Focus 2 - rifled shells As already mentioned, in the 50-70s of the XIX century, dozens of systems were manufactured, the shells of which had rifling or protrusions. In Soviet artillery systems for rifled shells, the channel design differed little from conventional channels of the 1877 model,

Cannons and shells When firearms appeared six hundred years ago, at the beginning of the 14th century, the first cannons fired spherical projectiles - cannonballs. At first, they were hewn from stone, and then, already at the end of the 15th century, they were cast from cast iron. There were no plants and factories then. Guns and cannonballs

Anti-aircraft guided missiles "Reintochter I" and "Reintochter

II. Rockets and rockets USA as of 1956 General information. Missiles "Kapral", "Dart", "Nike" and "Redstone" are in service with the army; missile "Lacrosse" - in service with the army and corps marines; rockets "Bomark", "Folcon", "Matador", "Raskl", "Snark" and

Projectiles for defense A projectile, as a rule, is more commonly referred to as an attribute of an offensive weapon. However, Honored Inventor of Russia V.A. Odintsov came up with shells that can be attributed to self-defense weapons. Member of the Scientific and Expert Council of the State Duma Committee on

For the first time, armor-piercing shells made of hardened cast iron (sharp-headed) appeared in the late 60s of the 19th century in the arsenal of naval and coastal artillery, since conventional shells could not penetrate the armor of ships. In field artillery, they began to be used in the fight against tanks in the 1st World War. Armor-piercing shells are included in the ammunition load of guns and are the main ammunition for tank and anti-tank artillery.

Pointed solid projectile

AP (armor piercing). A solid (not having a bursting charge) sharp-headed armor-piercing projectile. After breaking through the armor, the damaging effect was provided by shell fragments heated to a high temperature, and armor fragments. shells of this type were easy to manufacture, reliable, had a fairly high penetration, worked well against homogeneous armor. At the same time, they were characterized by some shortcomings - low, in comparison with chamber (equipped with a bursting charge) shells, armor action; tendency to ricochet on sloped armor; weaker effect on armor hardened to high hardness and cemented. During the Second World War, they were used to a limited extent, mainly shells of this type were completed with ammunition for small-caliber automatic guns; also shells of this type were actively used in the British army, especially in the first period of the war.

Blunt-headed solid projectile (with ballistic tip)

APBC (armor piercing projectile with a blunt caped and a ballistic cap). A solid (not having a bursting charge) blunt-headed armor-piercing projectile, with a ballistic tip. The projectile was designed to penetrate surface-hardened armor of high hardness and cemented, destroying the surface-hardened layer of armor with its blunt head part, which had increased fragility. Other advantages of these shells were their good effectiveness against moderately inclined armor, as well as the simplicity and manufacturability of production. The disadvantages of blunt-headed projectiles were their lower effectiveness against homogeneous armor, as well as their tendency to overnormalize (accompanied by projectile destruction) when hitting the armor at a significant angle of inclination. In addition, this type of projectile did not have a bursting charge, which reduced its armor effect. Solid blunt shells were used only in the USSR from the middle of the war.

Sharp-headed solid projectile with an armor-piercing tip

APC (armor piercing capped). Pointed Projectile with armor-piercing cap. This projectile was an APHE projectile equipped with a blunt armor-piercing cap. Thus, this projectile successfully combined the advantages of sharp-headed and blunt-headed projectiles - a blunt cap “bited” the projectile on inclined armor, reducing the possibility of ricochet, contributed to a slight normalization of the projectile, destroyed the surface hardened layer of armor, and protected the head of the projectile from destruction. The APC projectile worked well against both homogeneous and surface-hardened armor, as well as armor located at an angle. However, the projectile had one drawback - a blunt cap worsened its aerodynamics, which increased its dispersion and reduced the projectile speed (and penetration) at long distances, especially projectiles large calibers. As a result, shells of this type were used rather limitedly, mainly on small-caliber guns; in particular, they were included in the ammunition of German 50-mm anti-tank and tank guns.

