Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/02/2018 in all areas

  1. 11 points

    Czechoslovak interwar bits

    Hello guys, I think that possibly some of you might be interested in our interwar Czechoslovak stuff. For starter I've decided to share with you a wonderful online document about our fortification system. At the very beginning I'd like to say that I have nothing common with its creators. It's just an incredible gem that deserves to be shared with you. If you know it, sorry for that, nevertheless I think most of you don't. Since I am new here I will not waste your time debating what if scenarios. Don't worry. Well, enough of talking. What I want to share with you is a massive interactive map of our fortification system containing nearly 11 thousand objects with information about every single one of them. You can switch on even such crazy details like cable networks or construction facilities used for building of the fortifications. The map is directly linked with an online database of the fortification buildings where more than 2000 objects are listed with detailed description (plans, 3D models, photos, weapons, crew, important dates, recent state etc.). Unfortunately this database is only in Czech language but it can be a great source of information for you anyway (especially when linked with the map). The good thing is that the map alone supports other languages and you can easily switch them. This is the base view where I have already switched on all objects. You can change background map type, information etc. on the left side and visualise everything what You want to see on the right side. Let's zoom in a little bit. Here You can see one of the strongest fortified places - a valey at Králíky in north-east Czechia. As you can see the object marks have different shapes, colours etc. The shape is matching the menu on the right side. Triangles are concrete pillboxes vz. (mark) 36. Small circles are pillboxes vz. 37. The letter inside means type of the object (with one firing post, two on each side, angled one etc.). The color can be decoded from the information table in the bottom right corner. Basically it shows whether the object was actually built, if it was later destroyed or the works were only started or even not so. The heavy objects are the large circles. The numbers have also a meaning. It's a resistance class (1 -> 2 -> I -> IV from the lowest to the most resistant). You can switch on also the ground plans of the artilery groups (fortresses with underground network between the casemates). You can see it here (fortress Hůrka). You can also switch on the firing lines. Here You can see heavy artilery coverage of the most fortified section of the line (the sad thing is that no heavy artilery pieces were installed by the time of Münich crisis - but lets leave such details aside for now). You can switch on the firing lines even for the pillboxes as you can see here on the example from the souther border. Nearly all Czechoslovak objects were built for side fire having superheavy resistance frontal walls with stone and earth covers. If You zoom even more and switch for satelite map you get something like this. In this case the red color shows anti tank 47 mm guns and the blue color is 7,92 mm (sometimes double) heavy machine guns of a heavy separated casemate (possible use of light machine guns in observation cupolas is not marked). The grey color shows vz.26 light machine guns of the neighbouring pillbox. You can click on every single object and you get available details. The first icon shows detailed lines of fire including realistic range. Bellow the L: L1 M ZN 3-4 means: Left side: L1 = 47 mm anti tank gun with 7,92 mm coaxial heavy MG; M = twin 7,92 heavy MG; ZN is I think type of the cupola but I'm not actually sure about it. The codes for the weapons are shown at the table in the lower right corner (you need to keep the cursor on the question mark). The Second icon leads to a database of objects which is unfortunately only in our weird language. Anyway you can dig a lot of information from it as well (drawings, recent state, photos, exact location etc.). The best thing is that most of the objects still exist till today (all of those heavy ones). The Germans managed to destroy roughly 2000 light objects (and gain some 11000 tons of steels from them). They managed to damage also many heavy ones when they were testing weapons and tactics for the future use duirng the WW2. They even moved some cupolas (and of course the famous hedgehogs) to other fortifications along the Atlantic wall or elsewhere. Many of them are made into better or worse museums today (large quantity is private now). Huge number of them is just left alone and freely accessible for anyone. If you are more interested I can give you tips which ones to visit. On the Czech map portal You can use a mode panorama which is basically the same thing as Google street view but it's much more up to date and it's nearly everywhere where they got at least with a motorbike. Since the fortifications are also visible there, you check where they are for easier access. If you are interested I can continue the fortification topic with some other information (I'm no historian but I have visited quite many of the objects myself and read some books about them). OK, so this was my first post on the forum. I hope you find it interesting and maybe for some of you it can be a reason for a trip, who knows :-)
  2. 8 points
    T-64BV added. Also added spoilers to make page a bit shorter, faster to scroll. This was the last vehicle that this guide will cover, BTW. So yes, after several years it is finally done! @Scolopax @N-L-M @Collimatrix @Ramlaen @Lord_James @Zyklon
  3. 7 points
    So, did anyone else post pictures of the Marder 2 before? My friends went to Koblenz and took these pictures: They asked about the penetration of DM33, but apparently it's still being used by Japan so it's "classified"(surprisingly not other coutries). Otherwise he'd be allowed to share it.
  4. 6 points

