also, their mechanical strength (especially in bending) is higher than that of composite tungsten carbide. Thanks to these qualities, it is possible to concentrate more energy in a smaller volume of the projectile, that is, to increase the density of its kinetic energy. Also, these alloys have tremendous strength and hardness compared to even the strongest existing armor or specialty steels.

The projectile is called sub-caliber because the caliber (diameter) of its combat / armor-piercing part is less than the caliber of the gun. Typically, the diameter of such a core is 20 - 36 mm. Recently, projectile developers have been trying to reduce the diameter of the core and increase its length, if possible, maintain or increase mass, reduce drag during flight and, as a result, increase contact pressure at the point of impact with armor.

Uranium ammunition has 10 - 15% greater penetration with the same dimensions due to interesting feature alloy called self-sharpening. The scientific term for this process is "ablative self-sharpening". When passing tungsten projectile through the armor, its tip is deformed and flattened due to the enormous drag. When flattened, its contact area increases, which further increases the resistance to movement and, as a result, penetration suffers. When a uranium projectile passes through the armor at speeds greater than 1600 m/sec, its tip does not deform or flatten, but simply breaks down parallel to the movement of the projectile, that is, it peels off in parts and thus the rod always remains sharp.

In addition to the already listed damaging factors of armor-piercing projectiles, modern BPSs have a high incendiary ability when penetrating armor. This ability is called pyrophoricity - that is, self-ignition of projectile particles after breaking through armor ***.

125 mm BOPS BM-42 "Mango"

The design is a tungsten alloy core in a steel shell. Visible stabilizers at the end of the projectile (empennage). The white circle around the stem is the obturator. On the right, the BPS is equipped (drowned) inside the powder charge and in this form is delivered to the tank troops. On the left is the second powder charge with a fuse and a metal pan. As you can see, the whole shot is divided into two parts, and only in this form it is placed in the automatic loader of tanks of the USSR / RF (T-64, 72, 80, 90). That is, first the loading mechanism sends the BPS with the first charge, and then the second charge.

The photo below shows parts of the obturator at the moment of separation from the rod in flight. A burning tracer is visible at the bottom of the rod.

Interesting Facts

*The Russian Shtora system was designed to protect tanks from anti-tank guided missiles. The system determines that a laser beam is aimed at the tank, determines the direction of the laser source, and sends a signal to the crew. The crew can maneuver or hide the car in a shelter. The system is also connected to a smoke rocket launcher that creates a cloud that reflects optical and laser radiation, thereby knocking the ATGM missile off the target. There is also an interaction of "Curtains" with searchlights - emitters that can interfere with the device of an anti-tank missile when they are directed at it. The effectiveness of the Shtora system against various latest-generation ATGMs is still in question. There are controversial opinions on this matter, however, as they say, its presence is better than complete absence. The last Russian tank "Armata" has a different system - the so-called. the Afganit complex active protection system, which, according to the developers, is capable of intercepting not only anti-tank missiles, but also armor-piercing shells flying at speeds up to 1700 m/s (in the future it is planned to increase this figure to 2000 m/s). In turn, the Ukrainian development "Barrier" operates on the principle of detonating ammunition on the side of an attacking projectile (rocket) and informing it powerful impulse in the form of a shock wave and fragments. Thus, the projectile or missile deviates from the originally given trajectory, and is destroyed before meeting the target (or rather, its target). Judging by the technical characteristics, this system can be most effective against RPGs and ATGMs.

**Tungsten carbide is used not only for the manufacture of projectiles, but also for the manufacture of heavy-duty tools for working with extra hard steels and alloys. For example, an alloy called "Pobedit" (from the word "Victory") was developed in the USSR in 1929. It is a solid homogeneous mixture/alloy of tungsten carbide and cobalt in a ratio of 90:10. Products are obtained by powder metallurgy. Powder metallurgy is the process of obtaining metal powders and manufacturing various high-strength products from them with pre-calculated mechanical, physical, magnetic, and other properties. This process makes it possible to obtain products from mixtures of metals and non-metals that simply cannot be joined by other methods, such as fusion or welding. The mixture of powders is loaded into the mold of the future product. One of the powders is a binding matrix (something like cement), which will firmly connect all the smallest particles / grains of the powder to each other. Examples are nickel and cobalt powders. The mixture is pressed in special presses under pressure from 300 to 10,000 atmospheres. The mixture is then heated to a high temperature (70 to 90% of the melting point of the binder metal). As a result, the mixture becomes denser and the bond between the grains is strengthened.

