• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Autoshotgun firing mini-grenades

The AA12 looks like the old beloved Atchisson shotgun from the Morrow Project. Similar to the CAWS in TW2000.

It is impressive as hell, but I'm not sure what real value it has. That Frag 12 ammo will make short work of Level IV rifle armor, though.
 
The AA12 look a lot like Atchisson shotgun because the internals are identical. AA owns the rights to the Assasult-12, and the AA12 is just a modewrn repackaging of the older gun.
 
Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
It is impressive as hell, but I'm not sure what real value it has. That Frag 12 ammo will make short work of Level IV rifle armor, though.
Will it? Given the penetration of 25mm HEAT, I wouldn't be shocked if 18mm HEAT can be stopped by level IV body armor, and we can very safely assume that the fragments will be stopped by flexible armor (level II is probably more than enough).
 
Huh? Level IV is equivlent to 15mm RHA or about 10mm HHA. We know the Frag 12 will penetrate 25mm of at least mild steel. The 25mm spin-stabilized warhead of the XM109 payload rifle (and the XM307 OCSW) will penetrate 51+mm RHA, so 25mm RHA from a 18mm smoothbore charge is somewhat conservative.
 
Huh? Level IV is equivlent to 15mm RHA or about 10mm HHA. We know the Frag 12 will penetrate 25mm of at least mild steel. The 25mm spin-stabilized warhead of the XM109 payload rifle (and the XM307 OCSW) will penetrate 51+mm RHA, so 25mm RHA from a 18mm smoothbore charge is somewhat conservative. 36mm would still be conservative.

Ceramic armor is relatively more effective against HEAT than KE, so armor that gives 15mm RHA against AP will give 22 mm against HEAT. 25-36mm penet is an overmatch.
 
Performance of armor varies significantly depending on the threat it's being used against, and hard ceramics might well be exceptionally resistant to shaped charges. I'm not saying it will be stopped, just that I wouldn't be shocked if it were.
 
Isn't part of the object of a grenade to effect an area? That is to say a direct hit by a grenade isn't really the desire outcome, though a bonus effect. This being the case the point of impact isn't the issue, but the shrapnel exploding from the round, and as such you'd want to know the explosive force of the round, not it's impact strength nor that of the armor in question.
 
Originally posted by Blue Ghost:
Isn't part of the object of a grenade to effect an area?
In theory, yes. However, fragments from microgrenades are incapable of penetrating modern flexible body armor (let alone inserts), meaning only a direct hit is significantly useful.
 
as commonly used "grenade" can mean any hand thrown or low velocity piece of ordnance. The first grenades were frag grenades, but by WWII we had a wide variety of loads and effects.
 
But I'm still puzzled. I mean, why use a single grenade on a single target? Isn't that a lot of material gone to waste to take out one enemy soldier/combatant?
 
Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Blue Ghost:
Isn't part of the object of a grenade to effect an area?
In theory, yes. However, fragments from microgrenades are incapable of penetrating modern flexible body armor (let alone inserts), meaning only a direct hit is significantly useful. </font>[/QUOTE]Of course armor doesn't cover everything (at least until combat armor). If the object is only to render the target hors de combat, wounds to the exposed areas (typically arms, legs, lower torso and face) are going to be sufficient. Modern armor, particularly Level IV, has fairly limited coverage - generally restricted to a portion of the upper torso. The typical SAPI plate is on 12x10 inches of coverage. Even the level IV armor with the best coverage (Pinnacle Dragon Skin) has fairly limited coverage:

tac-front-large-se-ur.jpg


In these cases area effect (i.e. fragmentation) weapons have a better chance of striking a vulnerable area.
 
Originally posted by Blue Ghost:
But I'm still puzzled. I mean, why use a single grenade on a single target? Isn't that a lot of material gone to waste to take out one enemy soldier/combatant?
Given that tens of thousands of rounds (or more) of smallarms ammunition are expended to produce a single casualty in modern combat, the added cost of a grenade is pretty insignificant.
 
Originally posted by Corejob:
Of course armor doesn't cover everything (at least until combat armor). If the object is only to render the target hors de combat, wounds to the exposed areas (typically arms, legs, lower torso and face) are going to be sufficient. Modern armor, particularly Level IV, has fairly limited coverage
You don't need level IV armor to deal with grenade fragments; I doubt that fragments from an 18mm microgrenade would even penetrate level I armor. That still leaves the limbs and face, which aren't protected in current models of vest, though it's not technically impossible. Also, the supposed use for these grenades would generally result in an airburst above or behind the target, which would tend to protect arms and face behind the torso.

Given that tens of thousands of rounds (or more) of smallarms ammunition are expended to produce a single casualty in modern combat, the added cost of a grenade is pretty insignificant.
Assuming one grenade per target, yes. A ten-fold increase in hit probability, which is probably all you can really hope for (area doesn't help if you aren't firing in the right place to start with), is a thousand grenades per target.
 
Back
Top