Sharp-headed solid projectile with armor-piercing tip and ballistic cap

APCBC (armor piercing capped ballistic capped) . A sharp-headed projectile with an armor-piercing cap and a ballistic tip. It was an APC projectile equipped with a ballistic tip. This tip significantly improved the aerodynamic properties of the projectile, and when it hit the target, it was easily crushed without affecting the armor penetration process. APCBC shells were the pinnacle of development of armor-piercing caliber shells during the war years, due to their versatility in terms of action on armor plates of different types and angles, with high armor penetration. Shells of this type have become widespread in the armies of Germany, the USA and Great Britain since 1942-43, in fact, replacing all other types of armor-piercing caliber shells. However, the reverse side high efficiency the projectile was of great complexity and the cost of its production; for this reason, the USSR during the war years was unable to establish mass production of shells of this type.

Armor-piercing shells

These shells are similar to conventional ARMOR-PIERING shells, only they have a “chamber” with TNT or a heating element in the back. Upon hitting the target, the projectile breaks through the barrier and explodes in the middle of the cabin, for example, hitting all the equipment and also the crew. Its armor action is higher than that of the standard one, but due to its lower mass and strength, it is inferior to its “brother” in terms of armor penetration.

The principle of operation of a chamber armor-piercing projectile

Sharp-headed chamber shell

APHE (armor piercing high explosive) . Chamber sharp-headed armor-piercing projectile. In the rear part there is a cavity (chamber) with an explosive charge of TNT, as well as a bottom fuse. Bottom fuses of shells at that time were not perfect enough, which sometimes led to a premature explosion of the shell before penetrating the armor, or to failure of the fuse after penetration. When hit in the ground, a projectile of this type most often did not explode. Projectiles of this type were used very widely, especially in large-caliber artillery, where the large mass of the projectile compensated for its shortcomings, as well as in small-caliber artillery systems, for which the simplicity and cheapness of manufacturing shells was the determining factor. Such shells were used in Soviet, German, Polish and French artillery systems.

Blunt-headed chamber projectile (with ballistic tip)

APHEBC (armor piercing high explosive projectile with a blunt nose and a ballistic cap) . Chamber blunt-headed armor-piercing projectile. It is similar to the APBC projectile, but it had a cavity (chamber) in the rear with an explosive charge and a bottom fuse. It had the same advantages and disadvantages as the APBC, differing in a higher armor action, since after breaking through the armor the projectile exploded inside the target. In fact, it was a dumb-headed analogue of the APHE projectile. This projectile is designed to penetrate high hardness armor, destroys the initial layer of armor with its blunted head part, which has increased fragility. During the War, the advantage of this projectile was its good effectiveness against sloped armor, as well as the simplicity and manufacturability of production. The disadvantages of blunt-headed projectiles were lower efficiency against homogeneous armor, as well as a tendency to destroy the projectile when it hits the armor at a significant angle of inclination. Shells of this type were used only in the USSR, where they were the main type armor-piercing shells throughout the war. At the beginning of the war, when the Germans used relatively thin cemented armor, these shells performed quite satisfactorily. However, since 1943, when German armored vehicles began to be protected by thick homogeneous armor, the effectiveness of shells of this type decreased, which led to the development and adoption of sharp-headed shells at the end of the war.

Sharp-headed chamber projectile with an armor-piercing tip

ARHCE (armor piercing high capped explosive) This projectile is an APHE projectile equipped with a blunt armor-piercing tip. Thus, this projectile successfully combines the advantages of sharp-headed and blunt-headed projectiles - the blunt tip "bites" the projectile on inclined armor, preventing ricochet, destroys the heavy layer of armor, and protects the head of the projectile from destruction. During the APC War, the projectile worked well against both homogeneous and surface-hardened armor, as well as sloped armor. However, the blunt tip worsened the aerodynamics of the projectile, which increased its dispersion and reduced the speed and penetration of the projectile at long distances, which was especially noticeable on large-caliber projectiles.

