Gabriele Molinelli Profile picture
Mar 27 12 tweets 6 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
Some Basic facts: CHARM 3 depleted uranium anti-tank used by Challenger 2 is not "nuclear". It is also not coming from US for very good reasons: US doesn't use it nor make it. They have their own DU types, NOT compatible with Challenger 2's 2-piece ammo because they are 1-piece.
Like all armor-piercing ammunition of this kind, CHARM 3 does NOT explode. Doesn't contain explosive at all. It pierces armour by means of speed & mass. DU has great density and once appropriately treated becomes a better penetrator than next best option which is tungsten steel.
Only explosive part of CHARM 3 is the launch charge which is used to fire it (the large orange cylinder). CHARM 3 is stored in the back of the turret and needs no particular protection as, again, is not explosive. Launch charges are stored below the turret ring in sealed bins.
CHARM 3 is expensive, precious, and no longer in production, so training is actually done with a steel rod projectile, not with the actual CHARM 3. Note the color blue: if you see blue in NATO weaponry, it means it's a training/inert weapon. In short: no DU if it is blue.
For general interest purpose, going to the right of image we see the rest of the CR2's weaponry: the white bag is the launch charge for the Smoke shell (next to it) and the HESH (High Explosive Squashing Head) shell, next again. The "coke can" is a smoke grenade for concealment.
Obviously, as i said earlier, Blue means training/inert: in photo you see HESH trg rounds. HESH kills by squishing itself against armour and exploding. Force of blast causes spalling, aka the separation of fragments on the inside. The tank's own armour becomes the tank's enemy.
While HESH is no longer as effective as it used to be as an anti-armour solution (anti-spalling solutions got good over time) it works plenty good against structures. Challenger 2's gun offers better elevation/depression than several of its peers, which isn't a bad thing in urban
Now, i said Challenger 3 ammunition is 2-piece but it is technically 3-piece. A special cartridge, in fact, is fired from the breech of L30 cannon to ignite the launch charge. You can see said cartridges in the left photo and a magazine of them between the Smoke and HESH shells.
A magazine of cartridges is inserted into the breech of the L30 cannon and after the first shot the cartridges are loaded automatically without the loader having to touch them again. Some cartridge action can be observed in this turret simulator during training.
HESH was the reason for the controversial rifling of the L30 cannon (and its predecessor L11 on the CHIEFTAIN, which was the first 120mm in NATO back in its days). Big HESH round, more explosive, more explosive = more spalling / spalling effect even through very thick armour.
Now Armor Piercing, Fin-Stabilized, Discarding Sabot ammo fired from a smoothbore for maximum speed is best, but for a long time HESH was. And at one point British Army was "playing" with 183 mm guns of naval derivation to fire VERY BIG HESH to really shit on soviet heavy tanks.
Arguably, the British Army by the end of World War 2 had had absolutely enough of guns which struggled to hole enemy heavy tanks at long range. A multitude of post-war projects for heavy tank destroyers with massive cannons to deal with soviet heavies tell you what the mood was!

• • •

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

Keep Current with Gabriele Molinelli

Gabriele Molinelli 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 @Gabriel64869839

