Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Molota_477

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    189

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Molota_477

  1. Molota_477
    The initial Equipment Requirment of GSR3574 defined that CR1's turret must retain the minimum protection requirement of MBT-80, which should withstand 600mm CE and revised 480mm KE within ± 25° front arc. But as for hull front, because of the steel structure was too heavy, only required significant improvement against HEAT than Chieftain while KE resistance not less than Chieftain.( Only needed to against 85mm HEAT)
  2. Molota_477
    Interesting that the No.4 array had been mentioned in a report of Chieftain mk5/2, would you mind share the source of this message? Title of report is ok.
  3. Molota_477
    CR1 UFP without cover According to the report "Operational Requirements Committte, The Requirement to take Challenger Tanks into Service in the British Army, 7th August 1979'', CR1's turret front has a specified protection level of 480KE/600CE
  4. Molota_477
    Do you have any photo of the gun elevation mech?
  5. Molota_477
    No idea where this rumormonger came from, obvious full of nonsense, nothing is true in fact. What he said such as the magic ceramic/composite applique armor tiles on 99 and 96 which is a 10+ years old rumor widely spreaded in Chinese forums and other internet platform..
  6. Molota_477
    No, it's just a nick name of someone.
  7. Molota_477
    From this book I believe. https://tankmuseumshop.org/collections/haynes-tank-owners-workshop-manuals/products/challenger-2-main-battle-tank-owners-workshop-manual
  8. Molota_477
    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
  9. Molota_477
    Can you share this original source?
  10. Molota_477
    No idea if it is ture or fake. BUT, until now this claim by Jia Yuanyou in CCTV is the only opened official source related to 99A's protection. There is little information about 99's real protection level because its top secret. When I first heard such info, I also keep skeptic, but now IMO it is possible, according to other information implied by some official publishments (mainly China Ordnance Society), there might be some type of integrated ERA under the face plate of 99's modular composite armor(So there are 2 layers of heavy ERA if taking account the hinged ERA tiles), which can drastically increase the KE protection level..
  11. Molota_477
    He said that both KE and CE protection level have exceed 1000mm RHA.
  12. Molota_477
    It should be the 5th prototype with wedge ERA in front of hull nose.
  13. Molota_477
    Both hull(full protection, including front arc of 50°) and turret at 69 metric tonnes. While combat weight at 64 tonnes——fully protected turret + hull protection without enough side armor(only front glacis). The number of 540mm actually meams a specific KE threat which could penetrate up to 540mm RHA at 1km range(It was assumed as Soviet DU APFSDS M1980). MBT-80's Chobham armour was desired to defeat such threat after some meetings in 1978. Besides these two heaviest schemes, there are also 2 correspondly intermedial schemes have 480mm protection level, but still too heavy, the full protection scheme weight 65 t, and the "only front protection on hull" version weight 62 t. Note that all of these schemes are only on paper discussion. And the level of 430mm RHA actually is the original requirement for MBT-80 before 1978. They thought it can be achieved within MLC60 which the turret is fully protected while the hull only has upper glacis. As for CE threat, they specified the need of againsting 130mm caliber shape charge（also is front ±25° in azimuth）. That's all I have seen.
  14. Molota_477
    Yes , the GSR 3572 only for MBT-80, so that's all I mean.
  15. Molota_477
    Finally I found the document of GSR3572, the data of 480 and 430 only refer to the KE protection, but not the mass equivalent thickness, and there is a heaviest protection level up to 540mm.(But it is so heavy and very hard to offer full protection on hull under MLC70, while MLC60 or 55 tonnes only is a basic model without full protection on hull, note "full protection" means including side protecion within a limited angle.
  16. Molota_477
    https://m.blog.naver.com/jhst3103/221397823921 Original blog.
  17. Molota_477
    Yes, I misread it before, so it makes sense that the ''up armour'' Challenger 1's turret can obtain up to 500mm protection against some specific KE rounds while the thickness of steel-equivalent mass only 430mm.I think the same theory also is appropriate for the glacis.
  18. Molota_477
    Full page of the leo 2 armor:
  19. Molota_477
    "Equivalent amount" might refer to the mass of special armor which mounted on MBT-80 and provide 480mm protection for turret and 430mm for front hull: Note the endnote"6"
  20. Molota_477
    What page is the data of 480/340 on?
  21. Molota_477
    I just curious on one thing, where can enquire such documents?
  22. Molota_477
    https://www.facebook.com/pg/Museeblindes/posts/ Two weird EPC concept models from Saumur museum. I suppose that the 1st model with top-mounted gun is likely a solf-recoil gun. Obviously they are different from the schemes described in Marc's book, in which all have six roadwheels.
  23. Molota_477
    Thanks, so it just a rumor.
  24. Molota_477
    And there is a livejournal post about AMX-30 test with Radar FCS(in Russian) https://strangernn.dreamwidth.org/1786004.html
  25. Molota_477
    Hi, Do you guys who know what's this equipment mounted on the MSC's turret? There is someone claims that it was a surveillance radar and likely the same device also had been mounted on a Leclerc prototype , I would like to ask that if it is ture and is there any material related to such devices?
×
×
  • Create New...