Sharp-headed chamber projectile with an armor-piercing tip and a ballistic cap

(APHECBC - Armor-Piercing high explosive capped ballistic cap). The projectile is sharp-headed, with a ballistic tip and an armor-piercing cap, chambered. The addition of a ballistic cap significantly improved the aerodynamic properties of the projectile, and when it hit the target, the cap easily wrinkled without affecting the process of penetrating the armor. In general, in terms of the combination of properties, this type can be recognized as the best caliber armor-piercing projectile. The projectile was universal, it was the crowning achievement of the development of AP shells during the Second World War. Worked well against any type of armor. It was expensive and difficult to manufacture.

Sub-caliber shells

Under caliber projectile

Sub-caliber projectile (APCR - Armor-Piercing Composite Rigid) had a rather complex design, consisting of two main parts - an armor-piercing core and a 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 an explosive charge, ensuring that the target was hit by core fragments and armor fragments heated to high temperatures. Sub-caliber shells had significantly less weight than conventional ones. armor-piercing shells, which allowed them to accelerate in the gun barrel to significantly higher speeds. As a result, the penetration of 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 a streamlined shape, but they were much less common), which greatly worsened the ballistics of the projectile, in addition, a 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 heavily 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.

Sub-caliber projectile with detachable pallet

Sub-caliber projectile with detachable pallet (APDS - Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot) . This projectile has an easily detachable pallet, discharged by air resistance after the projectile leaves the barrel, and had a huge speed (of the order of 1700 meters per second and higher). The core, freed from the pallet, has good aerodynamics and retains high penetrating power at long distances. It was made of superhard material (special steel, tungsten alloy). Thus, in terms of action, a projectile of this type resembled an AP projectile accelerated to high speeds. APDS shells had record-breaking armor penetration, but were very difficult and expensive to manufacture. During the Second World War, such shells were used to a limited extent by the British army from the end of 1944. In modern armies improved shells of this type are still in service.

HEAT rounds

HEAT projectile

Cumulative projectile (HEAT - High-Explosive Anti-Tank) . The principle of operation of this armor-piercing ammunition is significantly different from the principle of operation kinetic ammunition, which include conventional armor-piercing and sub-caliber shells. 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 HEAT shell hole is small and has melted edges, which led to a common misconception that HEAT shells “burn through” armor. Soviet tankers aptly dubbed such marks "Witch Hickey". Such charges, in addition to cumulative projectiles, are used in anti-tank magnetic grenades and Panzerfaust hand grenade launchers. The penetration of a HEAT projectile does not depend on the velocity of the projectile and is the same at all distances. Its manufacture is quite simple, the production of the projectile does not require the use of a large amount of scarce metals. But it is worth noting that the manufacturing technology of these shells 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 unstable. The rotation of the projectile at high initial speeds made it difficult for the formation of a cumulative jet, as a result, the cumulative projectiles had a low initial velocity, a small effective range shooting 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 action of the cumulative projectile

Non-rotating (feathered) cumulative projectiles

A number of post-war tanks used non-rotating (feathered) HEAT shells. They could be fired from both smoothbore and rifled guns. Feathered projectiles are stabilized in flight by caliber or over-caliber empennage, which opens after the projectile leaves the bore, unlike early HEAT projectiles. The lack of rotation improves the formation of a cumulative jet and significantly increases armor penetration. For the correct action of cumulative projectiles, the final, and hence the initial, velocity is relatively small. This allowed during the Great Patriotic War to use not only cannons, but also howitzers with initial speeds of 300-500 m / s to fight enemy tanks. So, for early cumulative shells, typical armor penetration was 1-1.5 calibers, while for post-war shells it was 4 or more. However, feathered projectiles have a slightly lower armor effect compared to conventional HEAT projectiles.