    Your Tank Stories

    Abrams Driver then Gunner* Anyway once after we returned from Kuwait and not to long after we gotten our tanks back from the boat/train we had to loan out some of ours to another unit conducting training. So after like a week of so the guys return the tank claiming the turret was traversing on its own with zero human input whatsoever. So one day the mechanics tell us to go ahead and startup this particular tank and move it forward (so the turret can be freely moved without hitting other parked tanks). They specifically told us not to worry about the turret because its hydraulic line had been completely disconnected and that there was no way it could move unless manually. I hop in and startup and I swear that thing made the freakiest engine startup noises I'd ever heard. Sure enough a couple of moments later with my head out cause I was open hatch in the seat the freakin turret starts traversing on its own! Needless to say I immediately ducked my head and dropped the seat and did an emergency shut off of the engine. Even if I hadn't have ducked I would have been fine since it was parked with 2 tanks on either side and once the gun tube hit the adjacent tanks bore evacuator it stopped it in its tracks anyway. No one got hurt but the tank next to it had to get a replacement bore evacuator though lol......
  5. 6 points
    Stefan Kotsch has published the following excerpts from East-German documents regarding the reliability of the T-72 on Tank-Net.
  6. 5 points
    This is pretty well-written aticle about Tigr/SVD type rifles. https://huntportal.ru/hunting/oruzhie-i-boepripasy/nareznoe-ognestrelnoe-oruzhie/rossiya/tigr-i-realnost
  7. 5 points

    Israeli AFVs

    Pre-serial production variant. Prototype: Noticeable differences: Lower (fog?) lights are protected. Storage boxes on the sides appear to be somewhat extended downwards, with the central one being significantly enlarged. UFP has a little bump in the middle. Rear sponsons were somewhat changed. Smoke grenade launchers were removed. New commander's cupola? Sides are now protruding outwards, due to the installation of the new armor modules. New tires and wheel design. Different headlights.
  8. 5 points
    Don't know if already posted: https://www.mtu-report.com/Technology/Research-Development/Putting-the-Puma-through-its-Paces https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/public_relations/themen_im_fokus/puma_ersetzt_marder/index.php#
  9. 5 points
    We may (very soon) get Constitutional carry in Kentucky. Keeping my fingers crossed. ETA- IT PASSED. Kentucky has Constitutional carry. 60 "yes" , while 37 found freedom "scary".
  10. 4 points
    People are conflating requirements - parameters a system being procured has to meet - and conditions - parameters that respondents to the procurement have to comply with in order to participate. It doesn’t matter whether a system, in this case, KF41, meets the requirements stipulated by the customer, if the respondent (i.e. Rheinmetall) cannot meet the conditions of the RFP, in this case, delivery of an example system by a specified timeframe. A respondent has to meet the requirements while complying with the conditions.
  11. 4 points
    https://twitter.com/xmszeon Object 490 "Perspective 2001" and Object 490A models
  12. 4 points
    You must be insane, @XhaxhiEnver; truly. When comparing the cost of a series production, you use a single year’s dollar equivalent, which accounts for in/deflation, because the uncorrected values will indeed skew the final costs. It is a common, accepted practice to use the value of the dollar (or whatever currency) of the first year of production of an item, for all years that the item was produced. Ergo, if you want to compare the unit cost of the M1 over its production run, you would most likely use the value of the M1 in the first year it was produced. Inflation will make the cost higher because THAT’S WHAT INFLATION DOES! It makes the unit monetary value decrease, meaning you need MORE MONEY to pay for the same item. This is why it is imperative to adjust for inflation of goods. One thing you’re not understanding about that $4.2 billion number is that it is for EVERYTHING related to the M1: setting up a new factory and/or re-tooling of old factories to accommodate for the new vehicle (this cost money... like, a LOT of money); acquisition of ammo, fuel, spare parts, and crew pensions and training for each tank planned (make sure they’re not out of parts/fuel within days introduction), and that’s certainly not cheap for 7000 vehicles; worker, electric, and materials costs (it would be ridiculous to think contractor, sub-contractor, and other utility and manufacturing costs would not be estimated and included in the report). I don’t know where you learned to estimate finances, but you should probably ask for your money back.
  13. 4 points
    Finally, a Trump proposal I can support.
  14. 4 points
    Note that in Libya troops of field marshal Haftar use silhouettes of Africa and Libya in camo patterns.
  15. 4 points
    David Moyes

