Interesting info...where was that from? I got my figures from last weeks AP feature on Explosive concussion injuries in Iraq. If your numbers are correct, I think the AP fact checkers should be fired. Of course, I understand that the type of explosive matters. TNT, is more powerful than conventional explosives, and C4 has about 33% more explosive power than TNT,etc. Confining the explosive prior to detonation will greatly increase the explosive pressure because the force is confined and focus to a smaller area.
I did check, and my 1500 mps shrapnel velocity was way too low. "Typical detonation velocities from solid explosives can range between 5000mps to 8000mps." So shrapnel would likely be moving much faster than 1500mps near the blast
I don't know if the AP people who put together that feature were all smoking crack, or if the explosives involved really make that substantial amount of difference (I'm sure they do, but to what extent I have no clue).
I was doing some more looking into this, and found an article where tests were done on a WWII era 105mm artillery shell with approximately 25 pounds of explosives. At 30 feet from the detonation point the pressure was 125 psi and the detonation velocity was approximately 3000 mps.
An King Tiger gun 88mm L71, that fire a AP rnd at point blank, will at the point of impact, (in those 88mm diameter aria) produce that type of pressure you talk of, (500 000+ psi)… ?
That penetrates more then 200 mm of armour, but just in a 88 mm diameter.
Nuclear, 13 kt?? (=13 000 000 kg TNT) at 300 meters from the WW2 Hiroshima nuclear bomb there was +-19 psi…
A modern 1 Megaton (=1 000 000 000 kg TNT) Surface Blast at 1.7 miles will give 12 pounds per square inch..
That’s some pressure…
I bet C4 is effectve, but...
Thread is drifting a bit, so, lets stay on track, I think the weps are to leathal in CCMT.
I don't know if the AP people who put together that feature were all smoking crack, or if the explosives involved really make that substantial amount of difference (I'm sure they do, but to what extent I have no clue).
I was doing some more looking into this, and found an article where tests were done on a WWII era 105mm artillery shell with approximately 25 pounds of explosives. At 30 feet from the detonation point the pressure was 125 psi and the detonation velocity was approximately 3000 mps.
The standard US 105mm HE shell used during WW2 and now has aproximately 2,2 kilograms of TNT(or about 4,8 pounds) and has a total weight of about 15 kilograms (33 pounds) so I am a bit confused by the explosives mass? or was the shells destroyed by using 25 pounds of explosives?
To add to what rouge5 has written above, the amount of explosive material in an artillery shell is usually between 7 to 15% of its weight.
The effect of the shell is down not to its explosive power or blast, but to the large amount of fragments of the casing that this produces. The size of these fragments is dependent upon the percentage of explosive.
The only shells with a content of 25 pounds of explosive that I know of would have been used in very large guns in the 7.2 to 8" range.
I am new around here ...but here is my two cents .
I dont think the arty is over powered personally, I just think I shouldnt be able to call it til I run out, meaning once one volly is over turn around and call it again. Same for air support.
Also as far as rounds and stuff goes, one nicely placed mortar or heavy arty round in a middle of a squad will surely rip it to pieces. Body armor or not.
As far as small arms, any type of MG is really for mass-casualty, suppression fire. A M249 can engage at some pretty decent meters. And you can effectively shoot a still target at 300m with a M4. I personally would favor a M4 over a AK47 just so when I felt the need to burst or full-auto, I could control it better. AK's walk high, so really the first round is the most important of a AK.
But I also on the other hand feel that CC:MT seems to have higher power in its weaponary. I agree with the people that think they are as well. But yet the Javelin is too weak. It fires a sabot type round that our M1A1 Abrams fire. And it rips armor to bits. So I think some adjusting needs done in the area of weapons.
I am new around here ...but here is my two cents .
Welcome to the forum, u fined much nice stuff here.
I to have some issues with CCMT weapons.
SFC_Klemer wrote:
Also as far as rounds and stuff goes, one nicely placed mortar or heavy arty round in a middle of a squad will surely rip it to pieces. Body armor or not.
Yeh, but at what distance? A mort round is fragmentation, designed to make many frag, as chance of hit is grater, the fragments are rather small, (many effective fragments) and a few large undesirable fragments are a side effect, they can “ripp” body parts at distance, but normal there flight -pass will be upp – backward and not hit anything near the impact aria, one shunk go forward down into the ground, but if it’s a airburst that part may ripp someone a part standing just under. The small “effective fragments” will most likely be absorbed by armourer = “not effective fragments”, exposed parts though may be hit ofcose, what’s the chance of that, specially if it’s a air burst?
SFC_Klemer wrote:
As far as small arms, any type of MG is really for mass-casualty, suppression fire. A M249 can engage at some pretty decent meters.
