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

May 12
In February 2022 putin declared war on Europe & his army marched on Kyiv.
Since then European EU/NATO nations have added and/or are forming these active (!) battalions to their armies:
(Worst 2 countries are of course the two loudmouths)

🇵🇱 +44 (3 recon, 4 tank, 12 infantry
1/14 Image
2 anti-tank, 6 artillery, 5 air defence, 4 engineer, 1 signal, 1 CBRN defence, 1 transport, 5 logistic)
🇸🇪 +22 (10 infantry, 3 artillery, 2 engineer, 1 signal, 1 EW, 1 intelligence, 1 transport, 3 logistic)
🇷🇴 +10 (2 infantry, 3 drone, 3 engineer, 1 signal, 1 logistic)
2/n Image
🇧🇪 +7 (1 recon, 1 drone, 1 cavalry, 1 artillery, 1 engineer, 1 logistic, 1 transport)
🇦🇱 +5 (4 infantry, 1 air defence)
🇩🇪 +4 (3 artillery, 1 air defence)
🇭🇺 +4 (1 cyber, 1 mechanized, 1 engineer, 1 logistic)
🇸🇰 +4 (1 paratrooper, 1 drone, 1 engineer, 1 signal)
3/n
Read 14 tweets
May 8
Europe has to realize that there are two global military powers that it will have to find an arrangements with to safeguard its future security:
🇺🇸 the US
🇺🇦 Ukraine

These two have the highest defence materiel production output, and troops from these two are present in the
1/9 Image
highest number of nations around the globe (Ukrainian troops are fighting russians in every nation, where russia has allied with the regime; a will to fight our enemies that is sorely lacking in the rest of Europe).
Minor powers like the UK or middling powers like France,
2/9
can't provide as much security (troops, defence equipment, tech innovation, will to fight, etc.) as Ukraine or the US.
While Ukrainians fight, innovate and produce vast amounts of war materiel, Europe continues to fiddle as the fire of war spreads across the continent.
3/9
Read 9 tweets
May 2
Fellow Europeans on here claiming that Europe doesn't need the US to fight off russia are delusional:

Does Europe have enough cruise missiles? No.
Is Europe investing to fix this? Also no.
Does Europe have enough tanker aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix this? Also no.
1/6
Does Europe have enough maritime patrol aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have any ballistic missiles? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have enough SEAD/DEAD aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.
2/6
Does Europe have enough logistic units aircraft? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have enough air defence? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? Also no.

Does Europe have enough recon satellites? No.
Is Europe investing to fix that? A bit.
3/6
Read 6 tweets
Apr 25
On 2 April 1982 Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands.
3 days (!) later a 🇬🇧 Royal Navy task force left the UK to retake the islands.
That task force included: 2× aircraft carriers, 8× destroyers, 16× frigates, 6× attack submarines... a fleet bigger than today's Royal Navy.
1/8 Image
22 Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships provided logistic support... in total 127 ships sailed, and the Royal Navy still (!!) had enough destroyers, frigates, submarines to fulfil its NATO obligations.
It was an awesome display of military power, professionalism, courage and grit.
2/n Image
On 28 February 2026, after weeks of tension, the Iran War began... and even though the UK had been asked by the US for bases weeks earlier, the Royal Navy was caught wholly unprepared... and then it took the Royal Navy 10 days (!) to get 1× destroyer out of port, which after
3/n
Read 8 tweets
Mar 17
To give you an idea, why European militaries prefer US-made weapons to European-made weapons:

Europe militaries urgently need a ground launched cruise missile capability... the US already had such a (nuclear) capability in 1983, then dismantled all of its BGM-109G Gryphon
1/10 Image
ground launched cruise missiles after signing of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
russia of course broke this treaty after putin came to power and after 15 years of ignoring russia lying about it Trump finally ordered to withdraw from the treaty in August 2019.
2/n
Just 16 days after withdrawing from the treaty the US Army began to test launch Tomahawk cruise missiles form land (pic) and in June 2023 (less than 4 years later) the US Army formed the first battery equipped with the Typhon missile system.
And as Raytheon has a production
3/n Image
Read 10 tweets
Mar 8
These are the 🇬🇧 UK's HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carriers.

First, as you can see in this picture, only one actually carries aircraft. The UK barely had enough money to buy the F-35B for one. For the other the Blairites expected the US Marine Corps
1/9 Image
to provide the required aircraft, because the two carriers were bought so the Royal Navy could fight alongside the US Navy against China in the Pacific.

But the US does NOT want the British carriers anywhere near its carrier strike groups, because the UK carriers would slow
2/9
down a US carrier strike groups, as the UK did not have the money for nuclear propulsion.
And as the UK doesn't have the money for the ships that make up a carrier strike group (destroyers, frigates, submarines) the UK expected the US Navy to detach some of its destroyers and
3/9 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!

:(