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

Mike E

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    323

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Mike E

  1. Mike E
    Well, there's no way he has more than 9...
  2. Mike E
    Well, I'm rewatching Interstellar right now. Don't ask how many times I've seen it.
  3. Mike E
    *cough* B3 *cough* That's basically what they are doing. Also, LoooSeR isn't "pictures", he is a single picture; of Putin.
  4. Mike E
    Not on the shown unit. Same unit, same electronics.
  5. Mike E
    Someone hasn't driven a light.... Try the scorpion.
  6. Mike E
    Humor it had, but it wasn't any out of the ordinary; and honestly, it was tiring by the end of the movie. TARS was just as humorous at times. Then again, both movies *are about space*, humor shouldn't be a major consideration. If you want to see a funny, great movie, two words; Buckaroo Banzai.
  7. Mike E
    No specifics on it, and the only link I could give you is the ECP1 funding information page.
  8. Mike E
    The SEP v3 also includes a new armor package (Next Generation Armor Package) and an updated tank management system.
  9. Mike E
    And in that case; The Martian is no exception.
  10. Mike E
    Well, I did say "but the end". The protrayal of the black hole and worm hole was spot on, as was relativity. Even the whole "enough speed will take you through the black home" thing is regarded as a possibly in one model of the black hole. The tesseract is...well...but it is science *fiction* after all. And, in what ways was the Martian any better?
  11. Mike E
    Knew someone was going to ask. It's hard to explain, I just really like Interstellar. Hans produced a great OST, the visuals were generally amazing, good acting outside of a few people, and accurate science (minus the last 20 minutes, some of which was still plausible). If you didn't see it in theater then you are missing out. A few people I know that saw it in Imax were blown away. Also, the problems in Interstellar were kind of offset by the problems in The Martian.
  12. Mike E
    The radar isn't used for detecting objects on the ground, or mapping. Instead, it is used to detect rounds fired at the tank, and helicopters. Similar to the panels for Afganit.
  13. Mike E
    Just saw it tonight; good plot, well filmed, good special effects, great acting, a surprising amount of humor, and a little bit of science. Besides the typical...issues (crew radiation, they didn't need the Chinese booster, and the way too strong dust storm), it was a great movie. I'm heavily biased here, so take this as an opinion and nothing more; Interstellar was a bit better, Gravity was horrible on its' own, and is (even) worse now.
  14. Mike E
    The other, smaller radar panels are alleged to have a range of 10 km. Not sure for what exactly.
  15. Mike E
    The left unit is a rather large muzzle reference sensor. Supposedly it is more than just that. I suspect the right unit is a radar system relating to the fire restriction system. If the tank has a limited-to-no chance of impacting the target, the gunner is overridden by the tank. It's probably there to map the enemy tank and its location. The defense radars are on the side turret cheeks.
  16. Mike E
    Like what Armata has; just without significant layering and thickness. IIRC the base side armor is ~20 mm and the add-on panel is an additional 25 mm. And yes, that's an Abrams.
  17. Mike E
    Come on EE, we've known that for years. After all, the T-90A *is* just an upgraded T-34.
  18. Mike E
    Very interesting, I can see how that would be effective. To answer your question; I was talking about the glacis composition itself. The one with multiple layers of ceramics as you mentioned earlier.
  19. Mike E
    It seems odd to have a ceramic based composite heavily angled like that. IIRC, that lowers their effectiveness and increases the chance that multiple plates will be hit, and shattered. To be honest, I always figured it to be NERA.
  20. Mike E
    Hopefully they do, and hopefully in the triple-packed configuration that was originally rumored. 72 Oniks Not even sure they could fill them all up.
  21. Mike E
    It's odd to think how it can be so much more effective without additional explosives. A little design change goes a long way. Thanks LoooSeR.
  22. Mike E
    I made a very, very crude diagram of how I think Relikt ERA works. It goes off of the idea that a plate is shot outwards, an inner plate is shot down into another explosive charge, which then shoots it upwards again. I'm not sure if this has ever been proven, but it seems to be the general consensus of how 4S23 Relikt operates. (Missing a "3" ) 1 - General design; "thrown" plate -> charge -> "thrown" plate -> spacing -> charge -> static rear plate. 2 - Initiation; Outer plate is thrown, inner plate is shot downwards into next charge. 3 - Result; Inner plate detonates charge, and shoots outwards. I am confused by the all-too-popular Narod diagram, that conflicts with the above layout and operation. This seems to show something completely different, to my eye. Any thoughts?
  23. Mike E
    AFAIK it will primarily replace the left over Tu-95MS's, which itself makes it invaluable.
  24. Mike E
    If you look really closely, you can see the wings folded up near the tracks. Looks to be an early Aero-Gavin-TD prototype of some sort.
  25. Mike E
    Vlad is coming to New York on Monday, I'll let him know. All the B3 needs (to become a world class en mass MBT) is the 1000/1130 hp engine, a CITV, and Relikt. B3M already solved the first, and helped the second. Terlikov's armor talk probably references the third.
×
×
  • Create New...