Militarysta

@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
 

Thanks to Paweł Przeździecki (Przebzdziello on  TnakNet)
 
a few pages later on the same report:

I have been searching for informations regarding current Chinese APFSDS ammo for a discussion in another forum... seems interesting.
 

 
The older APFSDS design had a windshield and a copy of the M829A2's "stepped tip" to maximize penetrator length. According to the original poster, the left APFSDS shown in this image has a WHA penetrator, the other one has a DU one and is therefore shorter (due to keeping a desired velocity I assume).
 



 
The Type II M APFSDS has a penetration of 220 mm at 66.4° at 2,000 metres or roughly 550 mm along the line-of-sight. It has a muzzle velocity of 1,700 m/s and is overall a bit lighter than the DTW-125. The PTZ98 II round for the 120 mm smoothbore gun has similar armor penetration, but a lower muzzle velocity of only 1,660 m/s... so it either has better flight characteristics or a longer penetrator (overall length of projectile is 655 mm, so penetrator length most likely is less than 600 mm). The 105 mm DTW2 APFSDS penetrates 150 mm at 71° at 2,000 m, which is roughly 460 mm along the line of sight.
125 mm BTJ1 HEAT penetrates 180 mm steel at 68° or roughly 480 mm unsloped steel, so performance seems somewhat poor.
 
 

125 mm Type IIM or 125 mm DTW-125 APFSDS in front, at the left side is an old 105 mm APFSDS not being sold anymore
 

Old 105 mm APFSDS has a penetration of 460 mm (220 mm at 61.4°) and a muzzle velocity of 1,530 m/s.
 

The 105 mm BTA2 APFSDS seems to be nearly identical to the DTW2, but has a much higher penetration 220 mm at 66.42° at 2,000 m. That's about 550 mm along the line of sight! Muzzle velocity is slightly better than on the DTW2 and old APFSDS (1,540 m/s instead of 1,530 m/s). The projectile is much longer (703 mm vs 636 mm), but the weight has slightly decreased from 6 kg to 5.9 kg for the projectile. Do the Chinese utilize composite sabots?
 

125 mm DTW-125 APFSDS on the top, unknown two other rounds.  Note that the 120 mm APFSDS seems to be a lot more beefy (longer road) than the previous PTZ89 II. The 105 mm APFSDS also has a "DTW" name, so it is probably the DTW2 above.
 
These two photos confirm that the upper APFSDS is indeed the DTW-125
 
The APFSDS round is called DTW-125 and supposedly capable of penetrating 220 mm steel at 68.5° slope and 2,000 m distance, which is roughly equal to 600 mm along the line of sight. The muzzle velocity is 1,740 m/s and the overall weight of the complete round (both parts) is 21.36 kilograms. Dispersion at 1,000 m is 0.25 x 0.25 m on average. Some claim that the DTW-125 and DTW10-125 APFSDS rounds can only be fired from the Type 99(A) tanks.
 

For the VT-4 the Chinese manufacturer NORINCO is offering the BTA4 APFSDS. I wonder if this is equivalent to the Type II M or the DTW-125...
The size comparison between BTA4 and BTJ1 HEAT suggests that the BTA4 APFSDS is identical in length to the Type II M. I personally would asusme that Type II M and DTW-125 were identical (seem to be similar sized), if it wasn't for the differences in armor penetration and velocity. So that points to a stronger powder charge or a composite sabot.
 

The latest round is the DTW10-125, which has a slightly longer penetrator than the previous DTW-125. Supposedly it has no ballistic cap, but the penetrator extends into the tip. I remember reading similar patents from the 1980s or 1990s suggesting this layout, doesn't seem to be cutting edge. No performance data, but claimed to be 650-700 mm.
 
 
 

Yes.
As short term solution:
APFSDS "Ryś" whit Plansee rods:

 
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... 
 
