Yes, engaging essentially flat targets with a flat-ish trajectory won't work out well. Even MG fire at long distance has a higher arc.

A magnetic launch ought to be able to have a smooth, stable acceleration all the way along. I would think that in any combustion/explosion scenario, your greatest acceleration and pressure is immediately after combustion when the blast is the most contained.... as it passes down the barrel, a fair bit more space exists behind it so one would expect (or I would anyway) that the pressure behind it would reduce steadily as it passed down the barrel. So something that could even that out could make a difference.

Of course, those sorts of systems at higher TLs (9+) ought to be able to meter the acceleration dynamically and adjust sighting accordingly. Also, one imagines magnetic launch might be better given the lack of a muzzle flare (harder to spot the firing vehicle).

And ERA... yeah, that's not there, even in one incarnation, let along later generation stuff that can even affect KE rounds.

Russian PDS+ERA got good enough on their tanks that they were stopping 80-90% of incoming fire during some conflicts in the last couple of decades. That's a pretty good result against some of the more modern missiles/shoulder fired rockets and even some KE rounds.

A friend of mine works as an interior ballistics designer for AT weapons. There are some interesting conversations once and a while.

Of course, I didn't see the two stage missile systems in there either - one goes in, hits the target, sets off ERA, blows off ablative stuff, then the second one hits a second or three later in exactly the same spot. And the new railguns aren't exactly represented either.

A more modern Striker (not just tech stuff, but some streamlining of play) might be a good Traveller Minis game.

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:57 PM Ethan McKinney <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

The dual-purpose round for the 120mm M1 Abrams was found to be shockingly ineffective during the invasion if Iraq. The requirements of the two types of rounds just aren't compatible. CT Striker doesn't cover any of the things you mentioned. More importantly, it doesn't cover ERA, composite armor, slat armor, electric armor, and other things that have made HEAT far less effective.

ETC and everything else really needs a longer distance to accelerate the shell if you want to reduce the force. The simplest solution for HE is to use a reduced charge. That reduces nominal range, although you can almost always get it back by lobbing the shell on a higher trajectory. Higher trajectories actually improve your accuracy against infantry in foxholes and other ground-level fighting positions. (Imagine firing at a foxhole 500m away on perfectly flat ground. The muzzle of your gun is 2m above ground level. If your aim is off by 0.05 degrees, how much do you miss by?)

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 11:50 <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
The wiki on HEAT mentions HEAT-MP

" HEAT rounds termed high-explosive anti-tank multi-purpose, or HEAT-MP, has become more popular. These are HEAT rounds that are effective against older tanks and light armored vehicles but have improved fragmentation, blast and fuzing. This gives the projectiles an overall reasonable light armor and anti-personnel/material effect so that they can be used in place of conventional high-explosive rounds against infantry and other battlefield targets. This reduces the total number of rounds that need to be carried for different roles, which is particularly important for modern tanks like the M1 Abrams, due to the size of their 120 millimetres (4.7 in) rounds. The M1A1/M1A2 tank can carry only 40 rounds for its 120 mm M256 gun—the M60A3 Patton tank (the Abrams' predecessor), carried 63 rounds for its 105 millimetres (4.1 in) M68 gun. This effect is reduced by the higher first round hit rate of the Abrams with its improved fire control system compared to the M60."

They also mention HEDP:

" Another variant of HEAT warheads has the warhead surrounded with a conventional fragmentation casing, to allow the warhead to be more effectively used for blast and fragmentation attacks on unarmored targets, whilst remaining effective in the anti-armor role. These are sometimes referred to as high-explosive dual-purpose (HEDP) warheads. In some cases, this is merely a side effect of the armor-piercing design. In other cases, this dual role ability is a specific part of the design."

Not sure these or SFP/SFF/SEFOP rounds are covered in Striker/Traveller.

==

ETHAN:

Up 3 it is! (at least in my games now). Thanks for that.

==

The point mentioned separately about ETC or other sorts of more smooth acceleration could well change the dynamics of all gun types for HEAT/HEAP warheads as well, making them more viable (more explosive %) as the stresses on the round may be better distributed during firing.

TomB

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 4:37 AM Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

On 13Jul2020 1957, Ethan McKinney wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that they use the "Other" column of the Vehicle
> Penetration Table, so they do more damage when they do penetrate.
>
> Also, I think that they can do damage to structures, unlike KEAP.
Ah, yes they can. They count as 'other' vs structures whereas KEAP
explicitly do nothing to structures. Vs. vehicles the 'other' table is a
bit better than the KAEP table, but the KEAP having better penetration
counters that so it's a wash. Vs. personnel KEAPER upgrades all wound
results one step (they, and similar weapons like lasers, don't do light
wounds as a result of this).

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=RDHE7iRpfwqlHvVvWBIhpJZsbTiD5NnL