# MBT With 140mm gun



## tomahawk6 (31 Jan 2019)

If anyone can pull this off its the Germans and France. Just one issue will be ammunition size,another will be the turret size. Maybe just go with an assault gun style tank ? 

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26170/france-tests-huge-140mm-tank-gun-as-it-pushes-ahead-with-germany-on-a-new-tank-design


----------



## BillN (31 Jan 2019)

Hmmm......King Tiger Mk 2   ??????


----------



## NavyShooter (31 Jan 2019)

This is, quite literally, nothing new.

"By 1990, the L/44 was not considered powerful enough to deal with future Soviet armour, which stimulated an effort by Rheinmetall to develop a better main armament. This first involved a 140-millimeter (5.5 in) tank gun named Neue Panzerkanone 140 ("new tank gun 140"), but later turned into a compromise which led to the development of an advanced 120 mm gun, the L/55, based on the same internal geometry as the L/44 and installed in the same breech and mount. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_Rh-120



> Leopard 2-140
> 
> In the early 1990s, Rheinmetall began development of a 140 mm smoothbore cannon for use in future tank designs. The new gun was intended to counter new Soviet tank developments, especially since the next generation of Soviet main battle tanks were rumoured to be armed with a 135 mm or 152 mm cannon. The new 140 mm cannon was part of a modernisation programme for the Leopard 2 known as the KWS III. Test firing of the new 140 mm cannon was conducted. Results showed that the gun had high penetration values, and had a muzzle velocity of around 2000 metres a second, with potential to be increased further. However, the 140 mm rounds were too heavy for the tank crew to handle effectively.
> 
> ...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2#Leopard_2-140

Enclosed is what has been id'd as a 130mm cannon, with a 130 sabot and a 120 sabot for comparison.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 Jan 2019)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> If anyone can pull this off its the Germans and France. Just one issue will be ammunition size,another will be the turret size. Maybe just go with an assault gun style tank ?
> 
> http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26170/france-tests-huge-140mm-tank-gun-as-it-pushes-ahead-with-germany-on-a-new-tank-design



Wayyyy back in the 80s, at Shrivenham, I met some guys who, could charitably be described as 'mad scientists', that were working on a Rail Gun for tanks. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a20052869/the-us-army-is-pushing-for-battlefield-railguns/

Apparently, one of the main reasons they couldn't see the successful intrduction of traditional 'powder guns' larger than 120mm or so had something to do with 'physics'.


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Jan 2019)

A larger calibre does not equal a greater ability to perforate a target.  Unless, perhaps, you are using a shaped charge to do so.  But if you wish to have accuracy and perforating power, then you want velocioty and lots of it.  Hence the previously-mentioned L55.  Combine that with a very dence substance (best is depleted uranium) and you get fantastic terminal effects.


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Feb 2019)

BAE has suggested a rail gun. Germany has come up with a 130mm gun to replace the 120mm. 

https://www.military.com/defensetech/2014/10/23/bae-proposes-rail-guns-for-armys-future-fighting-vehicle 

https://whitefleet.net/2016/06/25/why-cant-tanks-be-larger-rheinmetalls-130mm-gun-and-tank-size-issues/


----------