*** Pyrophoricity is the ability of a solid material to self-ignite in air in the absence of heating and being in a finely divided state. The property can manifest itself upon impact or friction. One material that satisfies this requirement well is depleted uranium. When breaking through the armor, part of the core will just be in a finely divided state. Add to this also the high temperature at the point of penetration of the armor, the impact itself and the friction of many particles, and we get ideal conditions for ignition. Special additives are also added to tungsten alloys of shells to make them more pyrophoric. how the simplest example Pyrophoricity in everyday life can lead to silicon lighters which are made of an alloy of cerium metal.

Armor-piercing piercing sub-caliber projectile (arrow-shaped feathered projectile) - a type of projectile for barreled weapons, stabilized in flight due to aerodynamic forces (similar to stabilization in flight of an arrow). This circumstance distinguishes this type of ammunition from projectiles stabilized in flight by rotation due to gyroscopic forces. Arrow-shaped feathered projectiles can be used both in hunting and military firearms, and in cannon artillery. The main area of application of such projectiles is the destruction of heavily armored vehicles (in particular, tanks). Arrow-shaped feathered projectiles are, as a rule, kinetic-action ammunition, but may also contain an explosive charge.

120 mm shots of the Israeli company IMI. In the foreground is an M829 shot (USA), manufactured by IMI under license.

Terminology

Armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectiles (arrow-shaped) can be abbreviated as BOPS, OBPS, OPS, BPS. Currently, the abbreviation BPS is also applied to feathered sabot arrow-shaped projectiles, although it should be correctly used to designate sabot armor-piercing projectiles of the usual elongation for rifled artillery projectiles. The name of the armor-piercing feathered arrow-shaped ammunition applicable to rifled and smoothbore artillery systems.

Device

Ammunition of this type consists of an arrow-shaped feathered projectile, the body (body) of which (or the core inside the body) is made of a durable and high-density material, and the feathering is made of traditional structural alloys. The materials most used for the body include heavy alloys (of the VNZh type, etc.) and compounds (tungsten carbide), uranium alloys (for example, the American Stabilloy alloy or the domestic analogue of the UNC alloy type). The plumage is made of aluminum alloys or steel.

With the help of annular grooves (forgings), the BOPS body is connected to a sector pallet made of steel or high-strength aluminum alloys (type V-95, V-96Ts1 and similar). A sector pallet is also called a master device (VU) and consists of three or more sectors. The pallets are fastened to each other by leading belts made of metals or plastics and in this form are finally fixed in a metal sleeve or in the body of a burning sleeve. After leaving the gun barrel, the sector pallet is separated from the body of the BOPS under the action of the oncoming air flow, breaking the leading belts, while the body of the projectile itself continues to fly towards the target. Dropped sectors, having high aerodynamic drag, slow down in the air and fall at some distance (from hundreds of meters to more than a kilometer) from the muzzle of the gun. In the event of a miss, the BOPS itself, which has low aerodynamic drag, can fly away to a distance of 30 to more than 50 km from the muzzle of the gun.

The designs of modern BOPS are extremely diverse: the bodies of shells can be either monolithic or composite (a core or several cores in a shell, as well as longitudinally and transversely multilayered), plumage can be almost equal to the caliber of an artillery gun or sub-caliber, made of steel or light alloys. Master devices (VU) may have a different principle of distribution of the gas pressure action vector into sectors (VU of the “expanding” or “clamping” type), different amount sectors, made of steel, light alloys, as well as composite materials - for example, carbon composites or aramid composites. Ballistic tips and dampers can be installed in the head parts of the BOPS bodies. Additives can be added to the material of tungsten alloy cores to increase the pyrophoricity of the cores. Tracers can be installed in the tail parts of the BOPS.

