Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
LoooSeR

Ukrainian armor - Oplot-M, T-64M Bulat and other.

Recommended Posts

   Losses of AFV of Ukrainian army during 2014-2016 anti-terrorist operation (MoD statistics).

YbSJPrP.jpg

Black - destroyed, red - damaged (can be repaired). Left is IFV, then tanks, APCs, others.

 

   Sources of losses:

5HI28qS.jpg

   Most common is artillery and MRLS fire (~45%), infantry weapons (RPG and small arms) - 17%, enemy tanks and IFVs - 14%, IED/mines - 13%, ATGMs - ~11%.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Meplat said:

Do you think we'll see a move from Eastern/ComBloc patterns toward Western or (ideally) original designs?

   By who? Who will move from Eastern patterns to Western ones? Ukraine is not in the shape to create original design and put it into production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stimpy75 said:

@Looser

İ have this pic from a T-64 book

could you plz tell me what is written esscpecially the vehicle at the bottom with bustle mounted AL

Spoiler

zOu4M2S.jpg

 

T-64BV modeled in 2015 by A. Kostur. T-64BM Bulat modeled in 2015 by A. Kostur.
Variant of deep modernization of T-64 modeled in 2015 by A. Kostur.


Also, if you are really interested - you can check this untranslated book about T-64 with big numbers of drawing and photos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you all have seen this before. This is a chart that shows of the technical details of the BM Oplot tank and VT4 tank.  Richard Gao over at the SinoDefense Forum was so kind enough to translate the original chart:

 

COMPARISON OF SPECS BETWEEN VT4 AND OPLOT

 

I am not sure if about the protection values.  According to the chart, the turret front and hull front of the Oplot are rated at:

 

KE(3BM42/OFL120F1)>= 1100 mm**
CE(<Kornet-E>) >= 1300 mm**  

 

As far as I know, the 3BM42 has the ability to penetrate roughly 500 mm of RHA (260 BHN?) at 2000 m. The OFL120F1 penetrates around 560-600 of RHA (260 BHN?) at 2000 m. Could anyone  please explain this information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you tell me how to understand even the information alone (if we let the exact ammo type aside). How can the armour protection be rated to 1100 mm for an ammo with 500 mm penetration? I understand that these values are more or less relative due to the nature of the armor being no RHA at all but still what does it mean? That it needs 2+ hits into the exactly same place to penetrate or what is the meaning of such value? I understand simple protected/non-protected but not to this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laviduce said:

 Could anyone  please explain this information?

 

Yes, it's marketing fairytails. Knive ERA is well known and abilities to stop APFSDS are known too. Nope it does not work in sucht way on most covered by ERA area.

And without a lot of RHA before and after Knive efectivens is less then old polish ERAWA-2 ERA. Knive/Nozh ERA abilitiest to protect are highly depend on place where SC/penetrator hit casette.

And no way that Knive overcome Kornet. This is possible only for low-hight part of frontall hull module, but not in it's upper part par or on turret.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Militarysta said:

 

Yes, it's marketing fairytails. Knive ERA is well known and abilities to stop APFSDS are known too. Nope it does not work in sucht way on most covered by ERA area.

And without a lot of RHA before and after Knive efectivens is less then old polish ERAWA-2 ERA. Knive/Nozh ERA abilitiest to protect are highly depend on place where SC/penetrator hit casette.

And no way that Knive overcome Kornet. This is possible only for low-hight part of frontall hull module, but not in it's upper part par or on turret.

 

Its Duplet ERA. That explains the resistance against Tandem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Laviduce said:

Not sure if you all have seen this before. This is a chart that shows of the technical details of the BM Oplot tank and VT4 tank.  Richard Gao over at the SinoDefense Forum was so kind enough to translate the original chart:

So basically, the VT4 is a way more advanced tank. That was to be expected. One thing is surprising though... Main gun seems like it is based on old 2A46, not the much better 2A46M... asymmetric recoil mechanism is not good for accuracy. Also no quick change barrel... This is very strange, since 2A46M is also quite old. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, alanch90 said:

Its Duplet ERA. That explains the resistance against Tandem. 

No, it's not. On Bulat its Knive not Duplet. And both of them have efficency depend on place (hight) of hit in casette and present (or not) hard 20mm+ HHS outern plate in ERA casette.

Share this post


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

No, it's not. On Bulat its Knive not Duplet. And both of them have efficency depend on place (hight) of hit in casette and present (or not) hard 20mm+ HHS outern plate in ERA casette.

Yes but the document is about BM Oplot, not Bulat. And Duplet is explicitly mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, heretic88 said:

So basically, the VT4 is a way more advanced tank. That was to be expected. One thing is surprising though... Main gun seems like it is based on old 2A46, not the much better 2A46M... asymmetric recoil mechanism is not good for accuracy. Also no quick change barrel... This is very strange, since 2A46M is also quite old. 

