Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About barbaria

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

78 profile views
  1. The Leopard 2 Thread

    I would rather sit in an Abrams being a couple tonnes heavier and a top speed of a few km/h slower, than in a leopard 2
  2. The Leopard 2 Thread

    I should have said 'not cost effective in replacing/repairing the Armata' If a warhead penetrates the ammo in the autoloader, it will cause such a huge explosion that the turret will be popped of just like any other tank. The turret contains lots of expensive and sensitive electronics, optics and the main gun itself. Such an explosion would probably wreck any electronic or mechanical connection between the crew module and engine which makes repairs difficult and expensive, if not impossible. The most probable outcome of an internal ammo explosion of the Armata will be a total write off of such a tank, only in this case the crew is more likely to survive than lets say a T-90. An M1 Abrams won't suffer an internal ammo explosion and would thus be less expensive and difficult to repair and put in combat after a/couple hits. Of course the Armata will be a tough nut to crack with it's advanced APS and thick side hull armor.
  3. The Leopard 2 Thread

    IMO the Leopard faces us the viewers with it's turret facing to the left of it's center. The ATGM hit in the area of the main gun ammo stowage and there seems to be no delay between the ATGM exploding and the ammo inside the tank exploding, whatsoever. It still amazes me why virtually every (western) tank designers put half or more of the main gun ammo in the hull. There is not one modern day tank that won't suffer casualties from internal main gun ammo explosion expect for the M1 Abrams. And Armata, but then again it's design isn't cost-effective. 5 soldiers lost their life because of a faulty design. That's 5 too much and especially sad for the one soldier standing in the vicinity of the tank.
  4. The Leopard 2 Thread

    Could also be an M60 or sabra mbt. Anyway, this shows why hull ammo storage is faulty and bustle stored ammo with armored doors and blow off panels a la M1 is the best solution for mbt. Unfortunately the Altay also comes with ammo stored in the hull.
  5. So the warheads are in the crew compartment with the charges in the hull? Also interesting to see that the special amour begins just in front of the crew seats on either side of the hull.
  6. That (commanders/gunners??) sight resembles a lot like the CV90's UTAAS, or the other way around I wonder if the soviet's intended to field thermal imagers with these mbt prototypes..
  7. If I understand it correctly, this thing will blow up the internals of an integrated special armor array and will leave a huge hole in a adapted special armor array? (thnx SH_MM) Will this make backplates even more important to stop the jet from penetrating?
  8. DRDO; India's Porsche

    I retract my posts. Never give DRDO the benefit of the doubt.
  9. DRDO; India's Porsche

    You never know with Indians..
  10. DRDO; India's Porsche

    I meant a 300mm thick plate canted at 60 degrees.
  11. DRDO; India's Porsche

    Or they forgot to mention it's 300mm at 60 degrees angle. But then again the L/D ratio is awfull..
  12. DRDO; India's Porsche

    You can see different multiple layers around the driver's hatch, it's barely visible though. It looks to me like multiple layers but I could be wrong.
  13. DRDO; India's Porsche

    Aside from the flipflops in a tank factory, it seems that the UFP is made of some sort of multi-layer armor. It looks like they took the leopard 2 design and made it worse on purpose in every aspect possible. Deleting the special armor array behind the gunners sight, having no armored ammo compartment in the turret bustle with blow-out panels, having a rifled 120mm gun, having an engine based on the leopard 1 engine and having worse turret side armor coverage. The leopard 2 has it's design flaws and the Indians manged to amplify that. Kudos to them for achieving that.
  14. It's not like the Chinese are going to admit their IFV's are nightblind. And going from all the videos and pictures that are available to us, the only IFV equipped with thermals in Chinese service is the ZBD04A. If you count all the ZBD04, type 86A, type 86, ZBL09, Type 92, Type 92B, ZBD05 and ZLC2000 they surely must amount to more than the ZBD04A. Thanks for clarifying that. Sometimes designations get thrown around the internet whitout sources backing them up. Chinese army designation are quite confusing and of course, tanks are being called ZTZ-xx.
  15. Indeed, they upgrade T-series thoroughly but with one missing crucial component: thermal imagers. Expect for the Oplot-M which is fielded in very small numbers.