APFSDS failure video

@APFSDS

5 Likes

WOW, that has gotta be one of the most interesting ordnance videos I’ve seen in awhile!

I wonder how often something like this happens, must be quite rare.

2 Likes

Nice! The only idea comes in my mind is that a faulty sabot caused the dart breakage. How almost impossible this might seems, I have no other explanation :thinking:

Freaking Incredible Video! Wow!

I have also never seen such a inflight failure like this. My personal guess it there was some kind of manufacturing defect in the connection between the windscreen and main body, but who knows. That camera is as bad ass as the ammunition it tests, if not more. Incredible!

Jason

1 Like

WOW!
Interesting that the faild shot still went straight-ish, granted while yawing quite a but…

1 Like

Agreed, either failure in the windscreen (identified as “tip section”) or in the fins as also indicated in the photo. My question would be if the failure was in the fins - which would seem most likely - would the yaw and drag be enough at those velocities to cause the tip failure?

2 Likes

It’s really neat to see the broken penetrator section diving and climbing later in flight.

2 Likes

I have wondered the same thing about the yaw drag from a fin stabilization issue? My mind has be flashing back to that famous photo of either a, German DM-38 / US M865 TPCSDS-T, embedded sideways in the side of a target tank on a firing range. Forgot whether it was a US or German test. In that case, the sub-projectile was 100% intact, with its cone stabilizer, attached. Cannot imagine the force of a sideways impact. Of course, the, DM-38 / M865 is a uni-bodied, one piece dart, so not really apples and apples here. Still, a sideways / tumbling flight path and impact I would think would be even more stressful?

I have a friend who is retired that used to work for one of the two largest, US manufactures of tank ammunition. He was the guy range testing and filming these rounds. I am going to send this video to him for his feedback.

Jason

    • EDIT * *
      I just found the photo mentioned above (attached) that mentions it was a “ricochet,” and a imprinted dent. So disregard above mental theory LOL.

120mm ricochet

1 Like

Just spoke to my friend about this that used to do all of these tests. He watched it numerous times. He also worked with this same camera system and was hoping he would have the ability to stop, frame by frame as the original software included, but not on this Youtube vid. He threw so much science at me so fast it was hard to take notes. He has a a few theories, but believes this is, Sabot failure in one petal.

He said that he has observed this many times when he was testing the, US 25mm M919 APFSDS-T round. He said that in that case it was a problem with the propellent. That the wrong type of propellent was initially utilized causing a, “VIOLENT LAUNCH,” with too much force that caused the main rod to sheer at the fin assembly attachment point and the windscreen attachment. After they switched the propellent type (I think he said to ball) things worked out. That being said, he does not think that this is the case here.

He believes that in this case it was the sabot failure of one petal. That, “Gas Intrusion,” entered one of the petals (as seen by a assymetriucal pressure wave) between and around the buttress grooves causing the symmetry to be off, sheering the windscreen and damaging the stabilizer. He mentioned the extreme forces of the gas. That the gas is moving two times the speed of the projectile and got around the buttress grooves. If you are familiar with the construction of most, APFSDS projectiles, JRTV compound seals the buttress grooves to the sabot petals. During the manufacturing process this is done utilizing a vacuum to to insure zero air gaps that could allow gas to enter. He believes in this case, air got into one of the sabot petals at launch. Hope this makes some sense. I was having a hard time talking and taking notes :slight_smile: SO MUCH SCIENCE!

Jason

2 Likes