Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture
Feb 12, 2023 20 tweets 8 min read Read on X
I wanted to do a thread about operating mortars and a thread about tank ammunition... but can't, because before those two I have to do a thread 🧵about rifled and smoothbore barrels.

All NATO mortars (except for one) and all NATO 120mm tank guns (except for one) use
1/20
smoothbore barrels. This one mortar and this one tank use a rifled barrel, just like all NATO assault rifles, machine guns, auto cannons, recoilless rifles (photo: Carl Gustaf barrel), gatling guns, 105mm tank guns, howitzers, etc.

(Note: Shotguns use smoothbore barrels).
2/n Image
Why rifling? Well, you want the bullets, rounds, and projectiles to hit the intended target, therefore you have to stabilize them during flight. There are two ways to do that:

• rifled -> spin-stabilized
• smoothbore -> fin-stabilized

Fin-stabilized is obviously the much
3/n
more ancient way to stabilize a projectile during flight... but spin stabilization is actually more precise.

There is a ton of physics needed to explain this in detail... which isn't as much fun as watching NFL players throw perfect passes, because they spin the ball and not
4/n
as much fun explaining how artillery uses spin to smite the enemy.
This is the barrel of an M777 howitzer. The rifling isn't random - it's aligned to the ammunition that will be fired from this barrel. You want the projectile or bullet to fly through the air tip first, with
5/n Image
too much or too little spin the projectile will wobble and crash.
Spin rate also vastly differs between calibers - i.e. a 5.56mm M4 Carbine fired bullet will spin around 5,200 times per second, while a 155mm M777 howitzer fired projectile will spin about 250 times per second.
6/n
But not just the caliber, the weight and length of the projectile, the length of the barrel, the amount of propellant, etc. are used when calculating the twist rate of a barrel, because the barrel's grooves exert torque on the projectiles passing through the barrel & thus
7/n Image
impart a spin on the projectile's longitudinal axis, which stabilizes the projectiles longitudinally through conservation of angular momentum.

For smaller calibers, like NATO's bullets, the projectile's diameter is actually larger than most people know as the caliber is
8/n Image
actually the land diameter. I.e.

• NATO 5.56mm bullets are actually 5.70mm
• NATO 7.62mm bullets are actually 7.82mm

When the bullet is fired its jacket (usually copper) is deformed: this engages the rifling, which imparts the spin AND obturates the barrel to prevent the
9/n Image
propellant gas to blow by the bullet. Every bullet coming out of a barrel has distinct rifling grooves imparted by the barrel's rifling.

But what works with bullets you don't want to use for explosive filled projectiles... well, first because they are explosive filled and
10/n
you don't want them to be deformed.
Secondly having the entire body of a 155mm projectile engage the rifling would wear out the rifling in no time.
Thirdly scratches and grooves on the projectile will mess with its aerodynamics and when firing a shell 20+ km any deviation in
11/n
aerodynamics will result in missing the target.

Therefore explosive filled projectiles have a driving band (also called rotating band). That band is usually copper or copper alloys.
Some projectiles also have a obturating band made from plastic or nylon.
12/n Image
Smaller calibers, like i.e. the 30×173mm ammo for the A-10 Thunderbolt II's GAU-8/A Avenger cannon use plastic driving bands for obturation and to engage the rifling.

But artillery (and rifled tank cannons) use metal driving bands.
13/n ImageImage
Driving bands and obturators are protected by a cover during transport. Obviously you have to to remove that after you screwed in the fuze and before you fire the projectile.

14/n ImageImage
Once you're ready to fire the projectile is rammed into the cannon, past the charge chamber and into the barrel with the driving band wedged into the forcing cone between charge chamber and barrel.
You better ram the projectile hard into the cone or it will slide back out.
15/n
Once you fire the projectile the driving band will deform, seal the barrel and engage the rifling.

And your projectile is on its way - with the driving band cleary showing the grooves imparted by the barrel's rifling.
16/n Image
The spin also serves a second purpose: to ensure fuzes are not armed prematurely fuzes (especially point detonating) included a Setback Lock (Red) and a Spin Lock (Blue), which armed the fuze once certain acceleration and spin values were achieved.
I use past tense, as today
17/n Image
the mechanical locks are being replaced by MEMS chips.

And now to the M982 Excalibur precision guided munition, which as you can see, does not have a driving band.

There is a plastic obturating ring, which will engage the rifling, but in the Excalibur projectile only the
18/n Image
base bleed section spins... and at a very low rate, as once Excalibur reaches the apogee of its flight it deploys fins and glides to its target as a fin-stabilized projectile.
This video shows first a high explosive projectile & then two Excalibur projectiles in flight.
19/n
This was my (hopefully understandable) thread about rifled barrels and spin-stabilization.
Tomorrow we will hear a lot about smoothbore barrels and fin-stabilization, when I post my threads about mortars and tank guns.
20/20 Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @noclador

Sep 7
The North Atlantic - one of the key battles in a russia-Europe war.

