Bradley Replacement - XM30 MICV

If the telescoping 50x330mm you refer to is the 50mm SuperShot I think that development didn't really go anywhere and the focus is on this new 50mm cartridge which is as you say a necked out 35x228mm. The guns firing both are supposed to relatively easy conversions of the 35mm Bushmaster III chain gun.

Apparently there is/was also a larger 50mm cartridge being looked at for use in a counter rocket-artillery-mortar role. Might have just been a paper/PowerPoint study though.

Looking at that proposed Bradley upgrade they do need to find a way to get that antenna farm under control.
 
TomS said:
Forest Green said:
jsport said:
Bradley design concept likely capable of mounting a 50mm Bushmaster IIIView attachment 677610
Click to expand...
Which 50mm is it using? The telescoping 50x330mm, or the necked out 35x228mm 50mm derivative?
Click to expand...

The Army has been pushing the XM913, which fires 50x228.

Which means sabot performance isn't the driving factor here.
Click to expand...
Would the performance of the 50x228mm firing APFSDS really be any worse than the equivalent 35mm ammunition? Should be able to deal with a lot of targets short of MBTs.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Would the performance of the 50x228mm firing APFSDS really be any worse than the equivalent 35mm ammunition? Should be able to deal with a lot of targets short of MBTs.
Click to expand...

Not really worse (maybe the straight wall case adds a little case volume but also needs a bigger sabot). It's just that it doesn't add much armor penetration over 35mm, so the reason to switch to 50mm is to buy extra projectile volume for HE/guided rounds/etc.
 
TomS said:
Colonial-Marine said:
Would the performance of the 50x228mm firing APFSDS really be any worse than the equivalent 35mm ammunition? Should be able to deal with a lot of targets short of MBTs.
Click to expand...

Not really worse (maybe the straight wall case adds a little case volume but also needs a bigger sabot). It's just that it doesn't add much armor penetration over 35mm, so the reason to switch to 50mm is to buy extra projectile volume for HE/guided rounds/etc.
Click to expand...
Agreed, probably a result of experience in Iraq, Afghanistan, and everywhere else the Army had experience in. Apparently the 25mm struggled a bit when dealing with the construction of a lot of buildings out there. Would take a sizeable amount of ammo to make a hole or collapse a wall.

I wonder if the demise of the 50mm SuperShot has anything to do with the Army's seeming current disinterest in cased telescoping ammunition. Which is odd considering they sponsored the development of the 30mm and 45mm COMVAT which led to the 40mm CTA the UK and France are adopting.
 
Last edited:
Once heard an Army officer, who would know thinkin he was a PM, claim the Army wanted to field one gun and install a bigger one only when a contingency arose. he did not address any associated training issues.
 
jsport said:
Once heard an Army officer, who would know thinkin he was a PM, claim the Army wanted to field one gun and install a bigger one only when a contingency arose. he did not address any associated training issues.
Click to expand...

This was the idea behind the Supershot convertible chainguns (30mm/40mm Supershot and 35mm/50mm Supershot.) The theory was you could buy the smaller caliber now and step up to the larger caliber later by swapping out just the barrel while retaining the feed mechanism and ammo stowage. But the fact that the Army is now going straight to 50mm by offering the XM913 to OMFV competitors suggests that they no longer want to do this two-step process. And why should they? Why spend money on new 35mm ammo when you plan to throw it away in a decade anyway? Going straight to 50mm costs basically the same money and buys that future capacity now instead of later.
 
skyblue said:
What the heck is this. Are we trying to be goofier than Russian and their cope cages?
Click to expand...
Looks a bit like someone is channeling their granddaddy's Sd. Kfz. 232:

Bundesarchiv_Bild_101III-Hummel-025-22%2C_Russland%2C_SS-Division_%22Wiking%22%2C_Panzerspähwagen.jpg
 
MihoshiK said:
skyblue said:
View attachment 679603
What the heck is this. Are we trying to be goofier than Russian and their cope cages?
Click to expand...
Looks like a goofy roll bar. How do they imagine these things will be driven, by complete maniacs?
Brake too hard and it will do a full 360 roll forward!
Click to expand...

Probably as GTX suggested, it's an antenna frame, which makes sense for a command vehicle like the one shown.
 
SteveO said:
skyblue said:
What the heck is this. Are we trying to be goofier than Russian and their cope cages?
Click to expand...
Camouflage net frame maybe?
Click to expand...

An antenna would be my immediate thought, but this makes sense as well in the context of CUAS camouflage. A recent-ish Canadian Forces field exercise showed that camouflage netting was vital to avoid detection by drones when drones were overhead. Simply driving under scrub brush and putting the brakes on isn't adequate.

It could also be a mounting point for a standoff plate like the "cope cage"/emotional support armor but it doesn't seem particularly muscular so yeah.

The Liberty, which might just be a Polish Borsuk, is the best looking one followed by the K21. Liberty has the most missiles therefore it is the strongest. I suspect AMPV will win if anything happens at all.

1665661172919.png
 
skyblue said:
View attachment 679603
What the heck is this. Are we trying to be goofier than Russian and their cope cages?
Click to expand...
Finally got an answer to this (thanks, AUSA 2022). This fold-able cage is for combat in urban environments that have a lot of wires and other overhead snag hazards. It's meant to push hanging/dangling hazards out of the way so they don't tangle with the vehicle's antennae or the cupola. In more open environments, the crew would probably stow the thing or leave it off entirely.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom