Laviduce

16 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Where you found this pic?

16 hours ago, Molota_477 said:

From this book I believe.

https://tankmuseumshop.org/collections/haynes-tank-owners-workshop-manuals/products/challenger-2-main-battle-tank-owners-workshop-manual

Yes from that book !

I will no longer share any information on the Steel Beasts forum or with any person directly affiliate with that site.  I also do not want any of my diagrams shared on that site or anyone from that site because some of my diagrams will include or will be derived from information that will have come from declassified/classified/leaked data that might or might not have been labelled "secret" in one way or another.  I hope that overzealous douchebags such as that Australian will not be given any power or influence over the Sturgeon's House forum and that characters such as him will be kept away from having a say in the less restricted forums and websites. Anywhere I go online and/or offline, I try to keep my bull**** to an absolute minimum and I hope the other side will do the same.

7 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

And?

Quote

you aren't allowed to post that type of document.

7 minutes ago, Krieger22 said:

So I guess all those photos of damaged Abrams revealing their armor internal layouts are verboten now?

 

And the DoD is going to slowly scrape the internet clean of them? That seems implausible.

Technically yes on the first part.

7 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

It effects one forum.

Let me quote the guy:

Quote

 

You are assuming I read it though as that would be in breach of the forum rules and presumably someone would just remove the post (or maybe delete your account if you did it often enough).

 

I don't care about if its been published elsewhere or not - that is the owning country's issue, not mine.

 

My requirement to report such breaches when I see them (or know about them). So in your case, if you post something here and say "this is from XWZ forum" I just include in my report the URL to here and mention that you said it was posted on XWZ forum too.

 

Basically, regardless of the country, you aren't allowed to post that type of document.

 

1 hour ago, Lord_James said:

 

https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2017/01/early-m1-abrams-composite-armor.html?m=1

 

he needs to calm his shit, is what he needs to do. 

This needs to be removed.

1 hour ago, Ramlaen said:

If you broke the rules on another forum is this really the place to complain about it?

The forum rules were not broken , they were updated because of me posting some diagrams that were labelled "secret". This affects all classified information not just classified information on one forum. 

Yesterday I created a thread on the Steel Beasts forum that would address the protection characteristic of the  vehicles modelled in Steel Beasts. I included all kinds diagrams and images from various sources to back up my claims on various relevant vehicles.

One of the sources was information contained int the now somewhat notorious presentation on the Swedish Tank Trials labeled as Stridsfordon idag och morgon.

As you might know, this information contains images/diagrams that have been labelled "secret".   After putting some effort into creating this post , it was deleted because it contained this "secret" information. Although I was/am under the impression that just deleting or sanitizing the "secret" diagram(s) should have done the trick, I can fully understand that the owner wants to be rather save than sorry because of potential legal liabilities and further complications.

What happened next irked me a bit , to say the least. A person who will remain nameless, *cough* Gibsonm *cough*, who seems to serve in the Australian armored corps, who is a regular on the Steel Beasts forum informed us that he has to report any leaks containing classified/declassified information that have the words "secret" on it.  Any incident he will inform the respective nations military attache in Australia about the leak.  That includes the military attaches of the US, UK, Russia, China and any other countries information.  It does not matter if these documents were leaked or declassified, he will have to report the leak to the proper authorities.

Here is the conversation about the removal of the thread: https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/12504-about-that-deleted-thread/

What happened toward the end of the thread just takes the cake, IMHO. 

Another forum member posted a link to the War Thunder Challenger 1 historical reference thread to make a point: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/419818-datasheet-challenger-historical-references/

I quipped that his post technically violated the updated Forum rules and that it could get deleted.

The nameless Australian individual had this to say about the link and my comment about "santizing" the diagrams:

Quote

 

Well I would suggest you remove the URL from you post as you are basically telling other people where to find it.

 

I'll send the paperwork off as I'm not worried about giving Gajin the benefit of the doubt (and apparently its already been in the Swedish press - "Why are Swedish Secrets on Russian web sites?", or words to that effect).

 

and

Quote

 

You editing the label in no way "sanitises" the information.

 

The idea is not to cover the label and then post it. The idea is not to post it in the first place.

 

How will the Sturgeon's house deal with situations such as this?   Technically if any of you guys are posting this information on here , the nameless individual will have to report it. This also includes any previous and future diagrams that have the words "secret" on it from any nation even if they are declassified.  Technically these diagrams might all have to be removed.

I am all about a sensible degree of OPSEC but the behavior of this nameless Australian officer is a bit "rich" to put it mildly. 

On 1/7/2019 at 8:55 PM, LoooSeR said:

Gurkhan's post about 2A82-1M cannon

 

 

Also from text and number of material bought for cannons production says that no T-14s were finished in 2018 and only 24 cannons could be/were made so far.

 

From otvaga - patent was found for 2A82, another link.

Is this secret information ? If yes, Gibsonm needs to report it to the Russian military attache in Australia!

On 12/29/2018 at 1:53 PM, Molota_477 said:

No idea if it is ture or fake.

 

BUT, until now this claim by Jia Yuanyou in CCTV is the only opened official source related to 99A's protection.

 

There is little information about 99's real protection level because its top secret.

 

When I first heard such info, I also keep skeptic, but now IMO it is possible, according to other information implied by some official publishments (mainly China Ordnance Society), there might be some type of integrated ERA under the face plate of 99's modular composite armor(So there are 2 layers of heavy ERA if taking account the hinged ERA tiles), which can drastically increase the KE protection level..