If Europe is defeated here, which with Europe's current forces and capabilities, is almost certain to happen... then russia can nuke the UK without fear of retaliation.

This will be a unsettling thread:
1/40 Image
This battle will be very different from the battles in the Black Sea and Baltic Sea, which I discussed in an early thread, which is linked below.

To understand the North Atlantic Battle we need to look at Imperial Germany's WWI submarine campaign,


2/n
and at the WWII Battle of the Atlantic. We will also have to take a deep dive into the Cold War and that era's submarines and submarine tactics.

In WWI the Imperial German Navy sent some 300+ submarines into the Atlantic, which sank more than 4,000 merchant vessels. The UK
3/n Image
Read 41 tweets
Sep 4
2 days ago I did a thread about the reasons russia can't defeat Ukraine and yet is still a deadly threat to Europe and NATO (link to the thread the next tweet).

Today I will talk about three of the fronts of a russia-Europe war:
1) Black Sea
2) Baltic Sea
3) North Atlantic

1/36 Image
These three fronts will be air and sea battles, while Finland and the Baltics will be air and land battles; about which I will talk in another thread in the coming days.

I do not believe the US under control of Trump or Vance would come to the aid
2/n
of Europe... we will be on our own, which will have very dire consequences for the battle in the North Atlantic and thus the UK.

First, let's look at the Black Sea, where russia's Black Sea Fleet has already been savaged by the Ukrainians (pic: the sinking cruiser Moskva).
3/n Image
Read 36 tweets
Sep 1
• russia has no chance to defeat Ukraine
• russia is a deadly threat to NATO and the EU

Both of these are true... because as of 2025 Ukraine fields a far more capable military than NATO's 30 European members combined (!).

Let me explain.
1/39 Image
As of August 2025 russia fields more than 1,3 million troops; at least half of which are fighting in or against Ukraine.

Ukraine has an estimated 1 million troops... maybe even 1,1 million troops. NATO's European members have double that: some 2.2 million troops, but
2/n Image
(there is always a "but" with European militaries):

• with more than double the personnel European NATO members manage to field only 20% more combat brigades than Ukraine. Partly because Western navies and air forces are bigger, but mostly because in all European militaries
3/n Image
Read 39 tweets
Aug 18
People forget that for most if its history Europe was much, much more militarized than even during the Cold War.

Italy, from the end of the Third War of Independence in 1866 to 1939 fielded always 360-400 battalions, which fell to 110-115 during the Cold War, as the US
1/14 Image
backed its European allies with the its massive air force. Today Italy fields 41 battalions (infantry, tanks, recon, special forces, rangers).

Likewise the British Army fielded for most of its history (especially after the 1908 Haldane reforms) 450-480 battalions, which came
2/n Image
in three types: 150-160 regular battalions (of which a third was always in India), around 100 reserve battalions to provide replacements for the regular battalions, and 200-220 territorial battalions, which (at least on paper) could not be deployed overseas. The British Army
3/n
Read 14 tweets
Jul 4
This is Berlin.

And this is how Berlin would look like 3 days after putin attacks Europe... because Germany doesn't have the air defence ammo to defend any of its city for more than 2 days.
1/12 Image
Image
This is Copenhagen.

And this is how Copenhagen would look like the morning after putin attacks Europe... because Denmark doesn't have any air defence to defend itself.
2/12 Image
Image
This is Paris.

And this is how Paris would look like a day after putin attacks Europe... because France only has SAMP/T air defence systems, which is as of now has very limited capabilities against ballistic missiles.
3/12 Image
Image
Read 12 tweets
Jul 3
Are the American M142 HIMARS and the M270A2 MLRS the best rocket/missile launchers... yes, they are.

Should Europe buy them? No.

Not as long as @LockheedMartin doesn't have a production line IN EUROPE for GMLRS, GMLRS-ER, ATACMS and PrSM missiles... but as long as Europe
1/9 Image
Image
is ordering only itsy-bitsy amounts of missiles, there is no incentive for Lockheed Martin to produce missiles in Europe... which means at any given moment MAGA can deny Europe the needed missiles to defend itself against a russian attack.
So... Europe can either order 10,000
2/n
missiles per year,... or have a look at the second best rocket/missile launcher: Israel's PULS.

Should Europe buy it? No.

Because the missile production line in Israel is too small to support Europe's missile needs... again, Europe would have to either commit to buy 10,000
3/n Image
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(