TELESCOPING APFSDS | Rod & Tube APFSDS Armour Penetration Simulation | Unique APFSDS Vol. 1 

Any other unique APFSDS designs you want tested? e.g. PELE, jacketed, segmented...

Never even heard of telescoping APFSDS so this was extremely cool.

I feel like the major loss in the rigidity of the projectile would cause the round to struggle against angles

Interesting concept, but I see at least two drawbacks. First is the changing of the center of gravity/pressure when telescoping which could adversely affect accuracy. Second, where the two sections meet is a weak spot and would form a fulcrum for the penetrator to snap when hitting sloped armor.

Only thing I see as a problem for this design is the hollowed out tube of tungsten. Tungsten is extremely hard to deal with and could be too fragile to manufacture in that kind of shape in a large number. But if that is sorted, the 25 percent increase in penetration and the potential to defeat 3rd gen era might be the next generation of apfsds

I thought when the rod hits the plate the extended part would go back in since the main tube would be slower

Wow really cool. Would be very helpful interesting to see how nera affects them

Friend: "hey you want Tapas?" Me: "no, I want TAPFSDS"

That test came completely opposite to my expectations. Good work dude, hope to see more test against angled targets.

Now this is an interesting concept

your content is top notch! i really like that you link the references.

First telescopic test shown I was already headed towards the comments to suggest flipping that jewel of a projectile around to get deeper penetration. Should have known you had it coming

would de tailing design not be compromised by bending stresses of the rod generated angled armor ?

11k subs already. Ready for lift off my friend!

Love to see this against Spaced armour

Makes sense... Frontal part is wider, so it creates wider cavity. Once it is expended, the more narrow part enters an already prepared cavity, thus making its job easier; less resistance from material

Something interesting to try out with 500 mm length projectile: 3 steel sheets 10mm each clamped together at 60-65 degree angle, with the plates being able to move (separately) like a cm upon impact. After that there's 3 variations, a 1000 mm, 500 mm or 200 mm of free space ending in a flat witness block (or angled at 35 degrees, whichever is preferred). Simulating the approximate wedge armour for the Leopard 2A5, though the composition of it's add-on armour is still largely unknown, it just looks like 3 plates with that approximate thickness on the pictures (ignoring the other plate inside that doesn't really cover the whole cheek). It would be nice to see if that would have any effect compared to not having such a wedge. EDIT: From the pictures I've come to believe it's more likely a 3 layered system with the first two being wedge shell itself. Being approx. 10 mm steel - 5 mm rubber/ceramics - 10 steel, then 20mm of free space and then the same configuration of 10-5-10, all that is angled at 60-65 degrees. Then there's approx a meter space within which the rod touches one more plate that is angled in a different direction. Being about the same 10-5-10 approx. composition but angled horizontally between 40 and 70 degrees. This third layer would sit like a triangle inside the wedge, so the incoming projectile might interact with one (in the middle of the free space) or multible such plates (in the beginning and end), depending on where it hits. It might be quite difficult to model because the plates are angled in different directions.

Cool stuff!

Wow fascinating I’ve never heard of (or imagined) a telescopic sabot. Curious about the real world effectiveness as mentioned in the video that “a higher detail model that examines whether the trailing core really goes into the sleeve” upon impact (I’m no expert but my gut says it wouldn’t) Great video as always

I wonder if the accuracy of such a round would be acceptable for the increased terminal performance?

Looks awesome. I wonder what the sabot should be like especially for the trailing telescoping version, to be able to clamp the trailing part in place when firing.

And I learned something! But how would you secure the inner core for firing?

It seems that the benefit of the trailing telescope design is that on penetration the forward shaft essentially serves as a ballistic cap.

cool Projectile

Can you try to simulate the empty turret extension of Leopard 2A5?

Tungsten monolith with a large meplat (core diameter) under the ballistic cap. The large flat meplat is commonly used in elephant bullets to promote straight line penetration. My thinking is it may help normalize the penetration angle on highly sloped armor.

Very interesting.

Definitely an interesting idea. The obvious issue with the telescopic design is the strength when coming up against other more modern factors such as ERA and APS systems. Perhaps if a stronger material was lining the inside as well as with the telescoping part there would be an improvement to the strength. The question then would become one of cost. Would it be worth making more expensive rounds rather than changing the gun for a bigger one.

What keeps the telescopic rod from collapsing at impact? I.e if it extends due to inertia (or som other mechanism during launch) I'm curious what kind of locking mechanism can withstand the forces on impact without allowing it to collapse to its original length again

The mini Sabot realy made a dent in the monolith. Along with how the tail extension created a cavity for the Sabot to travel alittle farther. Would like to see this how this type of round works against a modern german tank(2019+current) Or maybe a M1A2sep3+(2016+current)

I love telescoping-anything and this idea of extendable projectile design would open a whole can of worms lol, at least to me.