The mass of BOPS bodies with plumage ranges from 3.6 kg in old models to 5-6 kg or more in models for advanced tank guns of 140-155 mm caliber.

The diameter of BOPS bodies without plumage ranges from 40 mm in older models to 22 mm or less in new promising BOPS with a large elongation. The elongation of BOPS is constantly increasing and ranges from 10 to 30 or more.

In the USSR and Russia, several types of BOPS are widely known, created at different times and having their own names, which arose from the name / code R & D. The following are BOPS in chronological order from old to new. The device and material of the BOPS body are briefly indicated:

"Hairpin" 3BM-23 - a small core of tungsten carbide in the head of the steel body (1976);
"Nadfil-2" 3BM30 - uranium alloy (1982);
"Hope" 3BM-27 - a small tungsten alloy core in the tail section of a steel body (1983);
"Vant" 3BM-33 - a monolithic body made of a uranium alloy (1985);
"Mango" 3BM-44 - two elongated tungsten alloy cores in a steel body jacket (1986);
"Lead" 3BM-48 - a monolithic body made of a uranium alloy (1991);
Anker 3BM39 (1990s);
"Lekalo" 3BM44 M? - improved alloy (details unknown) (1997); perhaps this BOPS is called the "Projectile of increased power";
"Lead-2" - judging by the index, a modified projectile with a uranium core (details unknown).

Other BOPS also have proper names. For example, a 100 mm anti-tank smoothbore gun has the Valshchik ammunition, a 115 mm tank gun has the Kamerger ammunition, etc.

Armor penetration indicators

This section is missing references to information sources.

Information must be verifiable, otherwise it may be questioned and removed.
You can edit this article to include links to authoritative sources.
This mark is set July 13, 2012.

Comparative evaluation of armor penetration indicators is associated with significant difficulties. Enough influence on the assessment of armor penetration indicators different techniques BOPS tests in different countries, the lack of a standard type of armor for testing in different countries, different conditions placement of armor (compact or spaced apart), as well as constant manipulations by developers of all countries with firing ranges of test armor, armor installation angles before testing, various statistical methods for processing test results. As a material for testing in Russia and NATO countries, homogeneous rolled armor is adopted, to obtain more accurate results, composite targets are used. For example, for testing Russian projectiles, the P11 multilayer barrier, developed at the Research Institute of Steel, is used, imitating the frontal armor of the M1 Abrams tank. However, the real indicators of the armor resistance of composite armor and homogeneous armor equivalent to it still sometimes differ, which makes it difficult to accurately assess the armor penetration of a particular projectile. In addition, the characteristics of armor penetration, as well as the protection parameters of armored vehicles, are traditionally classified.

As an example, we can take the Spanish BOPS guns of the 105 mm caliber of the company "Empersa Nacional Santa Barbara", which at a speed of 1500 m / s from a distance of 5000 m pierces a NATO standard target at an angle of 60 ° from the line of fire and consisting of an armor plate 120 mm thick and ten additional armor plates of 10 mm, located at a distance of 10 mm from each other.

According to published data, an increase in the elongation of the flight part to a value of 30 made it possible to increase the relative thickness of RHA-standard rolled homogeneous armor (the ratio of armor thickness to gun caliber) to 5.0 in caliber 105 mm, and 6.8 in caliber 120 mm.

Story

The emergence of BOPS was associated with insufficient armor penetration of conventional armor-piercing and sub-caliber projectiles for rifled artillery pieces in the years after World War II. Attempts to increase the specific load (that is, to lengthen their core) in sub-caliber projectiles ran into the phenomenon of loss of stabilization by rotation with an increase in the length of the projectile over 6-8 calibers. The strength of modern materials did not allow more increase in the angular velocity of the projectiles.

