Akula_941

Nyet we are criticising this one
http://sensha-manual.blogspot.com.au/2017/09/the-ho-ri-tank-destroyer.html

Thank you for your warm-hearted welcome! I am actually planning to post some articles regarding some older (IJA) Japanese tanks on the forum, I will always use the original and official archives. I hate cheaters and liars as much as you do

Talk about Type90, i got some information from Chinese document which mention about the armor composite used on Type88 which is the prototype for Type90 recently. Not sure the exact truth but i would like to share.

“Japanese Type88 tank's turret and hull composite armor were trying to use different ceramic material (Alumina、Silicon oxide or Silicon carbide ceramic cut in rectangle or hexagon),each layer using binder to bonded together. The protection of this armor can reach up equal to 400mm thick of armour steel (BK) and is capable of defeat 120mm high density KE projectile (muzzle velocity>1600m/s) fired from 200meters at 0 degree, and also capable to protect against the 120mm HEAT shell which capable of penetrating 600mm of armor.  Besides, there are many of different type of armor plate, the use of ceramic material and it's ability of protection giving the armor research development a new direction”
 

image10  Type88 tank's spaced (composite) armor structure.
陶瓷板=Ceramic plate    毫米=mm
 
Other than this，japan seems are developing some kind of Kevlar composite

It says:"Japan is currently develop a Kevlar fiber with Titanium alloy or aluminum structured multi-layer composite armor "
 
Of course those are just for the prototype of type90, but we can try guessing the armor from this 
 
source:
<<间隔（复合）装甲——现代坦克的主要装甲结构>>(1982)      (Composite armor--the main structure of the armor for modern MBT) (1982)
<<国外复合装甲中非金属材料的应用和研究概况>>(1983)      （Summarize of the use and research of non-metallic material in foreign composite armor）（1983）
 
ft. Akula_941

Oh looks like someone get their ass exposed HARD

Guys, it's not over yet. 

And yes, I do have the original file, but for some obvious reasons I add some watermarks. 
 
Waffentrager is doing the same thing as he did on Warthunder forum. 
He is just bluffing with unknown source screenshots or photoshopped fake “documents”.
He deleted every post arguing the pictures' authenticity to make himself “invulnurable”. 

Well - I did jump to conclusions without doing the proper looking into before sharing what's found online just because at first glance it matches with other material. So albeit harsh words, I did sort of earn the needed-backlash. 

ZhengZhou Police force around 90s

Around the late 80s and early 90s most of the Chinese police force doesn't equip the Type 85(SVD).  
The only choice for medium range fire are picking the Type56semi（SKS）and mount with optic.

Russian assault engineers training:

 
 

DTW-125=125-II（Export version code is BTA-4）
 
 

I'm Miller Z from Waffentrager's personal blog as well as Warthunder forum. I once argued about the Japanese WWII Type 5 gun tank with Waffentrager in his blog and because I post out the correct information, not his fake ones, he deleted my replies. For details and more info you guys here can visit this link(post), it's in Chinese but you can still understand what I said with the help of translators or something else, or from the screenshots I gave. Just want every of you here know that this guy is a FAKE, a totally ignorant one.
 
Here is the link:
http://www.zhuangjiacheliang.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=797&extra=page%3D1
If you can't see the pictures in the link above, here is an alternative way. It's the same article I post somewhere else:
https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404213101531682050

everyone can make a mistake )

You are unlucky - in Wroclaw city where I live there is big LG corp factory whit many Korean Managers. And preatty close there is TAKATA and Toyota big factories.
Funny I know people who know both - Korean and Japaneese language. And I had ask them about this whit kindly ask for translate.
It cost me a lunch. 
 
And it's not about tank but indeed lenses. 
 
You are fucked in the ass misarable piece of shit who misinforms peoples here. Honestly - go to fuck yourself, and as many as it's possible dicks in to ass of you, your family and dog or other pet you have.
GTFO!!!
 
 
 
 
 
 

Considering this was posted by someone new, I had it checked with a translator I know. And yes, this is about cameras, not tanks.
 
Also you can say bullshit and fuck on this forum, welcome to the club.

Waffentrager YOU FAKE BULLSXXT and FXXK OFF

In case you guys here cannot read Japanese:
It says "Height of lens assembly is about 380 mm"
May be taken from a manual of digital camera or sth. else. 
 
 

in short, people crys, shouting , cursing, claiming this whole file is fake, Abrams 900mm vs KE,DU stronk, USA win.

in short, people crys, shouting , cursing, claiming this whole file is fake, Abrams 900mm vs KE,DU stronk, USA win.

