Mordern day vs ww2

I already flew F-16 computerized simulators, and the guns are really accurate. The line of fire is dragged by a line. It sure as hell beats a simple crosshair!

 

See - that's the "exciting electronic doodah that shows them exactly where their bullets will end up"
I love using technical language!

 

but if the scenerio is like this, a tank division from the gulf war is suddenly transported into the battle of kursk, fighting the germans with no russian, can they last long enough to survive the entire battle with limited ammo and not much supplies?

 

As far as ammo supplie a modern fighter making a high speed, mach1+ to mach 2+ depending on the model, would proberly nock down most WW2 fighters. Also after a few smart bombs hits the WW2 airfields at night the 50 spitfires become alot less. Who wants to be fare in a fight?

 

Ammo wise, the WW2 main battle tank usually carries less ammo than the WW2 tanks (except the russian heavies like the IS2). A merkava carries 32 rounds for example.

 

But with all the guidance and tracking systems, those 32 rounds will certainly mean 32 knocked out German WW2-era tanks, while these tanks don't have rounds capable of penetrating the modern ones.

 

But I guess a 250 kg bomb from a Ju87 Stuka will kill a modern tank.

 

Most certainly, but the Stuka would never get the chance

 

Yeah, A zsu system for example would tear 50 stukas to shreds before they even see the tank.

 

Recently saw on TV that the British Army was using three or four Centurion tanks as recently as the first Gulf War. They were used in the engineer role and were fitted with reactive armour. Personally I didn't think the British used reactive armour.

 

Oops, forgot that tank division has some AA units.

 

hey guys just going back onto the m60-mg42 camparison i have a source that says it had a rof of 1,200 rounds a minute not 1,500. the source is a book called infantry weapons of world war 2

 

I'm no expert on small arms and I don't have the ballistics charts in front of me but in my experience with both weapons I don't see the significant difference KBO keeps referring to in regard to the 7.92x57 (I own one of these..a Yugo k98k) and the 7.62 NATO round (I trained on this in the USMC..M-14, M-60).
Their effective range , muzzle velocity, muzzle energy are all rather similar.
Sure the MG42 has a faster ROF but that isn't nearly as significant as one might think. It's not that often that a significantly faster ROF makes much difference and only those who lack experience think that if you fire off enough rounds you are bound to hit something. Take a look at the videos at the night sky over Iraq in the first Gulf War and then tell me how many aircraft you think they hit.

 

yeh but in a crowded attack like the russian mass attacks a higher ROF would help wouldnt it?

 

Yeah but you probably didnt shoot with German surplus then ! Beats the heck out of a 7.62mm NATO round !

Modern supersonic Aircraft aint "max 6-7 mph mammels", and they can go higher to !

Put a MG42 on a tripod and you've got 3500m of effective firing range, do it with MG34 and you've got a rapid firing Sniperrifle. (Just like the British 'Bren' the MG34 was highly accurate !


KBO

 

I don't think anybody shoots German surplus ammunition. But in any case you can get better ammuntion made with modern manufacturing methods that beats any surplus ammunition. There is simply not a significant difference in power, range or accuracy when the two cartridges are compared.

Thos F-117s were coming in at much less than supersonic speeds for accurate delivery of their ordinance. Lots of lead was fired into the sky..not a one was hit.

 

You clearly havent tried German surplus, wich there is lots of just so you know !

And about modern 8x57mm ammuntion being more powerful, you couldnt be more wrong !!

7.92x57mm surplus ammunition is available with much 'much' hotter loads than any Modern 8x57mm ammunition.

Only Sellier & Bellot produce reasonably powerful 8x57mm Mauser ammunition.

KBO

 

If I'm wrong I will gladly admit it. Do you have a source that has ballistic data on these cartridges? I can find 7.62 NATO stuff easily since it's modern but 7.92 x 57 is virtually obsolete is it not?

 

Not right at hand, but i don't see why you need it either.

Obsolete ? Ammunition doesnt get 'obsolete', only if left outside to long

It is fairly easy to aquire actually (In Europe), but im not sure about in the U.S..

Regards, KBO.

 

Because it would settle the issue of whether 7.92x57 ammunition is significantly more powerful than 7.62 NATO.

I mean obsolete as a cartridge. Do any modern military weapons use this cartridge?