Arrow-shaped and feathered projectiles for ultra-long-range guns

In the rocket and artillery design bureau of the Peenemünde training ground Peenemünde-Heeresversuchsanstalt by the end of World War II, the German designer Hanns Gessner designed a series of arrow-shaped feathered shells of the PPG index (Peenemünder Pfeilgeschosse) for smooth-bore 310 mm caliber barrels from Krupp and Hanomag, mounted on a carriage of a 28-cm ultra-long-range railway installation K5 (E). The 310-mm high-explosive fragmentation projectile index Sprenge-Granate 4861 had a length of 2012 mm and a mass of 136 kg. The arrow body diameter was 120 mm, the number of stabilizer feathers was 4 pcs. The initial speed of the projectile is 1420 m / s, the mass of the explosive charge is 25 kg, the firing range is 160 km. The shells were used against the Anglo-American troops in the battles near Bonn.

Experiments with arrow-shaped feathered sub-caliber projectiles for high-altitude anti-aircraft artillery were carried out at a training ground near the Polish city of Blizna under the guidance of designer R. Herman ( R. Hermann). Anti-aircraft guns of 103 mm caliber with a barrel length of up to 50 calibers were tested. During the tests, it turned out that arrow-shaped feathered projectiles, which reached very high speeds due to their small mass, have insufficient fragmentation action due to the impossibility of placing a significant explosive charge in them. In addition, they demonstrated extremely low accuracy due to rarefied air at high altitudes and, as a result, insufficient aerodynamic stabilization. After it became clear that swept finned shells were not applicable for anti-aircraft fire, attempts were made to use high-velocity finned piercing shells to fight tanks. The work was stopped due to the fact that serial anti-tank and tank guns at that time had sufficient armor penetration, and the Third Reich was living out its last days.

Arrow-shaped bullets of handguns

Russia is developing arrow-shaped (needle-shaped) underwater ammunition without plumage, which is part of the SPS cartridges of 4.5 mm caliber (for the special underwater pistol SPP-1; SPP-1M) and MPS cartridges of 5.66 mm caliber (for special underwater machine APS). Non-feathered arrow-shaped bullets for underwater weapons, stabilized in water by a cavitation cavity, practically do not stabilize in the air and require not regular, but special weapons for use under water.

Currently, the most promising underwater-air ammunition, which can be fired with equal efficiency both under water at a depth of up to 50 m, and in the air, are cartridges for regular (serial) machine guns and assault rifles, equipped with a Polotnev arrow-shaped feathered bullet developed by at the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "TsNIIKhM". Stabilization of Polotnev's bullets under water is carried out by the cavitation cavity, and in air - by the plumage of the bullet.

BOPS (Armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectiles)

With the adoption of the T-62 medium tank, the USSR became the first country in the world to massively use armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber ammunition (BOPS) in tank ammunition. Thanks to the extremely high speed and long range direct shot.

Armor-piercing shells for the 115-mm gun 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 by 30% and had a direct shot range 1.6 times greater than regular ones. However, unitary rounds for the GSP U-5TS did not allow to fully realize the potential in terms of rate of fire and reduction of 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 speed. Thus, the problem of automating the process of loading a tank gun became urgent, which, along with an increase in the rate of fire, significantly reduced 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) gun.

Completion of work on the creation of separate loading shots for the D-68 gun, 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 gun and new shots 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 overestimated assessment of the armor resistance of the new, most powerful English tank of that period, 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, which received the designation T-64A and was put into service. Soviet army in May 1968. The tank was armed with a 125 mm D-81T (2A26) gun developed in 1962 at the plant number 172 (Perm) in OKB-9 under the leadership of F.F. Petrov.

Subsequently, this gun, which deserved a lot of positive feedback for its high technical and operational characteristics, underwent numerous upgrades aimed at further increasing its characteristics.

Upgraded versions guns D-81T (2A26) such as 2A46M, 2A46M-1, 2A46M-2, 2A46M-4 are the main armament domestic tanks to this day.

BPS burning cylinder with tubular powder (SC) - Right

Burning Sleeve (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 completely burns out during the shot and there is nothing left of it. The burning sleeve (SG) is made using a similar technology; after a shot, a metal pallet remains from it. The means of ignition is the galvano-impact sleeve GUV-7, which differs from the usual one in that it has an incandescent bridge that ignites the gunpowder when the striker is touched, but it can also work like a normal one from impact.