This might be useful for the leopard 2 A5 and A6 spaced armor of it's turret.

Request: Can you do a video simulating the leo 2a7 turrent armour, the triangulated spaced RHA vs Sabot Rod. I think it would be neat to see how the spacing disrupts the different lengthed rods from 500mm to 750mm

Better than war thunder analysis of projectiles

I'm very curious how this performs against more complex arrays + ERA. I could see the sheathing getting crushed/fractured, but I'm unsure how much that would translate to the rod in the rear. It may make sense to make that interface as weak as possible, thereby having a super long break off tip sort of like what M829A3 has. Also what material did you use for the sheathing? In that case it might make sense to have a high strength steel. This is great work! I see you are getting closer to making an idealized future APFSDS. It would also be super interesting to see a hypothetical future armor design (glacis, turret, and hull/turret sides) and see how the future and present APFSDS does against. In this scenario, we would just allocate a certain amount of areal density and thickness that could be used. I would be happy to help out with that! I know it's NREA all the way down in recent designs, but I've been seeing some papers suggest that using at the front and rear to initiate heat jet breakup/completely fracture a damaged long rod is much more mass efficient than NREA arrays. Especially with nano ceramics these days. I believe the reason they aren't being used in current tanks is due to low ceramic quality when the armor packages were updated and higher costs. But the T-80U did use some ceramics (not the quartz filler stuff). Shoot me an email if you think coming up with a next gen armor layout would be fun! You should have it from the previous email.

The slender round is so good because its going so fast. Realistically, the cannon only shoots a projectile so fast before it cant go any faster.

Think about and analyze the following. A projectile is fired at a target. The core of the projectile is a spent uranium tipped tungsten penetrator. The penetrator is backed by a cup that contains an explosive. The cup is not attached to the penetrator but has a mild pressed connection. Once the projectile hits a target an explosive accelerator is triggered accelerating the penatrator into the target. The cup that adds area to accelerate the penetrator forces the penetrator forward but is not attached so does not add drag to the penetrator. Allowing the penatrator to continue to deeply penetrate the target. Tungsten adds mass and rigidity while the spent uranium tip reduces the nuclear pollution of a full spent uranium rod but enables penetration as it remains sharp in penetration and does not mush like tungsten tends to.

noted

Interesting idea.. I wonder how much the air trapped within the hollow tube will dampen & slow the solid core…. Just a thought that came to me & now I really gotta know the answer.

I want to see the segmented telescoptic version: the half-half :)

How long would it take for the trailing section to extend? Like would it be more effective at long range than short range due to the distance required to make it extend? Also, when it hits a slope, wouldn't the hollow part collapse, reducing penetration? This is a very interesting topic, great video!

So like the "sleeve" is extended mid flight or right out the barrel? And by any other mechanism or by seer force of the round leaving the barrel?

Depleted Uranium long rod penetrators are self sharpening and don't form a "mushroom" at the front like tungsten but rather a point due to the pyrophoricity properties of depleted uranium

That's one really neat idea. Wonder if it can be done with bullets.

man this stuff is amazing, got a patreon page or something?

Now do a model of a segmented rod. If you like those results, change the segments to aluminum and the strike face to Nitrogen gas to simulate atmospheric entry onto a moon like Titan. Ergo the use of long rod penetration data might be extremely useful in lowering the cost of planetary exploration 😁

Would love to see some Simulation from a PELE Shell.

Would not the round stay compacted due to vaccum forces? also would like to see the different material and post penetration effects on 120mm DM33 PELE type of round vs Regular APFSDS.

Very cool idea. In-flight stability and accuracy? Unknown/questionable? And probably would be very expensive to manufacture. Would love to see a more detailed animation :)

What happens to the material (penetrator and armor) displaced from the cavity? Does the surrounding material get a lot denser? Why doesn't the surrounding material rebound back into the cavity or push the surrounding armor outward?

I guess there's a fine balance between length and density here. If velocities are the same that is.

What will be the case when the projectile hits an angled block

1:30 if core is 15x475mm on full lenght and insides of sleeve are exactly 15mm how does it stop at end and dont just fly out of sleeve after extending?

Can you do double apfsds that is connected inside of the barrel? Two apfsds + charge connected after loading.

