STK
More than 1 million 40mm rounds sold annually, with over 3,000 AGLs sold internationally to more than 20 countries.
wow.Since, 40 mm grenades so cheap(Made in SG ah!)
I want a light AGL instead of a rifle in war!
Airbursting 40 mm grenades is a very good vision killer to MBT, IFV etc
All platform is almost useless when the crews cannot see!
2.
| International Debut of ST Kinetics' 40mm Low Velocity Extended Range Ammunition at Eurosatory 2010 | 14-Jun-2010 |
| ST Kinetics Unveils New Bronco Variant Prototype at Eurosatory 2010 |
gg
For extended ranges you will also need a much better sighting / fire control system otherwise it makes no sense if you miss the target - just wasting ammo.
With the existing sights, getting a hit at 300 m is already a big challenge in a peacetime range.
I think the British Army uses H&K UGLs with a new FC system which significantly improves first round hits. I believe it is uses a basic laser rangefinder / ballistic computer system.
SAF shud adopt such as system especially with extended range rounds. Worth the expense when you hit a target. Missing your target only attracts incoming rounds to the firer.
No mistake.
I am referring to the British Army's SA80 Underslung Grenade Launcher (UGL) system comprising the Heckler & Koch AG-36 40 mm system.
This is now equipped with a Holographic Sight / Laser Rangefinder as part of the British Army's Future Infantry Soldier Technology ( FIST ) program. These have already seen operational service since 2008 in operations in Afghanistan. First round hits are easily achieved with the new sights.
Well, better to carry some additional weight & kill the target with the first shot rather than with a few rounds while the enemy is sending bullets back to you.
You are grossly mistaken. Nice little ladder sights cannot be used in 40 mm UGL systems to take out targets at 400 m or more. They are at best used for up to 200 m max.
The British Army uses the Rapid Acquistion Aiming Module ( RAAM) developed by Vectronix and Wilcox for the SA80 Underslung Grenade Launcher (UGL) system & is part of the FIST UGL program.
See link
http://defense-update.com/features/2009/sept/170909_fist_increment_1.html
Originally posted by Sepecat:I think the British Army uses H&K UGLs with a new FC system which significantly improves first round hits. I believe it is uses a basic laser rangefinder / ballistic computer system.
SAF shud adopt such as system especially with extended range rounds. Worth the expense when you hit a target. Missing your target only attracts incoming rounds to the firer.
SG got it long time ago!!
http://www.stengg.com/CoyCapPro/listing.aspx?pdtypeid=1
Land sys
40mm Air Bursting Munition System
ST Kinetcs and Nammo are most likely the only two maufactuers of Air bursting
grenades in the world.
Originally posted by Sepecat:You are grossly mistaken. Nice little ladder sights cannot be used in 40 mm UGL systems to take out targets at 400 m or more. They are at best used for up to 200 m max.
The British Army uses the Rapid Acquistion Aiming Module ( RAAM) developed by Vectronix and Wilcox for the SA80 Underslung Grenade Launcher (UGL) system & is part of the FIST UGL program.
See link
http://defense-update.com/features/2009/sept/170909_fist_increment_1.html
That's where you don't understand how GL aiming works. Basically for every range and velocity, you need an angle cos that's where the round will go.
The problem with older GLs is that the range of the grenade is limited by its velocity ie 400m. Even if one has a RAAM, its not going to help extending the range to 600m.
If one has a different velocity, firing at the same angle = different landing point.
What the RAAM does is to calculate the range using a laser rangefinder (as I have stated before) and allocating the appropriate angle so that the range and shell lands where you want it to. Sounds fantastic but that's all it does. And if one introduces a higher velocity round like the STK LVER, its basically back to the manufacturer for recalibration. And if one thinks its going to be pin-point accurate... lol. Still too many factors to take into account.
You can do that with a ladder sight so long as one knows the angle and range. The M-16 has the quadrant sight for the M203 that does pretty much the same thing. There are already so many laser rangefinders incl those for the SAR-21.
Its 92mil swiss francs for 2700 moskitos and 2300 raams. That translates into 18,400 sfr or $20+k per sight. Thank you very much.
http://www.sagem-ds.com/eng/site.php?spage=03019900&idpress=86
For that money, I can get an LGB for every sight instead. More bang for the buck.
o That's where you don't understand how GL aiming works. Basically for every range and velocity, you need an angle cos that's where the round will go.