Domestic BPS consists of a leading ring, consisting of three sectors with a 120-degree split plane, fastened with a copper or plastic obturator band. 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 s high speed, it is not recommended to be in front of a tank firing BPS. The sector can damage lightly armored vehicles and injure infantry.Separating sectors of the BPS have significant kinetic energy within 2 ° from 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 completely burns out during the shot and nothing remains of it. The burning sleeve (SG) is made using a similar technology; after a shot, a metal pallet remains from it. The means of ignition is galvano-impact sleeve GUV-7.

The beginning of the 60s and the end of the seventies, the adoption of OBPS stabilized by plumage.

The late 1960s and late 1970s were characterized by evolutionary development foreign tanks, the best of which had a homogeneous armor shield within 200 (Leopard-1A1), 250 (M60) and 300 (Chieftain) millimeters of armor.

Their ammunition included BPS for 105 mm L7 guns (and its American counterpart M68) and 120 mm L-11 rifled gun of the Chieftain tank.

At the same time, 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 guns T-12, entered service in the USSR.

Among them were shells of two modifications: solid-shell and having a carbide core.

One-piece OBPS 3BM2 for anti-tank guns T-12, 3BM6 for GSP U-5TS of the T-62 tank, as well as one-piece OBPS for 125 mm GSP 3BM17. OBPS with a carbide core included 3BM3 for the GSP U-5TS of the T-62 tank, 125 mm OBPS 3BM15, 3BM22 for the T-64A / T-72 / T-80 tanks.

Projectile 3VBM-7 (projectile index 3BM-15; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-18 ) (p/w ca. 1972)

The active part of this projectile is slightly lengthened 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, until the collapse of the USSR it remained the most modern OBPS available to recipients of Soviet export T-72 tanks. BM-15 and its local counterparts were produced under license in many countries.

Shot 3VBM-8 (projectile index 3BM-17; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-18) (p/w ca. 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 only for export and training purposes.

Shot 3VBM-9 (projectile index 3BM-22; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-23) (p / in 1976)

Research theme "Hairpin". A.h. length almost identical to a.h. BM-15, however, a much more massive armor-piercing damper is used. As a result, the projectile is noticeably heavier than the BM-15, which led to some decrease in initial speed. This projectile was the most common in the Soviet Army in the late 70s - early 80s, and although it is no longer produced, it has been accumulated in large quantities and is still allowed for use..

Appearance core of one projectile option.

Second generation (late 70s and 80s)

In 1977, work began to improve the combat effectiveness of tank artillery rounds. The staging of these works was associated with the need to defeat new types of reinforced armor protection developed abroad for a new generation of M1 Abrams and Leopard-2 tanks.
The development of new design schemes for OBPS has begun, ensuring the destruction of monolithic combined armor in a wide range of angles of impact with the armor, as well as overcoming remote sensing.

Other tasks included improving the aerodynamic qualities of the projectile in flight in order to reduce drag, as well as increasing its muzzle velocity.

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 master device, which ended with the adoption of the Nadezhda, Vant and Mango OBPS 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 master device with sectors of the "clamp" type using aluminum alloy and polymer materials.

In OBPS, before that, leading devices with steel sectors of the "expanding" type were used.

In 1984, the OBPS 3VBM13 "Vant" was developed with the 3BM32 projectile of increased efficiency, "Vant" became the first domestic monoblock OBPS made of a uranium alloy with high physical and mechanical properties.

OBPS "Mango" was developed specifically to destroy tanks with combined and dynamic protection. The design of the projectile uses a highly effective combined core made of tungsten alloy placed in a steel casing, between which there is a layer of low-melting alloy.

The projectile is able to overcome dynamic protection and reliably hit the complex composite armor of tanks that entered service in the late 70s and until the mid-80s.

Shot 3VBM-11 (projectile index 3BM-26; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-27) (p / in 1983)

Theme "Hope-R". This OBPS was the first in a series of projectiles with a new master device.