Concrete-piercing projectiles

Concrete slaughterhouses projectile - projectile impact action. Concrete-piercing shells are intended for the destruction of strong concrete and reinforced concrete fortifications. When firing concrete-piercing projectiles, as well as when firing armor-piercing projectiles, the speed of the projectile when it hits an obstacle, the angle of impact and the strength of the projectile body are of decisive importance. The case of a concrete-piercing projectile is made of high-quality steel; the walls are thick, and the head part of it is solid. This is done to increase the strength of the projectile. To increase the strength of the head of the projectile, a point for the fuse is made in the bottom. To destroy concrete fortifications, one has to use high-powered guns, so concrete-piercing shells are used only mainly in large-caliber guns, and their action consists of shock and high-explosive. In addition to all of the above, a concrete-piercing projectile, in the absence of armor-piercing and cumulative ones, can be successfully used against heavily armored vehicles.

Fragmentation and high-explosive shells

High-explosive fragmentation projectile

High-explosive fragmentation projectile (HE - High-Explosive) has a fragmentation and high-explosive action and are used to destroy structures, destroy weapons and equipment, destroy and suppress enemy manpower. Structurally, a high-explosive fragmentation projectile is a metal cylindrical thick-walled capsule filled with an explosive. A fuse is located in the head of the projectile, which includes a detonation control system and a detonator. As the main explosive, TNT or its passivation (with paraffin or other substances) is usually used to reduce the sensitivity to detonation. To ensure high hardness of fragments, the projectile body is made of high-carbon steel or steel cast iron. Often, to form a more uniform fragmentation field, notches or grooves are applied to the inner surface of the projectile capsule.

Upon hitting the target, the projectile explodes, hitting the target with fragments and an explosive wave, or immediately - shrapnel action, or with some delay (which allows the projectile to go deep into the ground) - a high-explosive action. Well-armored vehicles are resistant to these ammunition. However, with a direct hit on vulnerable areas(turret hatches, engine compartment radiator, aft ammo rack knockout screens, triplexes, undercarriage, etc.) can cause critical damage (cracking of armor plates, jamming of the turret, failure of instruments and mechanisms) and incapacitate crew members. And the larger the caliber, the stronger action projectile.

Shrapnel projectile

Shrapnel got its name in honor of its inventor, the English officer Henry Shrapnel, who developed this projectile in 1803. In its original form, shrapnel was an explosive spherical grenade for smooth-bore guns, into the inner cavity of which, along with black powder, lead bullets were poured. The projectile was a cylindrical body, divided by a cardboard partition (diaphragm) into 2 compartments. In the bottom compartment was an explosive charge. In another compartment were spherical bullets.

In the Red Army, there were attempts to use shrapnel shells as armor-piercing ones. Before and during the Great Patriotic War, artillery shots with shrapnel shells were part of the ammunition load of most artillery systems. So, for example, the first self-propelled gun SU-12, which entered service with the Red Army in 1933 and was equipped with a 76-mm cannon mod. 1927, the ammunition load was 36 shots, of which one half were shrapnel, and the other half were high-explosive fragmentation.

In the absence of armor-piercing shells, in the early stages of the war, gunners often used shrapnel shells with a tube set "to strike." In terms of its qualities, such a projectile occupied an intermediate position between high-explosive fragmentation and armor-piercing, which is reflected in the game.

Armor-piercing shells

Armor-piercing high-explosive projectile (HESH- High Explosive Squash Head) - a projectile of the main purpose of high-explosive action, designed to destroy armored targets. It can also be used to destroy defensive structures, which makes it multi-purpose (universal). It consists of a steel thin-walled body, an explosive charge of plastic explosive and a bottom fuse. When hitting the armor, the warhead and the explosive charge are plastically deformed, which increases the contact area of ​​the latter with the target. The explosive charge is detonated by a bottom fuse, which provides the explosion with a certain direction. As a result, the armor breaks off from the back. The mass of broken pieces can reach several kilograms. Pieces of armor hit the crew and internal equipment of the tank. The effectiveness of an armor-piercing high-explosive projectile is significantly reduced when shielded armor is used. In addition, the low muzzle velocity of high-explosive armor-piercing shells reduces the likelihood of hitting fast-moving armored targets at real ranges of a tank battle.

