Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Glattrohr

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Glattrohr last won the day on September 18 2015

Glattrohr had the most liked content!

About Glattrohr

  • Rank
    Contributing Member
  • Birthday 02/10/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. The pump and reservoir are, but the hoses and actuators are naturally in the combat compartment.
  2. Yikes. Thats a certain cook-off, and seems to extend beyond blow-out panels. Hydraulic fluid flambered BBQ.
  3. Possibly the very same T-80U's as above (among other interesting vehicles) in an exercice: Source: Russian MoD, 29.6.2016
  4. A Sound explanation. I could buy that, but I still like to speculate around this a little. As I see it, the ATGM approaches bit from the left and penetrates right about where you presented it. To take another view into it, it tried to take that into another angle: The possible hit area could be longitudinally expanded here, and thus it might be possible that the TOW hit the upper portion of front turret K-5 first (the part which is visible in the lower left corner), had at least its precursor defeated and then partially penetrates towards the NERA cavity where it is stopped. In that case the gunner gets stunned, bails out and gets his ass kicked later. How ever, to me it looks like it hit higher than that, more towards the area between the gun mantlet sleeve, the laser detector and the gunners daysight. I dont see it viable that the turret roof armor, well known weakspot of the cast turret design could resist even a single warheaded heavy ATGM. The jet would form and start penetrating on low angle among the roofline, ultimately breaking in to the combat compartment above the breech. A jet proceeds to say hello to the commander whose error assessing the threat caused the whole event. How the gunner makes it out in that case? All I can think of he keeping his face in his sight and has the right side of his face covered partially by the breech which is in relatively high stance due the close to 0 degree elevation.
  5. I consider that a very likely penetration. Commander may have paid his error with his life. What do you think?
  6. Today I've been running to photos showing maybe some kind of new electro-optical device on SAA tanks and IFV's. The word out is that the stuff is at least mostly seen in Northern Aleppo. Any clue, what is the devices function and origins? A T-72 seen with such device at 0:48:
  7. I'll just dump the rest of my Kamenka photos here, as we are in a megathread and all. The fenders and ERA are hilarious, but the beauty lies beneath.
  8. Nice thread. I was traveling in the Carelian Isthmus in the last autumn and had to have a mediocre photoshoot at the Kamenka T-80 statue. Wasn't the 45. GMRD the first to receive T-80's back in the day? What is this actually? Obj. 219? The smoke dischargers were fake and ERA-attachments seem fabricated too. I've got dozen more photos of it...
  9. That is Czech-made example from NVA-stocks, if somebody is interested. I'd guess this is at least decade old picture, based on the tankers uniforms and the presence of PSTOHJ82M (9M111-1 Konkurs). The missile was removed from service long ago. The BMP-2, in other hand, is due to modernization as we speak, and the whole fleet will be upgraded by 2017. I can mash up an article about if you wish?
  10. Awesome new footage from Zvezda.
  11. Is my interpretion of the situation correct? Airforce operating from Syria remains the same Tu-22M3's will provide long-range bombing missions from Russian soil T-95MS's & Tu-160's are participating in cruise missile launces from Russian airspace Any ideas what kind of munition the Backfires will use / have used?
  12. Isn't this very similar to Smerch-bourne submunition that REKT two Ato Mech Bln's in Zelenopillya? Combat proven!
×
×
  • Create New...