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

Militarysta

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    392

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Militarysta

  1. Contemporary Western Tank Rumble!

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    45 minutes ago, Militarysta said:

    @UP

    TOW-2

    C-G

    ITOW

     

    EDIT:

     

    This 125mm ammo -it's US "black project" of 125mm test APFSDS whit technology of the XM829E1/E2 -so evaluation how good can by Sowiet APFSDS based on build "US 125mm ammo" on best avaibla components. It was XM.... (i will find this marks in my notes and put here).

     

     

    ZMEcTj9.png

     

     

     

     

    This American 125mm APFSDS-T was: XM711 / XM771 

  2. Contemporary Western Tank Rumble!

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    43 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

     

     

    The more interestin think is -how to hell was resistant Leopard 2I armour if it was describe by Sweden as "better" then EAP in Abrams?!

     

    And second think- we know that "Special armour" thickness like in Leopard 2A4 armour cabvity was able to stop LKE1 (DM43) from 2km.

    So no less then 640mm RHA at 2km.

    So meybe it's true:

    tKTV4eu.jpg

     

     

     

  4. Contemporary Western Tank Rumble!

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    @Methos

    Confirm that german special amrmour was not tested in USA:

    https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=msu.31293016483954;view=1up;seq=1

     

    marevelous document about 105mm vs 120mm in USA:

    https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31210024740399;view=1up;seq=1

    "we know that 105mm is shit but it's cost effective"

     

    BTW: Im agree that Leopard 2 is understimeted a lot. IMHO whole think is taken from T14 turret values or fact tahat in Leopard 2AV tehere was no special armour - just "cavity" made by frontplate and backplate - X-rayed by Americans who "discover" there is no special armour there. So propably (it's only my assumption) value for Leo2 is taken from XM1 whit thinner backplate and frontplate in leo-2 (2x 45mm RHA)

    IMHO there is no other logical explanation of sucht value

     

  9. The Leopard 2 Thread

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    1 hour ago, SH_MM said:

    As for the ADS's performance, Jane's Defence Weekly reported the following in early 2017:

    (...) The system has been subject to more than 800 live-fire tests, including three Kornet missiles, more than 535 RPG-7 series RPGs, and five top-attack TOW 2Bs. Threat detection and validation is reported by the company to be greater than 95%, while interception has been stated as 85–90% for anti-tank rockets and more than 80% for ATGWs.

     

    It's not all. Heavy version of AMAP-ADS is able to stop APFSDS-T even from 200m distance.

  13. No, Nozh doesn't work as advertised

    in Ballistics Science Discussion

    Posted

    22 hours ago, Bronezhilet said:

    Why would you try to propel a plate with something that is designed to cut?

     

    I mean, if the goal is to propel a plate at the highest velocity possible, just... make a normal ERA sandwich?

     

     

    Again - nope :-)

     

    The goal is to damage penetrator and brake it for as many parts as it's possible - that's the goal for ERA armour. 

     

    Single heavy plate, or two or even 3 plates (Relikt) moving whit opposide direction and whit diffrent speed are one solution - very good known on west and able to overcome. I mean western long-rods whit jacked penetrators are higly resistant for flying one or two heavy plates. Of course not immune. What worse - special tip in penetrator is able to dismont ERA tiles whithout ignite it. What even worse - there are present segmented and jacked rods rods (DM53, DM63) able to evercome ERA in sevral ways. Bad news for calssic ER whit flying plates. 

    And now we have Knive ERA when you have sevral DIFFRENT factors which are damaging long rods - firs is linear SC -one or two of them will have optimum stand-off and will be able to heavy damage Long-rod or even cut it in one place. Second factors are forced fragmantation of external ERA casette - sevral heavy fragments will hit penetrator after it will be damage by one or two linear SC and what even worse -after it tip will be in armour. So long-rod just MUST be broken in one or even sevral places. Bad news for long-rods...

     

     

  15. No, Nozh doesn't work as advertised

    in Ballistics Science Discussion

    Posted

    On 27.09.2017 at 7:58 PM, Bronezhilet said:

    So, if you're reading this I assume you know what Nozh is and how it's supposed to work. Just a quick tl;dr to refresh your minds: Nozh is supposed to work by cutting a penetrator with the use of multiple shaped charges, like this: 

     

     

    So why does Nozh 'work'?

     

     

    Nozh just gets one giant fucking "...what?" from me.

    @Collimatrix

     

    It's really simple - Knive is not czech EFA. It''s work on difrent principles.