And passive (pallet), made according to the caliber of the gun. In the first BPS, the pallet was an integral part of the projectile, but already in 1944, British ammunition designers developed their modern modification - armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile with a separating pallet from the active part after it exits the bore. BPS with separating pallet - basic anti-tank projectile in ammunition modern tanks. Armor-piercing sub-caliber shells with an integral pallet also continue to be used, but in more as ammunition for automatic small-caliber guns, where the implementation of a pallet separating from the active part is difficult or impossible. There are BPS stabilized in flight by rotation and plumage.

English designations for BPS types

In foreign, and after them in domestic publications on the relevant topic, the following abbreviations for the English designations of BPS types are often used:

• APCR - A rmour- P iercing C composite R igid (armor-piercing composite rigid) - BPS with an integral pallet and a harder active part (core);
• APCNR - A rmour- P iercing C composite N on- R igid (armor-piercing composite non-rigid) - BPS with an integral collapsible pallet and a harder active part (core) for artillery pieces with a conical bore;
• APDS - A rmour- P iercing D iscarding S abot (armor-piercing sub-caliber with a detachable pallet);
• APFSDS, APDS-FS - A rmour- P iercing D iscarding S abot- F in- S tabilized (armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber with a detachable pallet).

Armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectiles (BOPS, OBPS)

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 its extremely high speed and long direct shot range.

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 adopted by the 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 reviews for its high technical and performance characteristics underwent numerous upgrades aimed at further growth of its characteristics. Upgraded versions of the D-81T (2A26) cannon, such as 2A46M, 2A46M-1, 2A46M-2, 2A46M-4, are the main armament of domestic tanks to this day.

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

The period of the late 60s and late seventies was characterized by the evolutionary development of 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 PTP T-12, 3BM6 for GSP U-5TS of the T-62 tank, as well as one-piece OBPS for 125 mm GSP 3BM17, which was intended primarily for export and crew training.

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.

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.

In terms of the development of BOPS, since the late nineties, a lot of work has been done, the backlog of which was BOPS 3BM39 "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.

The new projectile guidance system in the bore not only allowed the use of longer cores, but also made it possible to improve their aerodynamic properties.

It was these products that served as the basis for the creation of modern domestic OBPS of a new generation. The results obtained from these works served as a basis for the creation of new, modern projectiles.

After the collapse of the USSR in the early 90s, a sharp degradation of the domestic military-industrial complex began, which had a particularly painful effect on the industry for the production of new types of ammunition. During this period, the issue of modernizing the ammunition load of both domestic and exported tanks arose. The development, as well as small-scale production of domestic BPS, continued, however, mass introduction and large-scale production of new generation BPS samples were not carried out. Positive trends in some aspects of this issue have emerged only recently.

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.

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 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.), uranium alloys (for example, the American Stabilloy alloy or the domestic analogue of the UNTs 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 metal or plastic 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.

Heavy alloy cores with elongations exceeding 30 are prone to bending deformations when driven through the bore and after separation of the pallet, as well as to destruction when interacting with multi-barrier and spaced armor. The density of the material is currently limited, since at present there are no materials denser than tungsten and uranium in technology that are practically used for military purposes. The speed of the BOPS is also limited to values ​​in the range of 1500-1800 m / s and depends on the design of artillery pieces and ammunition for them. A further increase in speed is associated with research work carried out in the field of projectile throwing with the help of artillery guns on liquid propellant substances (LMW), with the electrothermochemical method of throwing, with the electrothermal method of throwing, with the electric (magnetic) method of throwing with the help of railguns, gauss systems, their combinations, as well as combinations of electrothermochemical and electromagnetic methods of throwing. At the same time, an increase in velocity above 2000 m/s for many variants of projectile materials leads to a decrease in armor penetration. The reason is the destruction of the projectile upon contact with most variants of armored barriers, which ultimately exceeds the increase in armor penetration due to the increase in speed. As such, projectile velocity generally increases armor penetration as it increases, while the durability of armor materials decreases at the same time. The effect in some cases can be summed up, in some - not, if we are talking about complex armored barriers. For mono-obstacles, it is often simple different names the same process.

