Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Kal

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kal

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. https://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/china_has_developed_first_unmanned_main_battle_tank_mbt_type_59.html M113, type 59. In future t72 Anything which has the special quality of being surplus available in quantity. Hulls are a big cost for these, why not reuse a known vehicle, complete with existing logistics?
  2. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    What would create a weight limit, but not a ground pressure limit. Presumably, in use, is ground pressure limited, which is compensated by increasing track length. Presumably, in transit, is weight limited, but transport vehicles also get upgraded, and so too does rail lines. Russia's china to europe rail line is now a major line, providing faster movement than sea, and cheaper movement than air. I would expect ease of tranport east and west has improved for russia's military.
  3. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    The Centre of Gravity for the T14 turret must be fore of the turret ring? Would that be the case for other russian tanks? Its likely that western tank's turret's centre of gravity is circumcised by the turret ring. This should affect the ease with which to obtain adequate longevity from interface between turret and hull. Perhaps it ok with 125mm t14 turret but not with 152mm t14 turret. Thus needing a new turret for 152mm.
  4. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    Re: Merkava It is an object of the present invention to provide a non-explosive energetic material suitable for NxRA which does not contain explosive material and fulfills its protective function (high efficiency and high survivability of the armor), whilst the non-explosive energetic material lowers the requirements of transportation and logistics according to various standards e.g. UN regulations as appearing in the Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. [0014] It is a further object of the present invention to provide an armor element fitted for such an energetic material and where the armor is of comparable efficiency to SLERA and of comparable survivability to NERA.
  5. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    The turret of the armata suggest to me postage stamps of ERA. I was contrasting that to the block bricks of soviet ERA. Postage stamps being thin ERA. There are demonstrations using just the explosive inserts, upon thick steel. Something more akin to that.
  6. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    Ive yet to see clear definitons of 'middling' reactive armour. My understanding of SLERA is that it is essentially ERA, but the compounds/assembly make it technically not ERA. Similary to how ANFO is not high explosive but is a blasting agent instead. Or how a high explosive if stored at less than critical diameter might not be 'high explosive'. Basically its a arbitary definition, according to a rule, so to prioritise storage and handling procedures and laws.
  7. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    I dont think russia would use the perforated steel for the leading steel plate, but it is a option. Perforations are much cheaper now than historically. I do think russia will use their new steel, if it the same/similar chemistry as the old steel, but ran through a special roller, then the cost increase is small, in particular, the cost is sunk anyway and the incremental costs of using special rollers is probably less than the the benefit of higher strength. I do think they will upgrade the rubber interlayer, cost is neglible and reward is great. I suspect that russia would make the rear flyer plates out of titanium, just because its Russia, and its a suitable application. In general, with 5 sandwiches, newer tech is probably cheaper than 6 sandwiches of the older tech. With 6 sandwiches, newer tech can be thinner than the older tech. Either way, they are going to use ultrafine steel in there.
  8. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    Off topic, but UK tata PAVISE is a good example of technological metalurgy improvements significantly reducing costs.
  9. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    Whose apfsds? Pakistans or india? For many operators this armour is simply overmatch anyway. + russia really likes her ERA, this t14 is going to have era postage stamps all over it. I havent found a good paper comparing apfsds vs perforated armour. My intuition is that perforated armour works best when its holes/slots are optimised against a design projectile caliber. Also that the angle of the perforations can also have a large influence. Some of metallurgy improvements are costly, others are low cost, others still reduce cost. Obtaining fine grain by special rolling is not high cost at all, just specialised. But the benefits dissappear upon further heat treatment or welding. So its suitable for applications like bulging plates, covers and body armour, but NOT for applications involving wide re anealling. Would i design the armour to be like the t72b/t90 derivatives above? No. But i sure would test ammunition against the t72b/t90 derivative above. Its a baseline for simpliest technological progression for the armata t14.
  10. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    This t72b/t90 derived armour would be equivalent to entry level heavy armour. Its what a current t90 operator like india or egypt could use if they wanted to. What russia could do to improve it includes. Steel - Special rolling techniques, presumably this is what upgrades the 44s sv sh to be 'ultrafine' Should be able to use approximately same steel (t72b/t90) but improve both hardness and toughness, thus the 15% weight reduction (less steel used). Still artic friendly. Upgrade rubber interlayer to more energised compound, many options, an earlier israeli patent displays that highest decomposition but adequate stability is desirable. Upgrade the rear flyer plates to titanium. Can also use similar advanced rolling techniques. Make intitial front steel layer perforated steel, can save upto 50% weight. These all maintain the current design, just upgrade individual elements (or reduce weight)
  11. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    0.615 (los steel) x 2.3 (width) x 0.8 (height, lessor guess) x 7.8 = 8.8tonne 0.663 x 2.3 x 1.0 x 7.8 = 11.9 tonne So approximate range for front upper glacis armour is between 9 and 12 tonnes, using assumptions above. That is heavy.
  12. Kal

    Future of AFVs

    I would consider the rise of aerial drone warfare to make this a sensible solution. Whether on same vehicle or adjacent vehicle (t-15 with 57mm) But as main gun doesnt elevate to AA, the coaxial needs additonal elevation. We live in a world where mining's electronic millisecond fuzes cost about $20. So sooner or later it will be normal for a 57mm round to all come with those, so airburst becomes ubiquitous. So far only israel see fit to keep a 60mm mortar on tank, so my guess is that only israel would add a similar caliber gun to a tank. Others would keep it as an additional vehicle. Looking at syria conflict, a t 15 with 57mm couldve been so useful, tank round sniping vs individual infanty is here to stay, do we need 125mm rounds for that? What about future 130/140/150mm rounds?
  13. Kal

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    Weight guesses for t14 armata. The numbers banded around seem to be 48 tonnes and 57 tonnes. Personally i suspect 57 tonnes is more realistic (as its a longer tank and probable keeping the similar ground pressure as t90.) What do others think? A modern 57tonne, tank with hull only manning sounds significantly more survivable than a less modern 48 tonne tank witb conventional turret.
  14. Most of China's contested territory is either mountains or islands. When i saw that lynx, i immediately thought how useful for either side it would've been for india/pakistan mountain skirmish. (Followed by, what a great platform for development of robotank. I wonder if logistics make it a cheaper robotank than reuse of excess type59 tanks)
×