Please save your lesson on elementary ballistics to school kids.
We forumers already know all this basic stuff.
The problem with older GLs is that the range of the grenade is limited by its velocity ie 400m. Even if one has a RAAM, its not going to help extending the range to 600m
Clearly most 40 mm systems today were designed for max effective range of 350 to 400 m. Ballistically, they can go much further. The issue is accuracy. With iron sights and the soldier’s range estimate , accuracy will be poor.
If one has a different velocity, firing at the same angle = different landing point.
You really need some tutoring. Its not only velocity and elevation that determine where the round lands. There are other factors involved. I will be happy to give you a lesson.
What the RAAM does is to calculate the range using a laser rangefinder (as I have stated before) and allocating the appropriate angle so that the range and shell lands where you want it to. Sounds fantastic but that's all it does.
It does not sound fantastic at all to me. It is just simple physics.
And if one introduces a higher velocity round like the STK LVER, its basically back to the manufacturer for recalibration. Recalibration of what ?
And if one thinks its going to be pin-point accurate... lol. Still too many factors to take into account.
You can do that with a ladder sight so long as one knows the angle and range.
You can ?! I guess you have a built in biological protractor and rangefinder. Are you bionic ? I am sure that the SAF will be interested in your abilities. The SAF then really will not need to purchase a RAAM for you. Personally , I will gladly have a RAAM on my weapon.
The M-16 has the quadrant sight for the M203 that does pretty much the same thing. There are already so many laser rangefinders incl those for the SAR-21.
So we already have laser range finders in our SAR21s ?
Its 92mil swiss francs for 2700 moskitos and 2300 raams. That translates into 18,400 sfr or $20+k per sight. Thank you very much.
http://www.sagem-ds.com/eng/site.php?spage=03019900&idpress=86
For that money, I can get an LGB for every sight instead. More bang for the buck.
Try calling for an LGB when 10 of the enemy is 200 m in front of you & will overrun your position is less than 60 secs. Better get that 40 mm round out first & hit them first time. Sorry, no LGB bang even if you had the $20 K on your person. I rather have the $20 k ( by your calculation ) RAAM & take out the 10 enemy starting at 400 m range This is definitely more bang for the buck.
Edited by weasel1962
23 Jun `10, 7:26PM
Your truly.
Clearly, still no idea on how GL is used. If a person is mobile ie charging at you, the chances of hitting a target with a GL round is very small, raam or no raam. Funny since one would expect to know the flight time of a GL arguing saying that its simple physics.
One uses the rifle instead.
Calling fire down on one's position is not exactly an alien concept and one doesn't do it with an LGB or a GL. Irrelevant.
As to bionic or not, GL sights used to be precisely that. One estimates the distance, pluck in the angle. That's the reality. Nothing fancy and never said it would be that accurate. Its been more than a decade since I've fired a M203 so....
you might want to read this FM instead.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9297097/FM-32231-40mm-Grenade-Launcher-M203-February-2003-Version-2PDF
As to whether its worth getting a $20+k sight for a single shot weapon, that's your preference. As to LGBs, I think its more worthwhile to get one instead.
o Dear Weasel,
o Clearly, still no idea on how GL is used. Yes we all know that you have no idea.
o If a person is mobile ie charging at you, the chances of hitting a target with a GL round is very small, raam or no raam. Starting at 400 m, with RAAM , you will most definitely begin peppering the target and his buddies with grenade fragments. I do not think they will then be in the mood to run the next 200 m to try meet up with you.
Funny since one would expect to know the flight time of a GL
arguing saying that its simple physics. You do not know the
flight time because you have not fired a real 40 mm grenade or
closed your eyes after firing one.
One uses the rifle instead. Can you hit a man sized standing target at 200 m ? I guessed as much that you cannot do so let alone one at 400 m. I‘d rather use a RAAM equipped 40 mm UGL and start launching accurate firepower at 400 m before waiting for the enemy to close in to within 200 m. Calling fire down on one's position is not exactly an alien concept and one doesn't do it with an LGB or a GL. Irrelevant.