Mass? As in WW1, standing tall and running toward the MG?? I do believe we learned from that and adjusted. Hit something down on the ground crawling to get into cover, or someone who run for there life fast, is anything but easy and it takes many rnds to do it…
SFC_Klemer wrote:
And you can effectively shoot a still target at 300m with a M4.
Yeh, at shooting range it work just fine. But, how many can do it in real situation? Amazing even how the shooting range makes the bolt action rifle seem so perfect, most even far better then the M16. Until reality sets in, that is. In reality We don’t use the weapons like that.
SFC_Klemer wrote:
I personally would favor a M4 over a AK47 just so when I felt the need to burst or full-auto, I could control it better. AK's walk high, so really the first round is the most important of a AK.
Yeh, but the amount of rounds fired, is a part of the way to win a fire fight, has been specially since WW2, and the downsizing to 5.56 is a adjustment to that, “lead in the air”, to get the upper hand. We dint swoop to the 5.56 because its more effective, (its actually less effective, in city fights we still have 7.62 Nato) we swooped for it allows more “led in the air”, that allows for certain wining tactics.
SFC_Klemer wrote:
But I also on the other hand feel that CC:MT seems to have higher power in its weaponary. I agree with the people that think they are as well. But yet the Javelin is too weak. It fires a sabot type round that our M1A1 Abrams fire.
I don’t believe so (u mean the AT Guided missile?), the Javelin fires no sabot, a sabot is sub calibre dense metal rod, DU or Volfram, the missile use a HEAT tandem war head I believe.
SFC_Klemer wrote:
And it rips armor to bits. So I think some adjusting needs done in the area of weapons.
Welcome to the forum, u fined much nice stuff here.
I to have some issues with CCMT weapons.
Well thank you. I will check on some of the nice stuff here, I chit-chatted on gamespy with someone who uses some of the MODs for CC5 here.
AT_Stalky wrote:
Yeh, but at what distance? A mort round is fragmentation, designed to make many frag, as chance of hit is grater, the fragments are rather small, (many effective fragments) and a few large undesirable fragments are a side effect, they can “ripp” body parts at distance, but normal there flight -pass will be upp – backward and not hit anything near the impact aria, one shunk go forward down into the ground, but if it’s a airburst that part may ripp someone a part standing just under. The small “effective fragments” will most likely be absorbed by armourer = “not effective fragments”, exposed parts though may be hit ofcose, what’s the chance of that, specially if it’s a air burst?
I understand what you are saying, most modern mortar rounds are deadly to anyone within a 8m radius of the hit site, meaning 8m around the shell is almost in all case death. Of course this changes with round size. The impact area is the most deadly. So I dont agree with you on that.
When mortar teams fire the rounds they try to keep them over layered so that the blast radius is larger and more of a area is covered.
A friend of mine, God rest him, was killed in a mortar attack in Iraq, his standard US Army body armor was ripped to shreds. I remember being in the field hospital when they were removing the some of the pieces, most of the pieces were enviromental, meaning rocks, pieces of his own equipment, etc. I cant remember well, but there were like 2 or 3 actual shreds of the mortar round. Nothing over a finger length or wider than a inch. So in essence people tend to hang on the shreds from a mortar rather than all the other hazzards. Its the same affect of a car accident where the tissue box can be a brick. Or a tornado could send a piece of straw through a tree.
As far as airburst that would be horrible in a mortar round, thats why alot of bombs and missiles burst in the air. There are mortar rounds that do burst depending on certain aspects making them burst without a impact.
AT_Stalky wrote:
Mass? As in WW1, standing tall and running toward the MG?? I do believe we learned from that and adjusted. Hit something down on the ground crawling to get into cover, or someone who run for there life fast, is anything but easy and it takes many rnds to do it…
We did adjust thats why we train with 3 to 5 second rushes. But you know the enemy is in the area lay it out and run the rounds the rushes aren't going to matter. As well as the small items you could hide behind. Also in a ambush type setup creates mass-casualties.
As far as many rounds to do it, thats why M240B 's and M2 .50 cal, M249's etc...have 50 to 100 to 200 round drums, its not a matter of how many rounds its a matter of keeping the enemy pinned and flank. More so when .50 cal's and 7.62 penetrate alot of enviroment, man made objects.
AT_Stalky wrote:
Yeh, at shooting range it work just fine. But, how many can do it in real situation? Amazing even how the shooting range makes the bolt action rifle seem so perfect, most even far better then the M16. Until reality sets in, that is. In reality We don’t use the weapons like that.
