Andrei_bt

Soviet study of M113 APC, in general they liked it very much

Simple, cheap, good protection.

And another thing important to those who like history.

1-1 model made in the 1-st half of 70-s of future NATO tank (so called MBT-80).

This was designed to check anti tank weapons in development.

16 hours ago, Collimatrix said:

What period was this project from?  I didn't see a year mentioned in the auto-translated document.

 

I ask because it looks like they're still using the strange, long-necked ammunition similar to what was used in the 115mm gun.

it's I suppose from VNIITransmash

70-s - ealy 80s

maybe has some connection to this -

http://btvt.info/5library/vbtt_79_02_vnii.htm

Interesting Soviet Autoloader project for 1+ m rounds

http://btvt.info/5library/vop_1981_97_az.htm

3 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Comrades posted that on otvaga, so i repost it here.

 

Looks like Oplot use same type of inserts in turret armor as T-80U (plates with cavities filled with something).

 

Worst Korean plackard about T-80U

 

Here is a pic of book that says that plates are steel plates with cavities by Met749, Also shows turret frontal armor dimensions.

Cast cellular filler

early T-80U style -

and -

from - http://btvt.info/3attackdefensemobility/armor.htm

From a new Predator -

What type of APC is this?

great photos , thanks!

it's nothing but fantasy on this pic

it won't work at such angle

On Soviet AP rounds history http://btvt.info/3attackdefensemobility/history_bps.htm

Object 640 “Black Eagle” and it’s successors

The “Object 640” also known as a “Black Eagle” was created in 1990-s by the designers of Omsk KBTM (transport machine building bureau). The tank belongs to a new generation and realizes a lot of innovative constructional decisions and arrangement which differs it from all classical Russian and western tanks. The tank uses the new design turret with low frontal profile and detachable transport and loading module. The armor protection of front hull and turret is modular design. The crew is stationed in the hull below the turret ring and completely separated from ammunition and fuel.

We all know, that it was created in 90s without state financing and led to creation of 2 testing vehicles, than the idea of a whole new tank was abandoned as very complex and budget-unfriendly. But this development continued up to end of 2000-s. Several projects were realized like a T-55M6 upgrade with “black Eagle” components (turret bustle autoloader, reactive armor and so on). But state financed “Burlak” project is more interesting project. The only tank with 2 separately functioning autoloader. T-90 tank was upgraded under this project and experimental tank on T-90 chassis was created.

Well, maybe it’s bad translation but give an idea about this design  - http://btvt.info/7english/640a/640.htm

In my opinnion it decresed radiation protection. And they already had diferent design TKN4 almost ready to be produced

Maybe one of the most original ideas of tank redesign
What to do with old T-55 tanks and T-64 which are planed to be scrapped? It was primary aimed on countries which have difficulties with modern tanks with autoloader service. The ideas presented in 2000-s by the Ukrainian 115 armor repair plant in Kharkov. The plant was without work at that time and created various interesting ideas for it’s survival.
1. Take 1 T-55 and remove turret, place it on T-64 hull – you have T-55-64 hybrid tank
2. Make a survivable heavy IFV from T-55 hull – HIFV-55
3. What to do with an old T-64 turret? Make a remote controlled unmanned defense station with concrete strengthened protection.
Heavy armored fighting vehicle made on the basis of the chassis of the tank T-55
Hybrid variant of the tank T-55-64 (Modernization of the tank T-55)
Battle module with 125 mm tank gun on the base of the turret of the main battle tank T-64 (BM-125-64)

T-64B with panoramic sight -80s -

http://btvt.info/img/2017_t64_panorama.jpg

http://btvt.info/5library/vbtt1988_4_t64_panorama.htm

Yes, maybe,  1-st off all Soviet's gave a requirement for 105 mm gun protection.

Chief's APDS had 130 at /60, don't know how it sows itself against project 432 initial 80+140 armor at /68

as tech. project says it is 80+140 = 112 of steel. Which is ~ 300 mm of steel LOS.

 Suppose it won't.

a bit new on 255

and 299

Объект 299

and heavy IFV - БМП Т-15 (Объект 149), созданная на базе универсальной гусеничной платформы "Армата"

Armata pics inside crew stations

link
Танк Т-14 "Армата" снаружи и внутри

5 hours ago, Militarysta said:

You have been writing:

" An effective cellular type “special armor” installed in turret cavities. (...) Due to “special armor” functioning peculiarities there is an intermediate plate dividing “special armor” cavity into two pats. Into each of them plates with cells filled with polymer resin are installed"

So more or less Oplot-M turret armour is no diffrent then Ob.219AS? Polymer cels in cast BTK-1? Some information sugest completly difrent "special armour" in Oplot ;-) Rather simillar to the on of the T-80UD version whit SiC in steel sheets oraz cermaics in steel sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And how about hull? Factory welding shown obviously Duplet module and...space and STEF and backplate -nothing more to be honest.

 

 

 

Well, BTK-1 is rolled armor for hull and turrets inserts in 80s, it's not cast.

   cells can be both cast and rolled (drilled-in). Hull is another question, it has 1 non metallic plate instead of 2 in t-80ud-84

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi! Yes of course but don't forget to give a link on my new site )))) You make great pictures )

In the beginning of 60-s cast turrets with composite armor were introduced for T-64, T-64A (later for T-72A and T-80B) which had a significant protection against shaped-charge projectiles and APDS rounds. Such protection provided Soviet tanks with protection superiority over western designed tanks of that time like M60A and “Chieftain”. But in same period of time in the 1-st half of 70-s it became evident, that future development of tank cast turrets has no long term perspectives comparing to welded design. An experimental turret was tested with results published in 1977 special literature.



Development of welded turrets for post-WW2 tanks in USSR, Russia and Ukraine

3 hours ago, Sovngard said:

 

Well, could you share the penetration values of armor-piercing ammunitions for D-10T and U-5TS tank guns ? So that I could compare with my own data.

I will do soon.

Soviets study of M48A3

http://btvt.info/5library/vbtt_1979_3_patton.htm

14 minutes ago, Sovngard said:

 

The penetration values (3BM9 & 3BM15 125 mm APFSDS) found in your comparative table are considerably higher than the ones given on Fofanov's website.

They are from solid sourse (VNIITM) book on tank design by Isakov, now declasified.

4 hours ago, Collimatrix said:

@Andrei_bt, thank you for posting that translation.  It is a good article.  I have a few questions:

 

-Were there any designation differences between T-64s with the aluminum-filled turret vs the aluminum oxide spheres vs the high hardness steel?  Or were they all just called T-64A?

 

-When did the T-64 get a straight hull glacis plate without the "cheekbones?"

-Do you know why the fiberglass/steel composite material used in the hull was not also used in the turret?  They seem to have given similar protection.

There were no T-64 with the aluminum oxide spheres vs the high hardness steel in mass productin.

Only T-64A were with the aluminum ceramic vs the high hardness steel.

Designation were only drawings numbers.

Problems with cheeks Cheekbones were stresed by minister of defence industry in 1965. Drawings dated that year show tanks with a straight hull glacis plate.

It did not provide reqired iffecency, also look at the shape of turret - it is rounded, hard to place rectangel plates there.