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

Recommended Posts

   Iranian team T-72B3 with few mods that are very popular - note mudguards in the front have a triangle cutout part on their sides - for better water crossing and to avoid sideskirts "opening". Note that armor plates cover of engines are open. Another reason why TB is stupid.

pBxwlx2yiew.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/13/2018 at 10:27 PM, Jim Warford said:

 

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....       

 

SU-122-54%20Displayed%20at%20Krasnodar_3

             

 

122mm_BR-471D_BR-471B_1.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

UVZ started work on robo-tank on an alternative Armata chassis - T-72.

UVZ are developing a family of offensive robot-combat vehicles on the basis of the T-72B3. It should retain combat capability after suffering 15 RPG hits. Armata platform was deemed too expensive.

 

 

What the complex includes:

  Reveal hidden contents

Combat Vehicle #1:

 

Mass: 50 tons.

Main armament: D-414 125mm L/32 gun. It has a shortened barrel length of 4,000mm.

Secondary armament: 7.62mm MG.

Protection: All around protection system against RPGs.

Misc: Dozer.

 

 

Combat vehicle #2:

 

Main armament: RPO-2 "Shmel-M" incendiary/thermobaric rockets.

Secondary armament: 7.62mm MG.

Protection: All around protection system against RPGs.

Misc: Dozer.

 

 

Combat vehicle #3:

 

Main armament: Dual 30mm 2A42 cannons with 1,000 shells. And RPO-2 "Shmel-M".

Secondary armament: 7.62mm MG.

Protection: All around protection system against RPGs.

Misc: Dozer.

 

 

Combat Vehicle #4:

 

Main armament: 16 thermobaric 220mm unguided rockets with a coverage of 25,000 sq.m.

Secondary armament: 7.62mm MG.

Protection: All around protection system against RPGs.

Misc: Dozer.

 

=================================================

 

To control these vehicles, a T-72B3 will also be converted to a remote control center, also fitted with the all-around protection system.

It is assumed that every robot (the T-72B3 control center) will be able to control vehicles to up to 3 kilometers.

Maximum speed of the robots - 40km/h.

 

Other than that, there are intentions to create a special BTR-T for the protection group, also on the basis of the T-72B3. It will fit 8 men.

 

 

 

Other than that, they note that the Armata currently costs more than $6.8 million, while a T-72 costs $1.2 million.

Attempts to create a robotized Armata were made, and partially demonstrated a few months ago, but later came a decision to partially freeze the Armata project and go full speed ahead with the T-72. 

The robotization project could be a part of that, and it definitely makes sense to utilize old platforms for robots instead of brand new ones. For example, western attempts (US and Israel) to create robotized wingmen have quite a heavy focus on conversion of outdated M113 platforms.

 

Source:

https://www.rbc.ru/politics/08/08/2018/5b62d8979a794742d5e293fd?from=center_3

delete this, it is a fake. Check gurkhans blog for details. They found presentation (I posted it earlier in this thread) and made a bs news from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Why dafuq did the IS-7 have 2 fixed/static rear facing machine guns?

That is, other than emergency propulsion.

Because tankers do not trust infantry to correctly form protective screen? I mean until 1945 it is main problem of the Soviet tanks corps that infatry divisions wouldn't keep up with tanks .

According Andrey Ulanov GABTU received counrless demands from  tankers to increase amount of machineguns and trophy MG42 are often covered turrets or hull of T-34-85,SU-85/100 and IS-2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, That_Baka said:

Because tankers do not trust infantry to correctly form protective screen? I mean until 1945 it is main problem of the Soviet tanks corps that infatry divisions wouldn't keep up with tanks .

According Andrey Ulanov GABTU received counrless demands from  tankers to increase amount of machineguns and trophy MG42 are often covered turrets or hull of T-34-85,SU-85/100 and IS-2.

Yeah but what's the point of having them fixed? It would thus make more sense to just turn the turret around and use the coax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...