    Britons are in trouble

    2019 Production Line: 2019 Press: Videos: 2019 Roadshow: 2015 Prototype Testing: Photos from: https://www.armadninoviny.cz
  16. 4 points
    Gather round, ye posters of Mechanized! Recent events have indicated that a refresher course on the posting standards of this forum is needed, and so: Reminder that SH is primarily, first and foremost, a document-based forum. While there is a gentlemen's agreement kind of deal whereby you are not expected to post your sources with every post you make, it is implicitly assumed that you actually have such sources and that they actually say what you claim they do. Furthermore, it is expected that when requested, you post the relevant sources. While it is known that not all the information relating to the subjects discussed on this forum is public domain, and that therefore informed speculation is a large part of any debate, it is expected that: A. your speculation have some basis in reality (which can in turn be backed up with at least circumstantial evidence), and: B. that it be presented as such. Here is a very good example of how not to post: You would note that the poster in question is extremely confident in their tone with no indication to the average reader that this is in fact complete bullshit, and has no basis whatsoever for the claims he is making. This is in fact the exact kind of posting that is not desired on this forum. On the other hand, here is a good example of speculation done right: The poster in question clearly explains, by analyzing available imagery and using basic logic, why in fact they have reached their conclusions, and backs it up with references to available literature on the topic. No wild assumptions are fielded as fact, nor are any major claims presented without at the very least circumstantial photographic evidence. And all speculation is presented as such- "a seems to be true", "b seems to be better than c", "I'd say d is the case", and so on. Even a poorly-informed reader can easily distinguish between what is implicitly assumed, what is actually known and what is fresh new (grounded) speculation. For those of you who are new, or just rusty, the posting rules are fairly clear: Kindly re-familiarize yourselves with the rules. And last but not least, remember that the forum motto is Referte avt morimini, link or die. Hiding behind sources that cannot be confirmed, that have mysteriously disappeared, or that "you seem to remember" do not count. While nobody is expecting you to have all your sources at hand at any given moment, it is expected that you either post them at the nearest possible convenience or back off the claims which remain unsubstantiated until further notice. Failure to do so is considered poor taste, to say the least. Many posters who are no longer with us did not heed the warnings and therefore chose themselves the "morimini" route. The management thanks you for your voluntary cooperation.
  17. 4 points
    3M89 "Palash"
  18. 4 points

    Competition: Californium 2250

    Just to prove that it actually fits the crew. The dummy is 1,8m tall, so a bit taller than the California standard. Its actually surprisingly roomy, more roomy than I expected.
  19. 4 points
    I really dread seeing this thread update.
  20. 4 points
    https://zen.yandex.ru/media/gurkhan/izdelie-327--samohodka-obognavshaia-vremia-5c87f93f44a47600b4faa265 Izdelie 327 SPG
  21. 4 points
    As far as I am aware, Sweden was only inspired by the US to test DU armor themselves. Original: " Inspirerade av den valda skyddslösningen i den amerikanska stridsvagnen M1A1 DU där Chobhampansaret uppgraderats med skikt av utarmat uran, gjordes provskjutningar i Sverige även mot denna typ av material. Resultaten visade på möjligheten att nå bättre skyddsprestanda om volymen och inte vikten var gränssättande. " English: " Inspired by the american armor solution in the M1A1 DU main battle tank, in which the Chobham armor was upgraded with layer of depleted uranium, a test was conducted in Sweden of this type of material. The results showed that if was possible to increase armor protection if volume, but not the weight was the limiting factor. " In short, they tested a home made armor, and concluded it was only worth it if volume was the constraint, not the weight. Source: http://www.ointres.se/strv_2000.htm
  22. 4 points
    Challenger 2 + MUSS APS being tested as part of the British MEDUSA program.
  23. 4 points
    Object 770 (mock up, to be precise)
  24. 4 points

    The BFR Thread

    Starhopper is done. https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1083567087983964160
  25. 4 points
    Nice family drawing (same as one of our member's signature, but with names over them this time). Lacking Nota, though.
  26. 3 points

    The Leopard 2 Thread

    Tetris reached Leos
  27. 3 points

    The Leopard 2 Thread

    photo of pic from Wehrtechnik 1988-03 p.30
  28. 3 points
    Hi-Res CAD of prototype 5-pair road wheels Puma: http://btvt.narod.ru/4/puma2.htm
  29. 3 points
    BMPT ammorack layout
  30. 3 points