Wouldnt the tail of the apfsds just slam back into it as soon as it hits the armor? Since it just extends due. to the drag on the fins, unless theres some kind of lock that would survive that kinda impact

This is one of those channels that makes me love youtube. Did I ever look for this? No (well I mean I searched 'sy simulations apfsds' after seeing another one of your vids but you get my point). Does this stimulate my brain? Absolutely.

Future APFSDS

If you measure penetration in projectile calibers (T/D) you will note that the penetration of the 30-cal-length thin projectile fired at the much higher muzzle velocity is even greater than when just noted in mm. It seems that the striking velocity, not the weight, is the most important factor here. This is also true of face-hardened Krupp-Cemented-type 20th-Century battleships naval side armor, with increasing the weight of a shell having a given kinetic energy is much less effective than keeping the weight the same and upping the velocity to give the same KE total. The thicker the hard face, the weaker the armor becomes as shell diameter increases relative scaling), however, so increasing the weight by making the shell wider for a given total KE value is also better for penetration. RHA reacts differently to impacts, of course.

Where does the material get displaced to which empties the opening?

How do you do these simulations? Is there just a software you can plug values into and press render?

Coolest shit in the universe. Such a simple mechanical idea going so far.

That trailer round was just confusing as hell. Never seen a telescoping device extend backwards (core). Usually like my Dyson vacuum parts it gets smaller as it extends forward not larger (unless I do it backwards?...)

I wonder if leading telescoping APFSDS would work better if the front part was PELE? Then the cavity would be wider to allow the rest to fit through.

This would solve a lot of problems for tanks using the carousel autoloader. Combine this with that German non-sensitive propellant...

What stopes the tailing part of the projectile from sliding back into the "piston cavity" at the point of impact. Shouldn't the projectile slide back into it's retracted State In both cases (hollow cinder part at front or back of the projectile)? Since the extension of the projectile is caused mainly by air drag, impact of the front part of the projectile should slow it considerably enough so the rear part catches up. I'm interested if it actually works, or if is it just simplification for simulation sake :D. Great vid anyway, keep it up!

Bro I love apsdfsdf missiles

I would imagine APS would be very effective against this, but the idea is strikingly simple yet seemingly effective

I'm actually curious if the telescopic design can give better flight performance and, overall, better accuracy?

Russian 125mm apfsds ammunition manufatures be taking notes now for their max length problem

this kind of assumes that wont be bucking and etc. I dont know at this speeds what would happen, but did you look into that? also, a bit of angling of the round or the armor might mean much

I imagine it would be more prone to ricochet and diverting angles due to lower mass at the front.

wouldnt ERA displace the shaft of the projectile so that it would also take the telescopic fin with it?

Highest velocity APFSDS in existence is 2050 m/s. 2475 m/s is impossible to achieve with current technologies.

Wondering if the telescoping apfsds might have the benefit of detonating any reactive armor so the main body is less effected by the explosive force....???

What happens for the spend material. It isn't ejected from the cavity, nor does it turn to thin air

Wouldnt this just fold together the moment the tip hits the target?

Can we see the comparison of the shrapnel?

which software do you use for the simulations

any deviation/angel of target, i can see this folding more often

You gonna make more simulations about the telescoping apfsds?

I thought of an idea of using water as armor and am really interested how or if it would work out.

will you do leopard 2a5 wedge armour?

Have you tried hybrid DU/tungsten(lengthwise) penetrator? Will it mushroom out when the penetration reaches material switch?

Any plans on conducting a more detailed simulation of the trailing telescopic apfsds? I'd be very interested

But will it create less or more spalling though

The extension needs a small shaped charge in the front.

I think having an unbalanced weight through the bolt would affect its accuracy at long ranges

Whats this for a computer program?

Q: wouldnt the tail just slide back in upon impact?

Did this simulate the interior core being free moving, or locked in place at the end of the tube?

Super interesting! Would 1740m/s for DM63 from a L55 have any significant improvement of performance?.

Is this a real prototype or entirely your own invention? Very very impressive and worth zillion dollars' military contracts tho

Could you simulate the telescopic ones against composite armor?

I doubt this would do much, the penetration of the sleeve is probably greatly overestimated. Might be useful for detonating ERA before the penetrator hits.

I doubt the projectile would extend in flight, the fins just wouldn't have enough drag to Force the two apart, with friction, air displacement, and the whole flight lasting a very short time

Do the simulations actually model the aerodynamics accurately?

Imagine fitting an explosive charge in the hollow part of that projectile, maybe making it a heat round mash up

Can Fusion 360 create APFSDS simulation as well?

Where i can read of telescope apfsds?

I do have a question I hope I don't sound stupid but could the telescoping apfsds be made from depleted uranium instead of tungsten