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

barbaria

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    77

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by barbaria

  1. barbaria
    I should have said 'not cost effective in replacing/repairing the Armata' If a warhead penetrates the ammo in the autoloader, it will cause such a huge explosion that the turret will be popped of just like any other tank. The turret contains lots of expensive and sensitive electronics, optics and the main gun itself. Such an explosion would probably wreck any electronic or mechanical connection between the crew module and engine which makes repairs difficult and expensive, if not impossible. The most probable outcome of an internal ammo explosion of the Armata will be a total write off of such a tank, only in this case the crew is more likely to survive than lets say a T-90. An M1 Abrams won't suffer an internal ammo explosion and would thus be less expensive and difficult to repair and put in combat after a/couple hits. Of course the Armata will be a tough nut to crack with it's advanced APS and thick side hull armor.
  2. barbaria
    IMO the Leopard faces us the viewers with it's turret facing to the left of it's center. The ATGM hit in the area of the main gun ammo stowage and there seems to be no delay between the ATGM exploding and the ammo inside the tank exploding, whatsoever. It still amazes me why virtually every (western) tank designers put half or more of the main gun ammo in the hull. There is not one modern day tank that won't suffer casualties from internal main gun ammo explosion expect for the M1 Abrams. And Armata, but then again it's design isn't cost-effective. 5 soldiers lost their life because of a faulty design. That's 5 too much and especially sad for the one soldier standing in the vicinity of the tank.
  3. barbaria
    Could also be an M60 or sabra mbt. Anyway, this shows why hull ammo storage is faulty and bustle stored ammo with armored doors and blow off panels a la M1 is the best solution for mbt. Unfortunately the Altay also comes with ammo stored in the hull.
  4. barbaria
    So the warheads are in the crew compartment with the charges in the hull? Also interesting to see that the special amour begins just in front of the crew seats on either side of the hull.
  5. barbaria
    That (commanders/gunners??) sight resembles a lot like the CV90's UTAAS, or the other way around I wonder if the soviet's intended to field thermal imagers with these mbt prototypes..
  6. barbaria
    If I understand it correctly, this thing will blow up the internals of an integrated special armor array and will leave a huge hole in a adapted special armor array? (thnx SH_MM) Will this make backplates even more important to stop the jet from penetrating?
  7. barbaria
    I retract my posts. Never give DRDO the benefit of the doubt.
  8. barbaria
    You never know with Indians..
  9. barbaria
    I meant a 300mm thick plate canted at 60 degrees.
  10. barbaria
    Or they forgot to mention it's 300mm at 60 degrees angle. But then again the L/D ratio is awfull..
  11. barbaria
    You can see different multiple layers around the driver's hatch, it's barely visible though. It looks to me like multiple layers but I could be wrong.
  12. barbaria
    Aside from the flipflops in a tank factory, it seems that the UFP is made of some sort of multi-layer armor. It looks like they took the leopard 2 design and made it worse on purpose in every aspect possible. Deleting the special armor array behind the gunners sight, having no armored ammo compartment in the turret bustle with blow-out panels, having a rifled 120mm gun, having an engine based on the leopard 1 engine and having worse turret side armor coverage. The leopard 2 has it's design flaws and the Indians manged to amplify that. Kudos to them for achieving that.
  13. barbaria
    It's not like the Chinese are going to admit their IFV's are nightblind. And going from all the videos and pictures that are available to us, the only IFV equipped with thermals in Chinese service is the ZBD04A. If you count all the ZBD04, type 86A, type 86, ZBL09, Type 92, Type 92B, ZBD05 and ZLC2000 they surely must amount to more than the ZBD04A. Thanks for clarifying that. Sometimes designations get thrown around the internet whitout sources backing them up. Chinese army designation are quite confusing and of course, tanks are being called ZTZ-xx.
  14. barbaria
    Indeed, they upgrade T-series thoroughly but with one missing crucial component: thermal imagers. Expect for the Oplot-M which is fielded in very small numbers.
  15. barbaria
    I'm of the opinion that buying AFV's nowadays without thermals is ignorant and foolish. Thermals have proven their worth since 1991 and any army who considers buying these night-blind vehicles deserves a beating by a thermal imaging equipped opponent. The non thermal IFV's in Chinese service outnumber the thermal equipped one. I haven't seen any upgrade program for the older IFV's to equip them with thermals. Not even the ZBD-04A predecessor, the ZBD-04. I should have said the VT-5 light tank. There was a light tank program initiated by the Chinese army and there where two competitors. The one who won the competition is called the ZTQ-5 and the loser is now offered for export and is called the VT-5. They are both quite similar in capabilities. The IFV that NORINCO offers as the VN-12 is based on the chassis of the ZTQ-5 light tank.
  16. barbaria
    http://imgur.com/FwGiFJX 'Tail cabin type autoloader'
  17. barbaria
    That ZTQ-5 light tank has a bustle autoloader which is quite nice and a good solution. I wonder how much rounds it can store.
  18. barbaria
    Very nice find. It looks to me that the sights on the epoch turret are related to the sighting complex of the kornet-D.
  19. barbaria
    The ZTQ-5 light tank and the IFV based on the ZTQ-5 chassis have modern sights with thermals. The VN-12 and the type-59 based IFV not. The latter are prolly advertised at cash strapped armies while the former for more wealthy countries. Bear in mind that thermal imagers are quite expensive, especially military grade ones. I recall that the sights and FCS on the original bradley IFV accounted for 25% of the total cost of the vehicle. Even the PLA hasn't fielded IFV's with thermals until recently with the ZBD-04A. Thermals were present at mbt, tank destroyers/assault guns and specialized recon vehicles.
  20. barbaria
    Yeah I don't think so. For example that type 59 heavy IFV and VN-12 IFV both use similar turrets like some of the PLA's ifv's with the same non-thermal sights and weapons lay-out. Why not equip your product with all the bells and whistles to show it's full capability? Also that HJ-73 ATGM on top of that modern looking RCWS looks off.
  21. barbaria
    There is a disturbing lack of thermal imagers on some of these vehicles..
  22. barbaria
    I see that Ukies are still too poor for thermal imagers
  23. barbaria
    Yes that is the competition of 2014 and like I said in my previous post:
  24. barbaria
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_biathlon#1st_Tank_Biathlon_World_Championship.2C_2014
  25. barbaria
    Last year wasn't 2014. The Chinese did use APFSDS then. On top of that 125 mm HEAT munition have fins just like APFSDS.
×
×
  • Create New...