    Photos of T-15 from Army 2019
  31. 3 points
    Interestingly enough, the photos shown here in the famous IDR article are from the French delegation visit in October 1977, a month before the T-72's first appearance in Red Square...and over a year after the T-64A was first spotted in East Germany in September 1976. The article confirmed that the US and NATO had incorrectly labeled the T-64A, as the T-72.
  32. 3 points
    From The Tank Museum Twitter
  33. 3 points
    New photos! My mother and sister just arrived from their 3 weeks trip to Georgia and Armenia, visited different places and made about 1600 photos. Few things were visited again (as in 2015). Some photos from Armenia.
  34. 3 points
    SU-122-54s in Operation Danube (August 1968):
  35. 3 points
  36. 3 points

    Turkish touch

    and here in english p.s. end of april i will be at IDEF 2019.....will make a looooot of pictures and videos..will share them here too
  37. 3 points

    Competition: Californium 2250

    Yeah, no kidding. I actually had to downgrade my 133mm gun a bit, as checking it against the available pressure limits for 2A46 (510 MPa for earlier versions of the gun) showed that it was going over. Bear in mind that this configuration was selected precisely because it has the maximum possible penetration using conventional AP. So, for instance, if you run a similarly pressure-limited 152mm AP shell (based on BR-540B), you get something like 216mm RHA penetration at 2000m. Edit: hold the fucking phone, because I just had an idea. I'll revert if/when something comes of it. Edit 2: Okay, here it is I'm calling it the "Sustainer" shell. It's essentially a rocket motor and shell wrapped around a completely conventional armour-piercing core. The shell has a set of folding fins on the back, while the core has a small tungsten bit on the front. Testing using Rocketsim lots of math by actual rocket scientists shows that the entire assembly would weigh around 12.5kg and produces enough thrust to hit over 500m/s from a standing start. Behind the shell is a buffer pad to keep the entire thing from disintegrating, and behind that a powder charge. The entire thing is loaded as a warhead section in front of a standard propellent charge and shot out of the gun at around 1580m/s. From there on the rocket motor kicks in and actually speeds the projectile (potentially up to around 1900m/s) before simply sustaining the velocity. Penetration is accordingly a bit weird, starting off at around 300mm RHA equivalence at the muzzle, and then rising to perhaps 395mm a kilometre and a half out. From there it holds more-or-less steady out to 4km, before rapidly dropping off. This new type of shell, which we're thinking of referring to as "Rocket-assisted AP, Fin-Stabilised" (or RAP-FS) is expected to provide substantial penetration performance while maintaining a non-phallic, mammaric appearance.
  38. 3 points

    Israeli AFVs

  39. 3 points

    French flair

  40. 3 points
    https://spacenews.com/final-fiscal-year-2019-budget-bill-secures-21-5-billion-for-nasa/ Hype for potential of NERVA returning (plus probably some Timberwind DNA)
  41. 3 points
    Can we all agree that while we don't know exactly what Roger Stone did to warrant arrest by the FBI, he most certainly is guilty of crimes against fashion?
  42. 3 points

    General AFV Thread

    Iraqi federal police toys: Turkish APCs based on M24 Chaffe chassis.
  43. 3 points
    David Moyes

    Britons are in trouble

    Clearer images: "New Turret" refers to the turret citadel, with re-used equipment mounted on it.
  44. 3 points
    If you broke the rules on another forum is this really the place to complain about it?
  45. 3 points
    Of course dude, it's drawn by me, I post it about years ago in this thread, I still remember someone informed me that the spelling of its text are wrong
  46. 3 points

    Polish Armoured Vehicles

    Ho ho ho Merry x-mas T-72M1 durability and relability All based on "CONSIDERATION OF WEAPON SYSTEMS AVAILABILITY IN EARLY OPERATION PhASE" Translate: PT-91 Twardy tank, during 3 yers and 2 months for 144 tanks. During trials period (1174 days) we had 510 PT-91 falitures whit avarage time to repair 27 days. Avarage faliture ratio was 3 per tank but during trials it was between 1 to 14 for eacht tank. Important: falitures under factory warranty was in number ca 364 so up to 71%. All was procedure due to factory production. Translation from english for normal users here: up to 71% falitures was cased by non-existin quality control in Bumar-łabędy and fucked up production process. Summary in one table: And compare old Leopard 2A4 and PT-91: (black - Leopard2A4 white - PT-91)
  47. 3 points
    Thank you very much Sovngard ! Here is the file (hopefully): https://docdro.id/zvIkXJz
  48. 3 points
  49. 2 points
    105mm DM13(L28) APDS vs T-62 from 200 meters(german protection thickness TL graph made for 800 meters).
  50. 2 points
    https://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/1228913.html KV-2 on during tests.
  • Create New...