OH YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW THE BLOODY SHITSTORM LOOKS LIKE IN ANOTHER SIDE OF THE OCEAN

OH YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW THE BLOODY SHITSTORM LOOKS LIKE IN ANOTHER SIDE OF THE OCEAN

OH YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW THE BLOODY SHITSTORM LOOKS LIKE IN ANOTHER SIDE OF THE OCEAN

OH YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW THE BLOODY SHITSTORM LOOKS LIKE IN ANOTHER SIDE OF THE OCEAN

Wow,. thank you @skylancer-3441. Seems like R. Lindström (accidentally?) uploaded some (formerly?) claissified documents in his original presentation. That confirms that the diagram is real, @Militarysta
 
M1A2 turret was also meant to receive add-on armor...


 
Leclerc armor was very poor:

 
Leopard 2 armor evolution:




 
Turret front of a Leopard 2A5 is about 700-800 mm vs KE, 1,600 to 1,800 mm vs HEAT. The Swedish Strv 122 has a different armor package, providing higher protection levels; the Leopard 2 (flat turret) has 300 - 500 mm vs KE protection, but about 50% of the surface is protected against APFSDS ammo with less than 400 mm penetration into steel only.
Note the last slide: The German prototype offered to Sweden (and maybe also the German tanks) have Pakete (integrated armor pacakges) of the technology generation "B", while the Vors. Modul (Vorsatzmodul, add-on module in front of the armor) has the technology generation "D-2". I suppose Sweden uses a more modern integrated armor pacakge (C, D-1, D-2, D-3) and the same Vorsatzmodul. The German wikipedia (without citing a reference) claims that the German Leopard 2 uses "C technology" armor (so "Pakete"). Maybe that's based on Spielberger's book, I need to take a look at it in the future. The graph in the center of the last slide shows five colors... my guess (based on the graphs at the left and the right:
purple - Leopard 2 from 1979, armor package of the "b" generation (fits the graph on the left); red - Leopard 2 with enhance armor package (1987), which might be "C" generation; yellow - Leopard 2 with enhanced armor package (1992), which might be "D-1" generation; blue - Leopard 2 with armor of the "D-2" generation or armor of the "B" generation with Vorsatzmodul of the "D-2" generation green - Leopard 2 with armor as adopted by Sweden - so probably "C" or "D-1/2/3" base armor with Vorsatzmodul of "D-2" generation  
This would lead to the following protection estimates (please note that it says frontal arc - +30° to -30°, not direct from front):
Leopard 2 - 2A4 (from 1979): 300 mm protection vs KE at 60% of the surface, 400 mm protection vs KE at 25% of the surface Leopard 2A4 (from 1987): 300 mm protection vs KE at 65% of the surface, 400 mm protection vs KE at 55% of the surface, 500 mm protection vs KE at 30% of the surface Leopard 2A4 (from 1992): 350 mm protection vs KE at 93% of the surface, 400 mm protection vs KE at 87% of the surface, 525 mm vs KE at 50% of the surface and 620 mm vs KE at 42% of the surface Leopard 2A5 (prototype?): 620 mm protection vs KE at 65% of the surface, 700 mm protection vs KE at 40% of the surface Leopard 2A5 (production model? Swedish model?): 700 mm protection vs KE at 75% of the surface  
That also confirms that the older Leopard 2 models didn't feature the enhanced side armor found on newer production variants:

 
Btw: "gor" seems to be pentrated, "ub" means to be not penetrated in one of the earlier tables.
 
 

This is identical to the diagram I posted earlier (with a lot less pixels) coming from a presentation on the Swedish tan trials. It seems that the protection level was censored in the Swedish presentation (because it is public access). I guess somebody dug this up out of the Swedish archives? But the file name suggest that it shows the M1A1 HA...
 
That said, it seems to be legit. It would confirm my believes on the armor protection of modern tanks being hugely exaggerated and matches some of the earlier mentioned requirements stated in the British documents.
 
 
PS:

This is another photo from a Swedish presentation. Note how the background matches!

Where did this come from ?
 

CGI video of a danger close interception from either a Type 730 or Type 1130 30x165mm CIWS taking out multiple targets.
 
Hard to tell, the video runs so fast I have trouble counting the amount of fucking barrels.
 

yes it is a railgun, i was gonna hold the news for a while,you guys are sure keep eyes on it huh? ))))
the railgun sea trial is based on 072-III class landing ship CNS-936 'HaiYangShan'

just a prototype sea trial, the gun itself are build by Dr.MaWeiMing's team from University of naval engineering in Wuhan.