Why do modern tanks not have muzzle breaks?

[ImperialForce9]

Stuff like Abrams, T-62's, Challenger tanks (I'm not a tank expert so do correct me if I'm wrong) noticeably do not have them.

[Neurotic Panda]

Originally posted by zaphodikus:

You people know far too much about big guns. Ha ha.

sad right.

how obsessed people are with tools and machines that have no purpose other than killing other humans.

don't go to any ww2 forum. its like a nerd flex-a-thon of antiquated obsolete 'big-gun' knowledge.

maybe one day humans will evolve enough to realize how ridiculous we are. sadly we wont. to many egos.

[earlysunsets2]

No idea. The only tanks i know are Light, Heavy, Mammoth, M.A.D. and Tesla

[ImperialForce9]

Originally posted by Neurotic Panda:

Originally posted by zaphodikus:

You people know far too much about big guns. Ha ha.

sad right.

how obsessed people are with tools and machines that have no purpose other than killing other humans.

don't go to any ww2 forum. its like a nerd flex-a-thon of antiquated obsolete 'big-gun' knowledge.

maybe one day humans will evolve enough to realize how ridiculous we are. sadly we wont. to many egos.

Technically the whole ego flexathon is going to happen probably till the end of human existance. We like to think that people back then were stupid and primitive and those people back then thought the same maybe of the ones before them. Most llikely future humies will think us stupid and primitive for not understanding what they consider to be simple.

[Ghost Robertson]

Originally posted by earlysunsets2:

No idea. The only tanks i know are Light, Heavy, Mammoth, M.A.D. and Tesla

You play too much Red Alert.

I quite liked the T-72BM just because it looks cool and the explosive reactive armour sounds cool.

[permanent name]

Fin stabilizers require a certain velocity to be effective, so you want as much force from the propellant behind it when it leaves the barrel as possible.

Most of what modern sabot rounds do is store excess kinetic energy in the form of gyros, so that it can maintain a minimum level of propulsion as it encounters air resistance. And also recoup some of what's lost.

We don't have propellants strong enough to fully utilize modern sabots and we haven't invested in further research because they're already dangerously close to gyrojets in terms of potential collateral damage. They're good enough as-is.

Originally posted by levet.byck:

..guess cruise missiles also are centered with a sabot

They use rotational forces, fins, and a small ballistic computer. They also utilize a large ballistic computer in the launcher to triangulate and make adjustments, and sometimes a laser dot or satellite marker too.

The adjustable fins and the ballistic computer make the sabot gyros unnecessary, and adding them would only increase the amount of propellant you'd need to put in the missile.

They're mostly mechanical replacements for propellant in the first place anyway.