.You expect your Section to have top priority to be granted a request for a LGB drop ? Guess what , in a real war , your luck will be such that others will always have higher priority. It is pure naivety to think that calling for a LGB is so easy – you have been watching too many Hollywood movies.
You have to fight with what you have.
As to bionic or not, GL sights used to be precisely that.GL sights are bionic ?? Now that’s news !!
One estimates the distance, pluck in the angle. That's the reality. Nothing fancy and never said it would be that accurate. Its been more than a decade since I've fired a M203 so....so…………….you missed right ?
you might want to read this FM instead. Why bother, the manual using RAAM is only half a page long.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9297097/FM-32231-40mm-Grenade-Launcher-M203-February-2003-Version-2PDF
As to whether its worth getting a $20+k sight for a single shot weapon, that's your preference. As to LGBs, I think its more worthwhile to get one inste
Like I said , that was your calculation. If true, it must be extremely cost effective, otherwise why wud they buy it ?
They cud have easily bought more LGBs and stuck at equipping their troopers with plain vanilla rifles & UGLs with iron sights
I bet the troopers opted for the RAAM equipped UGLs.
lol. I see we're resorting to personal attacks again once facts run out.
An M203 grenade travels at 79 metres per second. An average person runs at 5-8 metres per second (unless you happen to be usain bolt in which case, it would be 10+ or if you're 200 kg, then it would be 0). A grenade kill radius is 5m. Its not as accurate as you think.
As to the definition of bionic, bionic is defined as a biological process ie living process. We refer to bionics because that's used as an enhancement eg a bionic arm is an artificial arm to assist in arm movements. How different is that from a mechanical sight? Your english needs improving.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/medical/bionic
As to the price, there is the press release (8.9.2009) which you can access in the link provided which states the contract value.
As to why the UK acquired it... They have acquired aircraft carriers, nuclear missiles and nuke subs, should we do so just because they have? The UK has no army conscription, should we follow? The saf decides on its own merits.
xxxxxxxxxxxx
On a separate note, there is this interesting STK design for a multiple shot GL....
Sorry if you think I am making personal attacks on you. I am not . I just expanded on what you have used to describe yourself.
Hitting a long range stationary target at 350 to 400 m with iron sights is already difficult , what more a moving one. Worse if you are using a low velcocity 40 mm grenade which has a high trajectory profile.
My point is that the ordinary infantryman cannot accurately estimate range.Neither can he accurately elevate the UGL to the angle required to achieve the estimated range. When these two critical inputs are incorrect he will surely miss the target. A FC system such as the RAAM will eliminate these errors and ensure a high probability of hitting the target on the first round at long range. This has been proven by the British Army when using the H&K UGL RAAM combination in Afghanistan. They feel that the effectiveness of this system justifies the cost of these weapons & that why they have purchased a substantial amount of these systems.
I will not argue with you if want to describe a weapons sight as bionic. If you read the definition clearly, it must be an extension or enhancement of an anatomical feature. Clearly a rifle is not anatomical. A weapons sight is attached to aweapon, a rifle in this case.
If a weapons system is proven to be highly effective in a real war, the SAF shud also adopt it . The SAF does not merely " follow " others. I am an advocate for better optical sights for all SAF weapons. Iron sights are ok, but the new generation of weapons sights are highly effective & increases dramatically the hit ratio. Dont you forget that you as a NSF or NSman are the front line SAF infantry.
The STK weapon in your link has been in development for a long time. As you can see, it also has a FC system.
By the way, you have not answered my question about your M203 experience. You missed right ?
UGLs use LV rounds for obvious reasons. HV rounds are for AGLs (and the difference in speed isn't that much either. Its still 20+ sec at max range). Its only recently that the trend went to slightly higher velocity for UGLs to extend range eg LVER.
There's a lot of other factors that influence accuracy beyond range, angle and even munitions, even with RAAM.
Bionic is bionic. If you don't know the meaning, don't claim to know and worse argue about it and contradict yourself.
As to my M203 experience. What I have experienced is that its easier and faster to hit a man with a rifle bullet than an M203 at 200m or 300m than with a GL. 6 out of 6 for an M-16 much less a SAR-21 with a laser. I don't need to waste time on a rangefinder. That's not what a GL is used for. Its an ignorant question and its really a waste of time to tackle it.