     

    http://dziennikzbrojny.pl/artykuly/art,5,23,8552,wojska-ladowe,wyposazenie,ukrainski-pancerz-reaktywny-noz-czesc-ii-noz-i-duplet

     

    Effectivnes of the Knive ERA is based on foced fregmentation the thick frontplate of ERA casette. No magic there, no mysterious factors - only one or two linear SC in Knive module have optimum stand-off to damage (not even "cut") penetrator BUT - those linear SC will formed about 7 to 14 heavy mettal elements who where hit from under APFSDS. And thats the point - tip of rod placed IN armour, after tip - heavy damage by SC penetrator and after that - strike form "bottom" by sevral formed metal elements from thic k(at least 15mm) ERA  frontplate.

  16. Polish Armoured Vehicles

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    On 13.12.2017 at 8:07 PM, Ramlaen said:

    Any idea what the new ammunition will be?

     

    Yes.

    As short term solution:

    APFSDS "Ryś" whit Plansee rods:

    ISzA78I.png

     

    As long-term solution - new 125mm APFSDS whit composite sabot and rod lenght equal to cira ~58cm. The problem is that polish amunition industry is looking composite sabot for 125mm on short list stays: USA whit it's "black project" for 125mm, France and one more partner. This long-term solution is IMHO not very sure... 

     

     

     

     

  17. Polish Armoured Vehicles

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    Hello back ;-)

     

    I) Polish Leopard 2PL program have one year delay couse two polish factories (ZM Tarnów and PCO)  where unable to take technology from German Rheinmettal in propper time. So not 2020 but 2021 as DOI for 2APL.

     

    II) Polish T-72M1 and PT-91 will be modernisated. At least 223 PT-91 and ~120 T-72M1. So 6 batalions (polish Tk.Bn have 58 tanks in 4 companies - eacht 14 tanks + 2 tanks in Bn.HQ)  Sevral facts:

     

    1) Base upgrade for polish T-72M1 will be almoust the same as russian T-72BA.  After that tanks will be upgrade to other wariat - common whit PT-91. So firstly - deep rebuild whit new APU, night vision (Liswarta nad Radomka from PCO), Deugra, modernisated AZ, newo fuel system, new electric system, new consoles for all tan crew members, new smoke charges and Obra-3, and other minor changes. After this T-72M1 will be obligatory upgraded to PT-91 standard.   

    2) All tanks will have new ERAWA-2 whit two type casettes - heavy and light (aluminia alloys). No Knive/Duplet will be introduced couse weight reson and fact that in "light" version of Knive there was no diffrent protection then in ERAWA-2. Of course heavy Duplet is better but due to weight reson it's imposible to put it on PT-91 or T-72M1. And light version is  on par whit K5 and  lest's say  - not so good in two areas as ERAWA-2. Including tanderm warhed :)))    So upgreaded ERAWA will stay whit PT-91 and T-72M1 couse ist still good solution. What funny - Knive wasttested in Poland and ERAWA-3 will be based on it, but whole problem is whit obligatory heavy ERA casettes for Knive/Duplet - in this (heavy...) solutions is hidden Kive/Duplet effetivnes.

    3) Polish factory give polish MoD sevral option for modernisation. Base level (rebuild only) will cost circa 1,1mln USD and after this we have sevral options whit many diffrent components including FCS from France, Turkey or Israeli, 2A46MS from Slovakia, thre diffrent stabilisation system (mostly EPS) and new turret ring. Of course there are many options. Rumors says that middle version (Savan-15, 2A46MS, EPS Albatross, new turret ring, etc) will cost like combat Rosomak M1M so circa 13mln PLN so circa 3,82mln USD per tank. The most advanced version is like PT-91M2+ whit new power-pack whit new engine and ESM.

    Before june polish MoD will chose what range of modernisation and in what cost will be done. Propably wole program for at least ~350 tanks will be asigned on MSPO2018. 

     

     

  25. The Leopard 2 Thread

    in Mechanized Warfare

    Posted

    1) hull ammo rack is placed at sucht angle in to longitiudal axis. And rack lenght is <1050mm

    2) I had mesured it twice on two diffrent Leos-2A4 and it's 600-620mm LOS.

    3) lecelrc hull is really hard to estimatous. I had truied it without measure real tank:

    c8d5c47ae0789.jpg

     

     

    And here is mucht better job done by guy who was sitting in Leclerc:

    3dcce46d20383.jpg

     

×
×
  • Create New...