Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Akula_941 said:

Retiv i need the source link of this plz

Photo by Alexey Ivanov, TRC "Zvezda"

 

No direct link because fuck Zvezda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of many proposed/tested upgrades for BTR-80

VfFJW.jpg

Unmanned turret with 14.5 KPVT and full ammunition load moved from hull to RCWS, plus upgraded protection/armor.

 

Older variant (without RCWS, with original turret), Chechnya, 2000

gkGHD.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2S25M Sprut-SDM-1, claimed that Indonesia is interested in it.

https://rg.ru/2018/08/21/novyj-legkij-tank-sverhzashchishchennyj-sprut-pokazali-na-armii-2018.html

 

Model at Army 2018

1_51c965a5.jpg

 

Spoiler

3_586004d9.jpg

 

8_836fc2f3.jpg

 

6_c2c020ec.jpg

Also claimed that it can still swim even with that add-on armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2018 at 6:34 PM, eggs benedict said:

Is that a fire control radar on the rop of ohitnik's ammo box?

/.../

Okhotnik turret from different angle, part of placard is visible where it says that this RCWS have a radar, but range of it is hard to see.

IVP7Y.jpg

 

UPD - more, bigger photos. 600 meters max range claimed for radar. Although it have thermal imager, so i see no point in radar.

Spoiler

UwfaSJR.jpg

 

tCsNGEt.jpg

 

xJR7BX8.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Single-pin tracks are much harder to break by torsional forces on the track, thanks to the large number and size of points where the pin is subjected to shear forces under such a loading.

55d7d68427d4a.jpg

Double-pin tracks are easier to break by loading like this as they only have the center guide connector and end connectors.

m4sample_03.jpg

That in my opinion is the case. I Don't have any hard evidence to back it up right now.

This is also in my opinion why single-pin tracks are preferred for hard, broken ground where the track is liable to ride on large rocks unevenly, applying torsion to the track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

That in my opinion is the case

I think the same. But why we see the broken 2-pin track from T-64 and not broken 2-pin track from Obj.219? This is curious for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 64 has narrower knife wheels, which remained intact and effectively 'cut' the track. The 219 has wider wheels, the outer one of which got wrecked. The wider wheels support the track more against uneven loading, and the energy spent on breaking the wheel prevented it from breaking the track.

 

Again, this is just informed conjecture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

The 64 has narrower knife wheels, which remained intact and effectively 'cut' the track. The 219 has wider wheels, the outer one of which got wrecked. The wider wheels support the track more against uneven loading, and the energy spent on breaking the wheel prevented it from breaking the track.

 

Again, this is just informed conjecture.

Thank you, it seems to be true. Before any other information, i think we can stick to this version

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, was the damage done from mines/grenades or just driving around on rough terrain? I cant read the caption, but the hole beneath each tank would suggest explosives were involved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lord_James said:

To be clear, was the damage done from mines/grenades or just driving around on rough terrain? I cant read the caption, but the hole beneath each tank would suggest explosives were involved. 

written there "Result of tank's tracks explosions on the T-72, Obj.219 and T-64A in equal conditions". 

psb4wTlWlHZkBMGLzRSxWE7nTvYuhexmvvR2KMhv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AssaultPlazma said:

What are " Kharkovite's"? 

 

Soviet tank development in the second half of the Cold War was... interesting.  NATO intelligence assumed that the T-64->T-72->T-80 represented a continuous development of better and better tanks.  In reality, they were three parallel developments.  This obviously didn't make any sense from a logistical standpoint.  It was driven by political considerations and different factions of engineers trying to grab as much glory as possible for their design bureau.  The article "Why Three Tanks" by Stephen "Cookie" Sewell in this edition of Armor magazine explains it in more detail.

 

The "Kharkovites" were the faction out of Kharkov, Ukraine, responsible for the T-64 tank.  This amazing thread by LoooSeR helps explain the differences between the three tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, but eventually the glorious T-72s also dropped the single pin tracks, and started using the "inferior" double pin :)

 

BTW, in my opinion, the 219 wasnt any better than the T-64 in that test, because even if the track didnt separate immediately in the explosion, it would surely do after traveling a few meters further.

Then, without track the T-64 is almost impossible to tow thanks to its narrow wheels. On the other hand, the wheel is not damaged significantly, so with spare links, the track can be repaired and the tank will be operational again. On the 219, the wheel is destroyed, and such repairs arent possible, but the tank can be towed away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
    • By Collimatrix
      At the end of January, 2018 and after many false starts, the Russian military formally announced the limited adoption of the AEK-971 and AEK-973 rifles.  These rifles feature an unusual counterbalanced breech mechanism which is intended to improve handling, especially during full auto fire.  While exotic outside of Russia, these counter-balanced rifles are not at all new.  In fact, the 2018 adoption of the AEK-971 represents the first success of a rifle concept that has been around for a some time.

      Earliest Origins


      Animated diagram of the AK-107/108
       
      Balanced action recoil systems (BARS) work by accelerating a mass in the opposite direction of the bolt carrier.  The countermass is of similar mass to the bolt carrier and synchronized to move in the opposite direction by a rack and pinion.  This cancels out some, but not all of the impulses associated with self-loading actions.  But more on that later.

      Long before Soviet small arms engineers began experimenting with BARS, a number of production weapons featured synchronized masses moving in opposite directions.  Generally speaking, any stabilization that these actions provided was an incidental benefit.  Rather, these designs were either attempts to get around patents, or very early developments in the history of autoloading weapons when the design best practices had not been standardized yet.  These designs featured a forward-moving gas trap that, of necessity, needed its motion converted into rearward motion by either a lever or rack and pinion.
       