In the USSR and Russia, several types of BOPS are widely known, created in different times and having proper names, which originated from the name / cipher R & D . The BOPS are listed below in chronological order from oldest to newest. The device and material of the BOPS body are briefly indicated:

• "Hairpin" 3BM22 - a small core of tungsten carbide in the head of the steel body (1976);
• "Nadfil-2" 3BM30 - uranium alloy (1982);
• "Hope" 3BM27 - a small core made of tungsten alloy in the tail section of a steel body (1983);
• "Vant" 3BM32 - a monolithic body made of a uranium alloy (1985);
• "Mango" 3BM42 - two elongated tungsten alloy cores in a steel body jacket (1986);
• "Lead" 3BM48 - 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

Comparative evaluation of armor penetration indicators is associated with significant difficulties. The assessment of armor penetration indicators is influenced by quite different test methods for BOPS 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.

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 the RHA homogeneous armor pierced by rolled armor (the ratio of armor thickness to gun caliber, b / d p) to the following values: 5.0 in caliber 105 mm, and 6.8 in caliber 120 mm.

a number of other US

• BOPS М829А1 for a gun of caliber 120 mm (USA) - 700 mm;
• BOPS M829A2- 730 mm;
• BOPS M829A3- 765 mm; often mentioned for many years "before 800"
• BOPS M829A4 nothing has been announced, outwardly it is quite consistent with its predecessor.

Germany

Of the known BPS of other countries, any record-breaking ammunition for recent decades at the moment it has not been noticed, which has little to do with the actual state of the situation, especially in the sense of additional data (for example, the number of shells and guns and the security of the carrier).

Story

The emergence of BOPS was due to the lack of armor penetration of conventional armor-piercing and sub-caliber rounds for rifled artillery 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 angular velocity projectile rotation.

In 1944, for a 210 mm caliber gun of an ultra-long-range railway installation K12(E) German designers created a caliber projectile with a drop-down plumage. The length of the projectile was 1500 mm, weight 140 kg. With an initial speed of 1850 m / s, the projectile was supposed to have a range of 250 km. For firing feathered projectiles, a smooth artillery barrel 31 m long was created. The projectile and gun did not leave the testing stage.

The most famous project that used an ultra-long-range piercing feathered projectile was the project of the chief engineer of Rechling Konders. The Conders gun had several names - V-3, "HDP-Pump high pressure”, “Centipede”, “Hardworking Lizhen”, “Friend”. A multi-chamber gun of 150 mm caliber used an arrow-shaped feathered sub-caliber projectile weighing in different versions from 80 kg to 127 kg, with an explosive charge from 5 kg to 25 kg. The caliber of the projectile body ranged from 90 mm to 110 mm. Different versions of the shells contained from 4 folding to 6 permanent stabilizer feathers. The elongation of some models of projectiles reached 36. A shortened modification of the LRK 15F58 gun fired a 15-cm-Sprgr swept projectile. 4481, designed at Peenemünde, and saw action firing on Luxembourg, Antwerp and the US 3rd Army. At the end of the war, one gun was captured by the Americans and taken to the United States.

Feathered shells of anti-tank guns

In 1944, the Rheinmetall company created a smooth-bore anti-tank artillery gun. 8Н63 caliber 80 mm, firing a feathered cumulative projectile weighing 3.75 kg with an explosive charge of 2.7 kg. The developed guns and shells were used in combat until the end of World War II.