 

What is *doubly* weird is that the Chinese gun internals are hard-chromed. The 2A46 family did not introduce that until the 2A46M - so the Chinese made the effort to modify production tooling and procedures to allow a good chroming, but didn't also copy the rather simple front-change screw mechanism that is very well known? Really is a baffling combination of gun "features".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, alanch90 said:

Yes but the document is about BM Oplot, not Bulat. And Duplet is explicitly mentioned.

 

Oh, sorry, my mistake. Indeed it's Oplot-M so Duplet ERA. It change a lot. Oplot-M and T is well protected indeed - propably in  top.

Share this post


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

 

What is *doubly* weird is that the Chinese gun internals are hard-chromed. The 2A46 family did not introduce that until the 2A46M - so the Chinese made the effort to modify production tooling and procedures to allow a good chroming, but didn't also copy the rather simple front-change screw mechanism that is very well known? Really is a baffling combination of gun "features".

 

 

Because it is copy of 2A46 gun, not 2A46M. Design is old, with single recoil buffer, short cradle, no fast barrel change feature. But materials, some details, finishing touches could be sinicized. One example is barrel, made with more modern technology than orginal, another one are gun trunnions, that fit in vintage, T-54-style frame mounting, not T-62+ sockets integral to turret front casting. It is a bit of steampunk in it, mix of old and new developments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

 

What is *doubly* weird is that the Chinese gun internals are hard-chromed. The 2A46 family did not introduce that until the 2A46M - so the Chinese made the effort to modify production tooling and procedures to allow a good chroming, but didn't also copy the rather simple front-change screw mechanism that is very well known? Really is a baffling combination of gun "features".

Ukrainian KBA-3 is also strange... While it is a copy of 2A46M, the barrel isnt chromed! Weird... And even though on the chinese gun the asymmetric recoil mechanism seems to be a big disadvantage, it still has better dispersion... I think there are lot more improvements inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway where did the table come from? Is that from Thailand? 

 

Also any idea why only several features of VT-4 are deleted from the table and nothing from Oplot-M? The selection of what was deleted is also pretty weird for me (such as engine dimensions - why would that be secret?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Beer said:

Anyway where did the table come from? Is that from Thailand? 

 

Also any idea why only several features of VT-4 are deleted from the table and nothing from Oplot-M? The selection of what was deleted is also pretty weird for me (such as engine dimensions - why would that be secret?)

Perhaps because VT-4 ended up being selected?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   Hey look, another Azovets!

http://arey.net.ua/Don

Quote

Don is designed to be a heavy armored personnel carrier (APC). But it is also much more. Don comes equipped with a new hybrid power plant, a newly-designed combat module — the Sword of Arey, a digital combat management system—Checkmate, and a new and highly reliable system of armor protection.

/.../

 

AioaAzP.png

 

kqOk1cr.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only vaporwave because people from Arey are smart people and they want to insert ceramic fillers to armor.

Spoiler

While MoD wants to see Nozh on these vehicles. :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.


  • 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 delfosisyu
      Hey guys. This is my first post in this forum.
       
       
       
      I want to find out sources for 2 information.
       
       
       
       
      Firstly, a friend of mine told me about the accuracy of T-80B tested in 1980s.
       
       
       
       
       
      T-80B      1000m   1500m     2000m
                      
                      87%       66%       46%
       
       
       
       
       
      I asked him where he found this data. But he told me he forgot where he did find this since too much time passed from that moment.
       
       
       
       
       
       
      The Second one is about Russian ballistic computer's range-finding rate.
       
       
      One day, one of my friends who speaks russian quite well showed me a product info. of russian(maybe ukrainian) gunner's primary sight.
       
       
      It was written that range-finding rate of the sight after laser fired-off 0.3~3.0 seconds. 
       
       
      I totally forgot the address of that product brochure.
       
       
       
      I'd be very appreciated if you help me finding links of these information.
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      I realized that we don't actually have a thread about the British Chieftain tank.  
       
      I posted a bunch of Chieftain related stuff on my site today for anyone who is interested.  The items include:
       
      Magazine Articles
       
      1970 article from ARMOR
      1970 article from IDR  - Chieftain-Main Battle tank for the 1970s
      1976 article from IDR - The Combat-Improved Chieftain – First Impressions
      1976 article from IDR - Improved Chieftain for Iran
       
      Government reports
       
      WO 194-495 Assessment of Weapon System in Chieftain
      WO 341-108 Automotive Branch Report on Chieftain Modifications
      DEFE 15-1183 – L11 Brochure 
      WO 194-463 – Demonstration of Chieftain Gun 
       
      WO 194-1323 – Feasibility study on Burlington Chieftain
×
×
  • Create New...