Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Molota_477

  1. 3 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:



    and again about this, report doesn't contain such scheme, the only scheme of L2 turret in report is this


    there is no any words about 105mm DM23 and P.B, and there is no initial requirement for +-30 arc as i posted real requirements earlier, Milan is not 103mm and there is no info about how tests was done, static or live fire with real ATGW etc


    3 hours ago, Militarysta said:


    I don't understand why is reson to make sucht draws based on data not avaible in this specyfic sources. IMHO better idea will be ad "based on multiple sources" itp No there is risk  that somebody will take this picture as orginally report draw.

    To clarify this point, I post these schemes in weibo for easy illustration purpose, I don't want to post original source pics because the weibo platform is a place full of marketing accounts, if you do not make any process in your posts then they will turn into other peoples money, that's what I dont want to see,and my blog is non-profit account, I only post message to my readers and if any one is interested in details can make comments below posts or PM me.

    In short, it is made by environment.


    As for MILAN, I know its core dia is 95mm, if you mean this point why you don't stress HOT isn't 136mm?

  2. 8 hours ago, SH_MM said:

    Is this snipplet taken from the real document or only made to look as if it was?





    Of course from real documents.

    21 hours ago, Sovngard said:

    So, it looks like an old British declassified DEFE document ...but it is not.

    Not very old, there're some files varied from 1985 to 1990.

  3. 5 minutes ago, SH_MM said:


    Thanks for posting. Very interesting.


    The Schotte Nr. 2 shows that West-Germany worked on a combination of NERA and perforated armor, I wonder if similar armor was used for the later Leopard 2. The name ("Schotte Nr. 2") also suggests that there have been multiple types of "Schotte" (add-on) armor.

    As for the problem of armor type, Swiss had given an answer I think

    Image may contain: text

  4. 1 hour ago, Wiedzmin said:

    yes there is several values, but it is better to give the real quotes and sources references , and not to draw it yourself so that it wouldn't raise questions and suspicions


    and IIRC there no reports with 200mm for turret side from CE

    hmm, I see,

    I will take care on such thing later.

    200mm is based on the table of Chieftain Burlington report, but not accurate value so I just estimated it.

    1 hour ago, Wiedzmin said:

    i only seen this images on otvaga

    For now I only post them on Chinese speaking platform, and have noted about it.

  5. 1 hour ago, Wiedzmin said:

    T 225/3237, main problem that there is no detailed info about 5,7(40 and 60 degree cone) and 8(40 and 60 degree cone) inch warheads, what explosive it used, what was the speed of jet etc, thats why real effectivness of all of those "Biscuits" vs real ATGM/RPG not quite clear

    Thank you! 

    1 hour ago, Wiedzmin said:

    you sure that is CR1 hull ?

    Pretty sure it is. 

    This photo is from the book of CR1 Owners' workshop manual, p29.

  6. 28 minutes ago, Scav said:

    But then the HEAT protection specified in a later document wouldn't be achieved, and "480mm" is again higher than what they settled on for MBT-80 while also not specifying what round it is against.


    28 minutes ago, Scav said:

    That's weird, MBT-80 settled on ~405mm KE requirement and ~850mm CE.

    I don't know where it said, can you give some hints?

    30 minutes ago, Scav said:

    Can you link where you got these weights?

    All my data come from MVEE Report 78013 and 78020, their time frame is 1978.

  7. 6 minutes ago, Liberator said:

    It is strange that the angles are + -25 °, although turret angles have +-30 °. Although perhaps this is due to fact that early data?

    And yet it is interesting whether CR 1 Mk.1 really had a weight 59.5 tons, and CR 1 Mk.2 already had 62 tons. Does anyone have more accurate data on this?

    Indeed the requirement data can not represent the implemented protection level,  the GSR3574 had already restricted the weight is 62 tonnes.



    There are some interesting armor weight data of MBT80 here:

    To against the 430mm KE threat(Original GSR 3572), the turret armor weight —— 6045kg

    As for 480mm KE threat—— 6880kg

    And 540mm KE threat —— 7495kg

    While Challenger only estimated to have 5498kg of armor on the turret.


  8. 8 hours ago, Scav said:

    Because https://fromtheswedisharchives.wordpress.com/2019/01/03/rheinmetall-105-cm-smoothbore-performance/ gives us performance for DM13 APFSDS and what looks to be M111 (32mm core, matches that of M111 and I cannot think of any more probable round that it could refer to).

    The performance figures for a 150mm plate @ 60°:

      Reveal hidden contents



    Interestingly, DM13 penetrates the plate as low as 1329m/s, while M111 fails at 1379m/s, which could indate that atleast against monolithic targets, DM13 performs slightly better.

    It gets even more interesting when we look at the third target, a 40mm plate + 150mm air + 90mm plate (all at 60°)

    Here DM13 has a ~100m/s advantage over M111 (at ~75m/s velocity drop over 1000m that means about 1.25km range advantage).

    I don't think that is M111, it might be some type of experimental sheated APFSDS but with 32mm dia.


    There are plenty data of M111 in Chinese:

    Its V50 of againsting 150mm/60° target is about 1260m/s

    No photo description available.

  9. 1 hour ago, Liberator said:

    Do they say this is the level of protection for frontal arc?

    The initial Equipment  Requirment of GSR3574  defined that CR1's turret must retain the minimum protection requirement of MBT-80, which should withstand 600mm CE and revised 480mm KE within ± 25° front arc.

    But as for hull front, because of the steel structure was too heavy, only required significant improvement against HEAT than Chieftain while KE resistance not less than Chieftain.( Only needed to against 85mm HEAT)



  10. 19 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:

    Biscuit №4 was 406mm thick(50mm of those 406 was RHA backing plate, so 356mm for special armour), whole assembly have weight similar to 5,3 inch steel plate(135mm)

    Interesting that the No.4 array had been mentioned in a report of Chieftain mk5/2, would you mind share the source of this message?  Title of report is ok.

    Image may contain: text

  11. On 5/2/2019 at 9:04 PM, Laviduce said:

    The HL-70 CIV, HL-60 GPS and periscopes (bright green):


      Hide contents




      Hide contents




      Hide contents




      Hide contents




      Hide contents




      Hide contents




      Hide contents




    Gun elevation mechanism (blue) and turret traverse mechanism (salmon):


      Hide contents

    Leclerc_Series_1 gun_turret_traverse_1



      Hide contents

    Leclerc_Series_1 gun_turret_traverse_2



      Hide contents

    Leclerc_Series_1 gun_turret_traverse_4



      Hide contents

    Leclerc_Series_1 gun_turret_traverse_3



      Hide contents

    Leclerc_Series_1 gun_turret_traverse_5



      Hide contents

    Leclerc_Series_1 gun_turret_traverse_6



    Do you have any photo of the gun elevation mech?

  • Create New...