      The French St. Etienne Machine Gun
       

      The Danish Bang rifle
       
      At around the same time, inventors started toying with the idea of using synchronized counter-masses deliberately to cancel out recoil impulses.  The earliest patent for such a design comes from 1908 from obscure firearms designer Ludwig Mertens:


       
      More information on these early developments is in this article on the matter by Max Popenker.
       
      Soviet designers began investigating the BARS concept in earnest in the early 1970s.  This is worth noting; these early BARS rifles were actually trialed against the AK-74.
       

      The AL-7 rifle, a BARS rifle from the early 1970s
       
      The Soviet military chose the more mechanically orthodox AK-74 as a stopgap measure in order to get a small-caliber, high-velocity rifle to the front lines as quickly as possible.  Of course, the thing about stopgap weapons is that they always end up hanging around longer than intended, and forty four years later Russian troops are still equipped with the AK-74.

      A small number of submachine gun prototypes with a BARS-like system were trialed, but not mass-produced.  The gas operated action of a rifle can be balanced with a fairly small synchronizer rack and pinion, but the blowback action of a submachine gun requires a fairly large and massive synchronizer gear or lever.  This is because in a gas operated rifle a second gas piston can be attached to the countermass, thereby unloading the synchronizer gear.

      There are three BARS designs of note from Russia:

      AK-107/AK-108
       


      The AK-107 and AK-108 are BARS rifles in 5.45x39mm and 5.56x45mm respectively.  These rifles are products of the Kalashnikov design bureau and Izmash factory, now Kalashnikov Concern.  Internally they are very similar to an AK, only with the countermass and synchronizer unit situated above the bolt carrier group.


       

      Close up of synchronizer and dual return spring assemblies

      This is configuration is almost identical to the AL-7 design of the early 1970s.  Like the more conventional AK-100 series, the AK-107/AK-108 were offered for export during the late 1990s and early 2000s, but they failed to attract any customers.  The furniture is very similar to the AK-100 series, and indeed the only obvious external difference is the long tube protruding from the gas block and bridging the gap to the front sight.
       
      The AK-107 has re-emerged recently as the Saiga 107, a rifle clearly intended for competitive shooting events like 3-gun.
       

       
      AEK-971

      The rival Kovrov design bureau was only slightly behind the Kalashnikov design bureau in exploring the BARS concept.  Their earliest prototype featuring the system, the SA-006 (also transliterated as CA-006) also dates from the early 1970s.



      Chief designer Sergey Koksharov refined this design into the AEK-971.  The chief refinement of his design over the first-generation balanced action prototypes from the early 1970s is that the countermass sits inside the bolt carrier, rather than being stacked on top of it.  This is a more compact installation of the mechanism, but otherwise accomplishes the same thing.


       

      Moving parts group of the AEK-971

      The early AEK-971 had a triangular metal buttstock and a Kalashnikov-style safety lever on the right side of the rifle.



      In this guise the rifle competed unsuccessfully with Nikonov's AN-94 design in the Abakan competition.  Considering that a relative handful of AN-94s were ever produced, this was perhaps not a terrible loss for the Kovrov design bureau.

      After the end of the Soviet Union, the AEK-971 design was picked up by the Degtyarev factory, itself a division of the state-owned Rostec.



      The Degtyarev factory would unsuccessfully try to make sales of the weapon for the next twenty four years.  In the meantime, they made some small refinements to the rifle.  The Kalashnikov-style safety lever was deleted and replaced with a thumb safety on the left side of the receiver.


       
      Later on the Degtyarev factory caught HK fever, and a very HK-esque sliding metal stock was added in addition to a very HK-esque rear sight.  The thumb safety lever was also made ambidextrous.  The handguard was changed a few times.



      Still, reception to the rifle was lukewarm.  The 2018 announcement that the rifle would be procured in limited numbers alongside more conventional AK rifles is not exactly a coup.  The numbers bought are likely to be very low.  A 5.56mm AEK-972 and 7.62x39mm AEK-973 also exist.  The newest version of the rifle has been referred to as A-545.

      AKB and AKB-1


      AKB-1


      AKB


      AKB, closeup of the receiver

      The AKB and AKB-1 are a pair of painfully obscure designs designed by Viktor Kalashnikov, Mikhail Kalashnikov's son.  The later AKB-1 is the more conservative of the two, while the AKB is quite wild.

      Both rifles use a more or less conventional AK type bolt carrier, but the AKB uses the barrel as the countermass.  That's right; the entire barrel shoots forward while the bolt carrier moves back!  This unusual arrangement also allowed for an extremely high cyclic rate of fire; 2000RPM.  Later on a burst limiter and rate of fire limiter were added.  The rifle would fire at the full 2000 RPM for two round bursts, but a mere 1000 RPM for full auto.

      The AKB-1 was a far more conventional design, but it still had a BARS.  In this design the countermass was nested inside the main bolt carrier, similar to the AEK-971.

      Not a great deal of information is available about these rifles, but @Hrachya H wrote an article on them which can be read here.
       
       
    • By LostCosmonaut
      Something I haven't seen discussed on this site before; Soviet/Russian efforts to domesticate foxes by breeding for domesticated behavior. Article in Scientific American here; https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/mans-new-best-friend-a-forgotten-russian-experiment-in-fox-domestication/
       
      Interesting that there were physical changes correlated with the behavioral changes the Russians bred for.

       
      Buy one for only $7,000! https://domesticatedsilverfox.weebly.com/aquiring-a-tame-fox.html
       

      (not entirely unlike a dog I guess)
       
       
      It seems like a pretty cool idea to drunk me, though I don't have a spare 7,000 dollars laying around (thanks student loans!). Also, I don't think my cat would approve.
       
×