 
 
 

Nice model work.
Very very accurate

Ob.477A1 "Nota"
Well better photo then "bulgarian ones:
 

 
 

Ob.477A1 "Nota"
Well better photo then "bulgarian ones:
 

 
 

Ob.477A1 "Nota"
Well better photo then "bulgarian ones:
 

 
 

Ob.477A1 "Nota"
Well better photo then "bulgarian ones:
 

 
 

Nice model work.
Very very accurate

Nice model work.
Very very accurate

Nice model work.
Very very accurate

Turret armour weight 8,9t (including ciitadele from RHA plates)
 

 
 

It's Hebrew, I know, but it does give a good view on how the Magach 7 looks like from the inside.
This is a spare parts catalog for the Magach 7 electric systems, and it's 363 pages long:
https://www.idf.il/media/12750/000908363-מגח-7-מערכת-חמשל-חדישה.pdf

Germans few yers ago had shown poles (and not only) abilities AMAP-ADS to stop DM63 from <200m distance.
The target was empty Leopard-2A4 hull and turret (only whit armour + ADS). There was sevral shoots from 120mm DM-63.
No perforation, the deepest mark from rebound long-rod have circa 50-80mm deep (mesured by hand for one polish officer there so inacurrate).
Anyway - ADS is able to stop long-rod even whit Vmuzzel = 1700m/s

My offcial statsment is this:
"Całość powyższych szacunków można zawrzeć w wartościach odporności między 450 a 500 mm stali przeciw amunicji kinetycznej oraz prawdopodobnie aż do około 850 mm stali przeciw amunicji kumulacyjnej dla wersji Leoparda 2 od 2A0 do „wczesnego” 2A4"
translate:
All possible estimatous based on sevral facts can be put in to armour values between 450 and 500mm RHA vs APFSDS and propably up to 850mm RHA vs HEAT - for Leopard 2 version  between 2A0 and erly 2A4.

How to get fucken angry polish PT-91 manufactory and other T-72 lovers.
Polish army hard data about MTBF for polish 30 old yers Leopard 2A4 and 20-25 old yers PT-91:

 

 
EDIT:

data above are from ALL 128 polish Leopard 2A4 and for 144 PT-91 tanks (68% PT-91 fleet in army) during 2,5 yers exploatation
 
Yes, T-72 is crap.
yes, PT-91 is crap too
 

BTW:
 
How many NERA layers is visible on hull SPz Puma?
Up to 3?!
 

 
 
again 3:
 

 
 

o.O

How to get fucken angry polish PT-91 manufactory and other T-72 lovers.
Polish army hard data about MTBF for polish 30 old yers Leopard 2A4 and 20-25 old yers PT-91:

 

 
EDIT:

data above are from ALL 128 polish Leopard 2A4 and for 144 PT-91 tanks (68% PT-91 fleet in army) during 2,5 yers exploatation
 
Yes, T-72 is crap.
yes, PT-91 is crap too
 

How to get fucken angry polish PT-91 manufactory and other T-72 lovers.
Polish army hard data about MTBF for polish 30 old yers Leopard 2A4 and 20-25 old yers PT-91:

 

 
EDIT:

data above are from ALL 128 polish Leopard 2A4 and for 144 PT-91 tanks (68% PT-91 fleet in army) during 2,5 yers exploatation
 
Yes, T-72 is crap.
yes, PT-91 is crap too
 

Polish simple NERA armour= better cut-viev:
 

 
the same descibe here:
 
 

 

 

Polish simple NERA armour= better cut-viev:
 

 
the same descibe here:
 
 

 

 

In the Czech trials for a BMP-2 replacement, the Puma IFV proved to be more accurate than all other contenders. It hit the highest number of targets during the static and also during the dynamic (fire on the move) tests. The trials lasted six weeks and included firing trials, high speed driving on roads, traveling cross-country, climbing, crossing ditches, wading through water and other tests.
The manufacturing companies hope to copy the Leopard 2's success and to start a Puma user's group responsible for suggesting upgrades, sharing operational experience, etc. PSM offers that all Pumas for the Czech Army would be assembeled locally and even some components for the German Puma would be made in the Czech Republic (currently some of the cables and parts of the fire suppression system are already made by Czech suppliers - in the future this also could include the tracks). Seems like a cost-cutting measure, but that may be the solution to make the Puma affordable (also make it cheaper for Germany) . On average wages in Germany are 3.64 times as high as in the Czech Republic (data from 2014), but it might mean that some jobs are outsourced from Germany (unless there is enough demand for tracks to keep KMW busy). It is possible to easily create other Puma variants such as a recce vehicle and an armored ambulance based on the Puma's hull.
 
Btw. the Spike-launcher to be added to the Puma IFV will be armored to resist enemy fire.
 

Polish simple NERA armour= better cut-viev:
 

 
the same descibe here:
 
 

 

 

Very very good video from polish SPH Krab:
 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B07EVig2xQ8FdDZSWWVoeXdhVFk/view
 
(this video will be removed soon IMHO couse it is inner Polish Army video for artilery unit and there is to mucht shown in term C3 and BMS...)
so enjoy it or copy to another serwer  ;-)