In the same year, the Krupp company created a smooth-bore anti-tank gun. P.W.K. 10.H.64 caliber 105 mm. The gun fired a feathered cumulative projectile weighing 6.5 kg. The projectile and gun did not leave the testing stage.

Experiments were carried out on the use of high-speed arrow-shaped projectiles of the Tsp-Geschoss type (from German Treibspiegelgeschoss - a sub-caliber projectile with a pallet) for anti-tank combat (see below "arrow-shaped anti-aircraft guns"). According to unconfirmed reports, German developers at the end of the war experimented with the use of natural uranium in pierced feathered projectiles, which ended to no avail due to the insufficient strength of unalloyed uranium. However, even then the pyrophoric nature of uranium cores was noted.

Arrow-shaped shells of anti-aircraft guns

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

Arrow-shaped bullets for manual firearms were first developed by AAI designer Irwin Bahr.

Firms "AAI", "Springfield", "Winchester" designed various arrow-shaped bullets, having an arrow mass of 0.68-0.77 grams, with an arrow body diameter of 1.8-2.5 mm with stamped plumage. The initial speed of arrow-shaped bullets varied depending on their type from 900 m/s to 1500 m/s.

The recoil momentum of the rifles when firing arrow-shaped ammunition was several times lower than that of the M16 rifle. During the period from 1989 to 1989, many modifications of arrow-shaped ammunition were tested in the United States and special weapons under it, but the expected advantages over conventional shell bullets (both medium and small caliber) were not achieved. Arrow-shaped bullets of small mass and caliber with a high flatness of the trajectory, had insufficient accuracy and insufficient lethal effect at medium and long distances.grain) (19.958 g) in a detachable pallet. With an initial speed of a swept bullet of 1450 m / s, the muzzle energy of a sniper rifle is 20,980 J. At a distance of 800 meters, a tungsten alloy sub-caliber feathered arrow pierces an armor plate 40 mm thick when it hits at an angle of 30 °, when firing at a distance of 1 km, the maximum excess of the trajectory over the aiming line is only 80 cm.

Hunting arrow-shaped bullets

Most types of elongated bullets for hunting smoothbore weapons have an aerodynamic principle of flight stabilization and belong to lancet (arrow-shaped) projectiles. Due to the slight elongation of conventional hunting bullets in most models (1.3-2.5 or even less (for example, the Mayer bullet, which is also stabilized not by the turbine, but by the lancet method)), the lancet (sweep) of hunting bullets is not visually obvious.

The most pronounced arrow-shaped form currently have Russian Zenith bullets (designed by D. I. Shiryaev) and foreign Sovestra bullets. For example, some types of Sovestra bullets have an elongation of up to 4.6-5, and some types of Shiryaev bullets have an elongation of more than 10. Both arrow-shaped feathered bullets with a large elongation differ from other hunting lancet bullets in high rates of accuracy of fire.

Arrow-shaped feathered bullets of underwater weapons

Russia is developing arrow-shaped (needle-shaped) underwater ammunition without plumage, which are part of the SPS cartridges of 4.5 mm caliber (for 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 air, are cartridges for regular (serial) machine guns and assault rifles, equipped with Polotnev's arrow-shaped feathered bullet, developed 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.

ISBN 978-5-9524-3370-0; BBK 63.3(0)62 K59.

• Hogg I. Ammunition: cartridges, grenades, artillery shells, mortars. - M.: Eksmo-Press, 2001.
• Irving D. Weapon of retribution. - M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2005.
• Dornberger W. FAU-2. - M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2004.
• Katorin Yu. F., Volkovsky N. L., Tarnavsky V. V. Unique and paradoxical military equipment. - St. Petersburg. : Polygon, 2003. - 686 p. - (Military History Library). - ISBN 5-59173-238-6, UDC 623.4, LBC 68.8 K 29.