Many can do it in a real situation, thats why its implemented into training, ranges, etc. Though it doesn't happen in current battlefields as much, due to the close quarters of the situations. Also remember our M24 is a bolt action rifle. Think about it, three men supressing a enemy squad, usually they try to flank the fire to escape the kill zone or to flank the MG, where you have say two marksmen with a M4 thats not a hard shot with a well trained soldier. You might get one or two til they catch on, but one or two is good enough.
AT_Stalky wrote:
Yeh, but the amount of rounds fired, is a part of the way to win a fire fight, has been specially since WW2, and the downsizing to 5.56 is a adjustment to that, “lead in the air”, to get the upper hand. We dint swoop to the 5.56 because its more effective, (its actually less effective, in city fights we still have 7.62 Nato) we swooped for it allows more “led in the air”, that allows for certain wining tactics.
How less effective do you mean? I mean presonally I don't like the 5.56 round. But I do say it is easier to control on different fire selects. Though I do agree it is more wanted for the amount and price to put it into the air or combat situation. But it is a very well controlled round. Remember heavy round makes a easier drop in the shot. A good example is 9mm and .45 pistol ammo, 9mm FPS (feet per second) is higher than a .45 cal FPS. It also brings to mind that certain BB guns can act like .22 rifles.
AT_Stalky wrote:
I don’t believe so (u mean the AT Guided missile?), the Javelin fires no sabot, a sabot is sub calibre dense metal rod, DU or Volfram, the missile use a HEAT tandem war head I believe.
I should have went int larger depth on this, the Javelin uses a HEAT style round to open a hole in which a sabot style rod enters into the vehicle. So its really the best of both worlds. Also to add in, M1A1 was shot using the new Javelin round. I ripped it apart. If it can take out a M1A1 Abrams tank, it can take out damn near anything in the battle field.
When mortar teams fire the rounds they try to keep them over layered so that the blast radius is larger and more of a area is covered.
The statistics say the first round is the killer, followed by no 2, there after its pretty useless as ppl are in cover, that why the new how’s fires with diff LG's in a way that make some 4 round from each barrel hit at the same aria at the same time (morts cant do that). So aria fire isn’t used to kill first hand, rather to suppress..
SFC_Klemer wrote:
remember being in the field hospital when they were removing the some of the pieces, most of the pieces were enviromental, meaning rocks, pieces of his own equipment, etc. I cant remember well, but there were like 2 or 3 actual shreds of the mortar round. Nothing over a finger length or wider than a inch.
Sry for that, size of finger frags is big frags not that many in a round, that may explain why body armour failed, bless him..
SFC_Klemer wrote:
As far as many rounds to do it, thats why M240B 's and M2 .50 cal, M249's etc...have 50 to 100 to 200 round drums, its not a matter of how many rounds its a matter of keeping the enemy pinned and flank. .
Yeh, so I ask my self why this is so poorly represented in CCMT
SFC_Klemer wrote:
Many can do it in a real situation, thats why its implemented into training, ranges, etc. Though it doesn't happen in current battlefields as much, due to the close quarters of the situations. Also remember our M24 is a bolt action rifle. Think about it, three men supressing a enemy squad, usually they try to flank the fire to escape the kill zone or to flank the MG, where you have say two marksmen with a M4 thats not a hard shot with a well trained soldier. You might get one or two til they catch on, but one or two is good enough.
It has to do with humans behaviour under stress.
And about marksmen and snipers, they do aim, most "normal" soldiers don’t, they point and fire, fire, fire that’s what different from the shooting range there everyone aim..
SFC_Klemer wrote:
How less effective do you mean? I mean presonally I don't like the 5.56 round. But I do say it is easier to control on different fire selects. Though I do agree it is more wanted for the amount and price to put it into the air or combat situation. But it is a very well controlled round. Remember heavy round makes a easier drop in the shot. A good example is 9mm and .45 pistol ammo, 9mm FPS (feet per second) is higher than a .45 cal FPS. It also brings to mind that certain BB guns can act like .22 rifles.
If we talk fire power, 5.56 has "little" vs 7.62, (its about half of 7.62), if we talk effect of wind and misjudgement of distance 7.62 is the winner. Controlled auto fire, 5.56 wins, still has max 3 round auto, but the main idea of 5.56 is the weight and cost of rounds, you can carry 2+ times more 5.56, and use it and get the upper hand in a fire fight.
That what’s decisive, suppression, and then that open up for other options, bring up the AT-4 and blast em, or get a team in close and finish em of with HE, flank em or whatever, the one with superiority has the upper hand and used right he will win, not because the 5.56 rifle ammo in it self is so “effective” its not, the whole idea of 5.56 its quantity not quality..
