Electrothermal-chemical Technology - Background

Background

The constant battle between armour and round has caused a near constant development of the main battle tank and this certainly had a major influence on tank design during the Cold War. In fact, current American future combat system technologies can be traced back to lethality requirements to successfully combat future Soviet tanks. It was thought in the late eighties that the protection level of the Future Soviet Tank (FST) could exceed 700 mm of rolled homogeneous armour equivalence at its maximum thickness, which was effectively immune against the contemporary M-829 armour piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot. Today it is estimated that a tank gun will have to achieve muzzle energies on the level of 18 MJ—which is double the muzzle energy of current solid propellant tank propulsion systems — to be able to successfully perforate future enemy armour plating. In the eighties the most immediate method available to NATO to counter Soviet advances in armour technology was the adoption of a 140 mm main gun. This, however, required a redesigned turret that could incorporate the inherently larger breech and ammunition, and it also required some sort of automatic loader. Although the 140 mm gun was considered a real interim solution it was decided after the fall of the Soviet Union that the increase in muzzle energy was not worth the increase in weight, and therefore more money was poured into research programs that could augment the muzzle energy of existing guns to match the 140 mm gun without the incrementing weight disadvantages. Furthermore, the 140 mm did not offer the dramatic increase in muzzle velocity also required. One of the most successful alternative technologies remains electrothermal-chemical ignition.

Most proposed advances in gun technology are based on the assumption that the solid propellant as a stand alone propulsion system is no longer capable of delivering the required muzzle energy to penetrate future tanks. This requirement has only been underscored in the west by the appearance of the Russian T-90 main battle tank. Even the elongation of current gun tubes, such as the new German 120 mm L/55, which was introduced by Rheinmetall is considered only an interim solution as it doesn't offer the dynamic increase in muzzle velocity required for the future combat system. Even advanced kinetic energy ammunition such as the United States' M-829A3 is considered only an interim solution against future threats. To that extent the solid propellant is considered to have reached the end of its tether, although it will remain the principal propulsion method for at least the next decade until newer technologies mature to a level where they can be successfully implemented. To improve on the capabilities of a solid propellant weapon the electrothermal-chemical gun may see production as early as 2016.

ETC technology offers a medium-risk upgrade and is to the point, currently, where changes for maturity are so minor that it can be considered as a realistic replacement for current solid propellant guns within the next two decades. The lightweight American 120 mm XM-291 came close to achieving 17 MJ of muzzle energy, which is the lower-end muzzle energy spectrum for a 140 mm gun. However, the success of the XM-291 doesn't imply the success of ETC technology as there are key parts of the propulsion system that are not yet understood or fully developed, such as the plasma ignition process. Nevertheless, there is substantial existing evidence that ETC technology is viable and something worth the money to continue development. Furthermore, it can be integrated into current gun systems. However, technology maturity requires a further understanding of the technology itself.