This ammunition was also the first to be developed and tested specifically for the purpose of fending off advanced multilayer barriers used on promising NATO tanks.

It is used with the main propellant charge 4Zh63.

3BM-29. "Nadfil-2", OBPS with a uranium core(1982) similar in design to 3BM-26.

Shot 3VBM-13 (projectile index 3BM-32; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-38 ) (p/in 1985)

Research theme "Vant". The first Soviet monolithic uranium OBPS.

Shot 3VBM-17 (projectile index 3BM-42; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-44) (p / in 1986)

The topic of research "Mango" was opened in 1983. A projectile of increased power, designed to destroy modern multilayer armored barriers. It has a very complex design, including a solid ballistic and armor-piercing cap, an armor-piercing damper, and two cores made of high-strength tungsten alloy of high elongation. The cores are fixed in the body of the projectile by means of a fusible alloy jacket; in the process of penetration, the jacket melts, allowing the cores to enter the penetration channel without expending energy on separation from the body.

VU - a further development of the VU used with OBPS 3BM-26, made of V-96Ts1 alloy with improved characteristics. The projectile is widely distributed, and was also exported complete with Russian and Ukrainian tanks T-80U / T-80UD and T-90, delivered abroad in the last decade.

OBPS "Lead" (projectile index 3BM-46; projectile index with throwing charge3BM-48) (p / in 1986)

Modern OBPS with a monolithic high elongation uranium core and sub-caliber stabilizers, using a new composite VU with two contact zones. The projectile has a length close to the maximum allowable for standard Soviet automatic loaders. The most powerful Soviet 125-mm OBPS, exceeding or equal in power to the OBPS adopted by the NATO countries until relatively recently.

Shot withheightened power

A high-power projectile with a high elongation tungsten core and sub-caliber stabilizers, using a four-section composite VU with two contact zones. In the literature of Rosoboronexport, this projectile is simply referred to as a "high-powered projectile."

The developers of this munition for the first time created a projectile of large elongation with new scheme reference.

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 BOPS 3BM42, a 20% increase in armor penetration is provided due to the elongated body made of tungsten alloy and a charge of higher-energy gunpowder.

Summary table TTX
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
Projectile index with additional charge	3BM-18	3VBM- 1 8	3BM-3	3BM-27	3BM-30	3BM-38	3BM-44	3BM-48	3BM-44M
Cipher			Barrette	Hope-R	File-2	Vant	Mango	Lead	Mango-M
Initial speed, m/s	1780	1780	1760	1720	1692...1700	1692...1700	1692...1700	1650	1692...1700
Core length, mm
Weight (without VU), g	3900	3900	3900	4800	4800	4850	4850	5200	5000
Core (base alloy)	Steel	Tungsten			depleted uranium	depleted Uranus	Tungsten	depleted Uranus	Tungsten
Scheme of reference	Ring VU made of steel, expanding type and plumage			WU clamping type aluminum alloy and plumage				Two-bearing WU
Normative penetration at 2000 m, 60°	110…150

In terms of the development of BOPS, since the late nineties, a lot of work has been done, the backlog of which was BOPS "Anker" and 3BM48 "Lead". These projectiles were significantly superior to such BOPS as the Mango and Vant, the main difference was the new principles of the guidance system in the bore and the core with a significantly increased elongation. New system conducting projectiles in the bore not only allowed the use of longer cores, but also made it possible to improve their aerodynamic properties.

After the collapse of the USSR, the backlog of the industry for the production of new types of ammunition began and continues. The question arose about the modernization of ammunition, both domestic tanks and those exported. The development, as well as small-scale production of domestic BPS, continued, however, the 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 gun have made their own attempts to develop BPS.

Comparison of OBPS caliber 125 mm 3BM48, 3BM44M, M829A2 (USA), NORINCO TK125 (PRC)

and OBPS caliber 120 mm DM53 (Germany), CL3241 (Israel).

OBPS caliber 125 mm developed in the 90s in China and countries of Eastern Europe: NORINCO TK125, TAPNA (Slovakia), Pronit (Poland).