Mar 29
Here it comes, a good 5 years after a reusable shoulder launcher was indicated as an alternative way to deliver HE at long range since the 60 mm Platoon mortar was removed.
Summary of past episodes: in January 2018, Saab and Instalaza were invited to bid (Carl Gustav and C90 Reusable respectively) for the "Reusable Multi-Role Medium Range Shoulder Launcher" requirement. Then, as so often happens, the Army kinda lost interest and it went nowhere.
In 2021 new RFI published "Platoon Organic Fire Support" because problem generated by withdrawing 60mm mortar was still there: "Infantry Company can project effects (HE, Smoke and Illumination) to 350m [...] needs to deliver multiple precision effects, at range (1000m+)
Read 7 tweets
Feb 19
When Blair was elected in 1997, RAF had 8 (IX, 12, 617, 31, 13, 14, 17, II) Tornado sqns, with GR4 upgrade underway. 3 Jaguar sqns (6, 41, 54), 3 Harrier (1, 3, IV) and 6 Tornado F3 sqns (5, 11, 25, 43, 111, 29). Fleet Air Arm has 800 and 801 Sqns. SDR1998 cut 17 and 29 Sqns.
Sea Harrier was sacrificed soon after; in 2005 Jaguar was cut. When Tory-LibDem won in 2010 there were 7 Tornado GR4 sqns, 2 Typhoon squadrons (3 and 11), one last Tornado F3 sqn (111) and 2 Harrier sqns, 1 & 801/ex Naval Strike Wing. 39 Sqn had formed on Reaper in 2007.
The 2010 cuts terminated what little was left of the Harrier fleet and removed 2 Tornado GR4 sqns. XIII Sqn became a second Reaper sqn in 2012. Come the next election, there will be 7 Typhoon (1, II, 3, 6, IX, 11, 12), 2 F-35B (617 and 809) and 2 Reaper/Protector (31 and XIII).
Read 35 tweets
Feb 19
5 Royal Artillery received MLRS Jan 1992. April 1998 it lost it and became Surveillance and Target Acquisition unit it still is.
32 RA got MLRS in 1993, but by 2003 it was all UAVs.
39 RA was the only left with MLRS. It wasn't a UK only thing, but it was not, in fact, wise.
HVM Starstreak was also a system with a regrettably short active life. It entered service in the early 90s and in great quantities that ensured every manoeuvre unit had good SHORAD, but a great number of launchers was axed soon after in the Labour reviews in the early 2000s.
When Labour won election in May 1997, Challenger 2 was new, AS90 just arrived, HVM and MLRS had been in service a few years, WARRIOR was young and APACHE had just been ordered. CVRT replacement and SAXON and other "wheels" needed replacement but TRACER died and MRAV abandoned.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 19
Casual mention of carriers as source of Army woes is ever present. Nevermind fact that carriers are paid for and haven't even qualified to be in Major Projects spreadsheet for 3 years now.
Army has 2 "carrier-sized" projects ongoing: AJAX and MIV (BOXER)
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…
AJAX, in the last Major Project spreadsheet, had its overall cost exempted for commercial reasons, an ominous sign. Last time it was given, it was 6353 million. MIV is 6575 million. That the return on both of these projects is so sub-optimal is largely the Army's own fault.
"Poor" British Army also has 1371 million on Challenger 3, 1787 million earmarked for Ground Based Air Defence, 1521 million for land ISTAR and especially a 13,140 million LeTacCIS mega-programme which is notoriously not doing well, particularly its MORPHEUS sub-component.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 9
What is going on with L118 Light Gun...? 1 February: the MOD has made BAE the Design Organisation for the L118 Light Gun, tasking them with producing updated design documents and a Manufacturing Data Pack (MDP) to allow new spares to be produced. (1)
Weird part is: "BAES can complete this work due to their unique knowledge and know-how which has been obtained by their maintenance of the TDP for the L119 variant of LG". So, knowledge of the L118 appears to have been lost, and have to draw from the american variant! (2)
8 February, BAE gets contract to produce L119 “Abbot kits”, aka ordnance that allows L119 to be turned into L118.
L119 uses a slightly shorter ordnance meant for US 105mm one-piece, while L118 uses 2-piece “Field 105” derived from those once used by Abbot self-propel howitzer.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 8
THREAD: The UK in the Indo-Pacific.
What does the UK do in the Indo-Pacific "tilt"? No other single topic in modern british defence matters is as misunderstood and misused as this one, so let's see make a summary:
SINGAPORE - Did you know that, back in the days, withdrawal of the UK from region was very much NOT wanted by locals? To lessen impact of hasty, largely unilateral decision to leave, 5 Power Defence Arrangements were signed in 1971 with Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore
Ever since, there has been a residual UK permanent presence in Singapore, tiny but precious: Naval Party 1022 – Sembawang Wharves. Berthing, storage and fueling facility. HMS Illustrious here picking up stores on the way to Philippines for disaster relief in 2013: Image
Read 15 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 on Twitter!

:(