SFC_Klemer wrote:
I should have went int larger depth on this, the Javelin uses a HEAT style round to open a hole in which a sabot style rod enters into the vehicle. So its really the best of both worlds. Also to add in, M1A1 was shot using the new Javelin round. I ripped it apart. If it can take out a M1A1 Abrams tank, it can take out damn near anything in the battle field
Not really I believe, no sabot follows, its first an explosive to rip off the Reactive Armourer, and then a new HEAT war head that hit the "cleaned" aria and penetrates.
When mortar teams fire the rounds they try to keep them over layered so that the blast radius is larger and more of a area is covered.
The statistics say the first round is the killer, followed by no 2, there after its pretty useless as ppl are in cover, that why the new how’s fires with diff LG's in a way that make some 4 round from each barrel hit at the same aria at the same time (morts cant do that). So aria fire isn’t used to kill first hand, rather to suppress..
Actually it is possible to do a TOT mission (Time On Target) as well with mortars,multiple rounds impacting simultaneously can and is devastating....
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night
To visit violence on those who would do us harm." - George Orwell
1996 to present. Airborne, and a whole crap load of worthless junk too LOL
So anyways, that was my point with the mortars, like when I play i overlay my mortar fire when I know the enemy in the AO is larger than the force it is closest too.
85 til last year with a couple of breaks here and there.
Just remember....not worthless just useless lol.
Got a bunch of buddies that are 11C and they tell me its a blast to watch a bunch of 4.2s just totally smoke an area.....kinda hard to beat a full house with a pair of deuces.
AoS fire(Area of Supression) is paramount when facing a larger force ar once the main axis of attack if defined.
1) Force attrition.
2)Supression.
3) Allows for redisposition of forces to meet the enemy.
Never have to blanket an area in RL as the effects of incoming rounds have a definitive effect an morale and movement.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night
To visit violence on those who would do us harm." - George Orwell
85 til last year with a couple of breaks here and there.
Just remember....not worthless just useless lol.
Got a bunch of buddies that are 11C and they tell me its a blast to watch a bunch of 4.2s just totally smoke an area.....kinda hard to beat a full house with a pair of deuces.
AoS fire(Area of Supression) is paramount when facing a larger force ar once the main axis of attack if defined.
1) Force attrition.
2)Supression.
3) Allows for redisposition of forces to meet the enemy.
Never have to blanket an area in RL as the effects of incoming rounds have a definitive effect an morale and movement.
Useless in the Civilian enviroment....LOL
I know some Charlies as well...I was 11B from 1996 to 1999, Ft. Bragg NC. Now since then I moved on to fast track myself. In fact I am coming up for a promotion soon to MSG.
So anywho pounding a bit with mortars is always a plus thing with me (as far as CC, dont really get them in my actual AO) as I thump em with the tubes I flank and supress, which usually gains my win.
When mortar teams fire the rounds they try to keep them over layered so that the blast radius is larger and more of a area is covered.
The statistics say the first round is the killer, followed by no 2, there after its pretty useless as ppl are in cover, that why the new how’s fires with diff LG's in a way that make some 4 round from each barrel hit at the same aria at the same time (morts cant do that). So aria fire isn’t used to kill first hand, rather to suppress..
Actually it is possible to do a TOT mission (Time On Target) as well with mortars,multiple rounds impacting simultaneously can and is devastating....
Hi there
Thanx for the input Ross.
What you say is a bit new to me, or do you refer to TOT as by multiple batteries TOT, and they calculate there diff In time to target and thus impact at same time, is that what you mean? That’s still a single barrel deliver a single round, and the next round from the same barrel come with delay. I mean same way as the mec/motor computerized how's do it.
A singe barrel tri pod mortar, mussel loaded man mechanic operated, can a single tri pod mort deliver multiple rounds at same time at same target (not the breach loaded, and motor operated computerized new fancy mortar we (Sweden) has today)?
I mean, for example a 8 cm mort Lg 3 at 950meter with 71 elevation degree and after that round is fired one shall reset the mortar and change the elevation degree manually to 63 degree and be able to get the next round Lg 2 in to the barrel exact 3,3 seconds after the Lg2 has left the barrel for it to arrive at same time… And then one do the same procedure and change to Lg 1 within, uh, but that not possible for 8 cm Lg1 cant reach 950 meters, (max 650) but anyway.
A 12 cm tri pod mort, grenade with Lg 1, -2, -3 at 1200 meter would demand EXACT 3,1 seconds between grenade has left barrel and re-elevate and reloaded to make em hit target same time. That would be impressive. I honest must say I never seen it done. You mean US do this with tripod morts?
Sorry Stalky....was talking about a battery of mortars.
Now I have heard that some artillery peices can get off 3 rounds and have them arrive simultaneously by using elevation and various powder charges. Of course that is calculated by computer.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night
To visit violence on those who would do us harm." - George Orwell
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
...but here is my two cents 
.
LOL