You can't hit a person in defilade with a bullet, that's why you use a weapon that fires in an arc. You can do that with an airburst munition, call in arty or better yet, an LGB subject to conditions.
Of course if a weapon is effective, one should consider it. Nukes are highly effective but one doesn't need to procure it. Without regard to cost, necessity and usefulness, any procurement is blind folly.
FC for GLs are nice... but it doesn't solve the problem of accuracy if the round travels a steep ballistics trajectory. That is because the firing solution will require you to raise the weapon to an angle that will hit the target. If the FC sight is fixed mounted on the weapon, the higher u raise, the further away from the center the target gets. And if it gets to a point that the target is totally out of the sight, then it will not be accurate.
For an FC to provide rapid and accurate firing solution, it has to be somehow mounted independent of the weapon's raise angle. Which means the sight remains stabilized and fixed on the intended target, while some kind of symbology tells the shooter if he is at an acceptable angle for a solution.
It is likely with the next generation of advanced combat systems, where soldiers wear heads up displays of sorts, that such an FC may be able to accurately target without the soldier taking his eyes off the target.
Dear Weasel,
Oh, I am absolutely clear what is the meaning of bionic & so do a vast majority of others. But when you persist & insist that a weapons sight is bionic even after it has been explained to you in the simplest possible terms in a dictionary, I will have to rest my case about your vocabulary level.
OK, OK................you missed. Told you so. Just only if the SAF had equipped you with a RAAM type FCS.........it cud have turned out differently.
Now you are confusing nukes with 40 mm ULGs......... I give up ................
Dear Shogun,
I believe that the RAAM FCS and other similar systems already address this issue of weapons elevation.
There is never a silver bullet solution, but FCS for UGLs have made it possible to achieve a high degree of first round hits on targets as experienced by the British Army in combat situations when using RAAM type systems. They must be sufficiently convinced of its effectiveness to purchase so many of these systems.
As you can see , the US and now the BA & many other armies are increasingly attaching optics on small arms. Almost all front line US troops are now equipped with optical sights on their M4s and M16s. The same trend will probably carry on to UGLs, hand held AT weapons, MGs etc etc as costs come down & as more computing power is packed into smaller, highly rugged systems.
Originally posted by Sepecat:Dear Weasel,
Oh, I am absolutely clear what is the meaning of bionic & so do a vast majority of others. But when you persist & insist that a weapons sight is bionic even after it has been explained to you in the simplest possible terms in a dictionary, I will have to rest my case about your vocabulary level.
OK, OK................you missed. Told you so. Just only if the SAF had equipped you with a RAAM type FCS.........it cud have turned out differently.
Now you are confusing nukes with 40 mm ULGs......... I give up ................
lol. Like I said, when facts fail, turn to personal insults esp self-deluded insults.
Too bad. Since this has been a wishing thread, I think most people, myself included, would prefer good looking women companions in NS instead of a raam.
Dear Weasel,
A fact is a fact. You confused it is as an insult. You will just have to accept that you missed the target when you fired your M203 a long long time ago & now wish that you had a RAAM that day. It is you who is in fact delusionary when you fail to see the plain truth.
When facing the enemy coming at you from 400 m away, I rather have the RAAM & ULG. Funny I never met any good looking women during NS in my SIR unit. That explains it.............in NS were you in the SAF Music and Dance Troupe ?
With all these raam this raam that, you seem to have a raam fetish :)
I prefer a woman, you prefer a raam. Preference noted.
True I rather have a RAAM in a combat situation. For other situations, female company from SAF Music and Dance Troupe will of course be much more welcome.
Originally posted by Sepecat:I think the British Army uses H&K UGLs with a new FC system which significantly improves first round hits. I believe it is uses a basic laser rangefinder / ballistic computer system.
SAF shud adopt such as system especially with extended range rounds. Worth the expense when you hit a target. Missing your target only attracts incoming rounds to the firer.
can u pl quote the source of info.
2. i think only STK and NAMMO can make GL with airbursting . USA is, at most, testing it in small scale in afgan n IRAQ.
3. pl search my old threads in this forum.u search NAMMO, Nammo in posts.