Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Jim Warford

Contributing Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jim Warford

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Jim Warford

    T-80 Megathread: Astronomical speed and price!

    The Soviet Military Power annuals were intended for multiple audiences...in my opinion, those audiences were both foreign and domestic. Again, in my opinion, folks and organizations in the US would be energized to see images of Soviet tanks with slab-sided turrets that imply advanced western-style armor of some kind. It's clear that some people not in the know, believed that drawing of the "T-80" to be accurate. Also, showing the world that the US had a good photo of the T-80 in 1976/1979 would have confirmed where and when we were looking, and more importantly, (potentially)...how the US got the photo. Those are the most important secrets of all...
  2. Jim Warford

    T-80 Megathread: Astronomical speed and price!

    Here are the pics related to the Oct 1979 intel report on the T-80. The pic was actually taken "prior to 1976." The higher quality version didn't become available until much later...
  3. According to soldiers involved in the XM-1 testing, the GM prototype was more popular and actually performed better than the Chrysler version.
  4. Walter; thanks...glad to be here! Yup, I'm pretty consistent in that regard. By the way, congrats on your website...it's grown into a must-visit place on the Net.
  5. "Fury" from Tankfest 2018...
  6. Jim Warford

    T-80 Megathread: Astronomical speed and price!

    Not true...that drawing was published in the 1981 edition of the Pentagon's annual journal, "Soviet Military Power." That journal was primarily a propaganda tool used by the US DOD and it included many hypothetical drawings over the years to include this infamous "T-80." While it's true that there was some confusion around identifying the T-80 exactly (which was finally corrected for the public in that unclassified journal in the 1986 edition), classified reporting regarding the T-80 had already been in use for many years before the published photo in 1986. A CIA report published in Oct 1979 (2 years before the release of the hypothetical drawing above), for example, confirms the first sighting of the actual T-80 with a photo.
  7. Jim Warford

    T-80 Megathread: Astronomical speed and price!

    One of the very first images to be released of the M1983/1 (T-80B) spotted in the GSFG (5 April 1983): Image from GSFG (22 Feb 1984): Image from GSFG (Aug 1985):
  8. Jim Warford

    General AFV Thread

    Well, you're right to a point...the IMI 60mm gun was a capable gun as well. The Super 75, however, fired a DU SABOT round that enabled these light platforms to knockout MBTs from the front, at normal combat ranges...there was no need to close to 500-1000 meters. These formerly classified pics show the result of such a hit with a penetrator the size of a standard pencil. The T-54 burned for three days...
  9. Jim Warford

    General AFV Thread

    The ELKE test bed like many of its experimental cousins mounted the ARES "Super 75" 75mm main gun. This was an impressive gun with performance above and beyond what was expected from it's size. Here are a few pics of the Super 75 APFSDS round being live-fire tested against a fully loaded T-54...
  10. T___A; well, the IS-7 is interesting, I'll give you that...but, how many test vehicles were actually built (4 or 5)? How many were deployed with Soviet forces? Zero... As I mentioned above, there are a lot of interesting test vehicles and prototypes at Kubinka (I know, I've been there), but most weren't fielded and ultimately became dead-ends. It's a mistake to criticize the SU-122-54 based on the numbers produced...we know that 95 D-49 main guns were produced and while some sources report a total production run of 77 vehicles, the actual number could be higher. I disagree with you regarding a 122mm "spg" being nonsensical after 1944. In fact, the SU-122-54's primary tactical role wasn't even fully developed until 1945. After the war, this new assault gun/tank destroyer successfully combined the capabilities of both the heavy and medium assault gun/tank destroyer...think "Storm Teams." In the end, the problem the SU-122-54 ran into was all about timing...the total number produced wasn't a statement concerning it's qualities or capabilities; on the contrary, it was accepted for mass production. This impressive vehicle was clearly killed by the pro-missile/anti-gun lobby....