For the Type 99 (A) the front armor's resistance to AP round/sabot is equivalent to 7** mm RHA, the resistance to HEAT round is equivalent to 1***mm RHA....

The top armor's resistance to HEAT round is equivalent to ***mm RHA...

12 hours ago, Sovngard said:

 

https://www.docdroid.net/

Thank you very much Sovngard !

Here is the file (hopefully): https://docdro.id/zvIkXJz

14 minutes ago, Lord_James said:

So are you going to post the pdf, or just tease us? 

When it comes to information I am not one to really tease. Where can i upload the pdf file  to,  to share it ? I have a couple of other pdfs that might be of interest to some.

These pages are from M1 ABRAMS in action - by Jim Mesko, Don Greer, Perry Manley - Armor No. 26 - Squadron/Signal Publications, Inc. -1989 (ISBN 0-89747-222-5).

I do have the .pdf file.

On 9/27/2018 at 2:31 PM, LoooSeR said:

   This surprise me as well. For outsiders of those circles of politicians and their ass lickers this murder attempt looks absoltely stupid. Not only this was a contract killing, but it was done using chemical agent/weapon, which is a socially dangerous method of murder. I am totally against killing people for internal political crap with methods that would hurt others. If politicians and alike what to kill each other, they should do it without endangering normal people.

   Not only this was a murder attempt with chemical agent, but it was done in another country and it failed miserably. They can't even maintain a facade of Soviet-era Special services! 

Something does not add up at all. I am getting the impression that they wanted  to get caught. Not even total amateurs would act this way, knowing about the CCTV networks in the UK.

33 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

That's one huge mantlet they've got on that thing.

It comes with a relatively thick composite insert unlike the Leclerc series of tanks.

10 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

This is a bit unserious, but i am interested - what tanks this thing is suppsoed to represent?

A T-90A  with the artist taking an artistic license.

Russia has a Merkava 1?

8 hours ago, David Moyes said:

http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/a42b8bf8#/a42b8bf8/34

Article on the Queen's Royal Hussars participation at Tank Challenge.
Claims they placed 4th. Which was also posted on their Facebook page shortly after the competition finished.
Won CASEVAC serial. Podium'd others including defensive live firing, pistol shoot and obstacle course.
Struggled in others because of weight and agility.

Has a tank comparison page. Usual "rifled gun more accurate", "3-piece quicker", "moar armour" but then says the CR2's fire control computer was better at hitting moving targets than the Leopard 2's. wat?
 

More British propaganda about the Challenger 2 having better armor than the Leopard 2A6 or M1A2 SEP. Nationalistic/biased publications do not help much. I wonder what they were thinking writing this stuff.

2 hours ago, Pardus said:

Hello Laviduce, 

Disappointingly the people I were able to talk to when there simply didnt know the information you requested, and taking any measurements was rendered impossible by all the military personnel around. 

However I found out that there's a tank musuem nearby with a Leopard 2A4 on exhibition that I might be able to get access to and there are likely to be experts on the tank there too. 

Thats ok. Thank you, I appreciate your effort!

17 hours ago, Pardus said:

Alright guys, I will be attending something called Åben Hede in Denmark tommorrow where the Leopard 2 will be doing some live exercises and you can walk around the tanks and so forth. If there's anything you guys want me to ask or achieve whilst there just let me know today.

Can you ask them about the weights of the following:

Turret and stripped turret

Hull and stripped hull

Mantlet

Applique armor front turret and side turret

Has the EMES15 been replaced with an updated model ?

Have there been any armor insert updates ever?

Thank you !

7 hours ago, Pardus said:

Btw, does anyone here possess or know the accurate armour protection of the Leopard 2A4 in these areas?:

 

 

 

As far as i know, roughly:

Orange: Should be 20-25 mm thick when the thickness is measure from the normal.

Yellow: Seems to be 30 mm primarily.   the forward section around the driver could be up to 50 mm thick. 

Light Orange:  Heavy Side skirts are up to 110 mm thick. Side hull 30 mm, up to 50 mm potentially in certain areas.

Magenta: Side skirts seem to be between 10-23 mm thick.   Side hull seems mostly to be around 30 mm in this area.

Purple:  Outer side hull sponson seems to be 10 mm thick.  Inner walls seem to be 10 mm thick in the forward section and 60 mm in the mid-section.

Cyan:   Outer side hull sponson also seems to be about 10 mm thick here. Inner side walls will also most likely be not much thicker.

Fuel cells, NBC system, batteries are not included in this.

1 hour ago, Lord_James said:

 

Welcome to SH, Rohr  

 

 

That's impossible considering the rod isn't 1m long. 

28 minutes ago, Pardus said:

 

Well that's assuming Lanz Odermatt's equation is 100% applicable to the most recent penetrator designs. 

 

I mean we have plenty of figures showing penetration past the length of the rod, so...

 

According to Rolf Hilmes the aim of the LKE2/DM53 program was to create a KE shell that had the ability to pierce about 1000 mm of RHA using the L55. Rumor has i that it can penetrate over 900 mm RHA.

1 hour ago, SH_MM said:

 

You marked the left turret front as "380 to 400 mm" KE, but if it offered less than 400 mm protection,  the portion of the tank's surface with "400 mm or more" KE protection would be far below the ~19.75% shown in the leaked graph.

 

 

It is 40 mm thick.

 

I suggested that the average RHAe KE resistance could be around 380-400 mm including 400 mm. It is an after all an estimate.

14 hours ago, Pardus said:

To me 350mm RHAe equivalent seems likely considering the 420mm mantlet + 240mm solid titanium block behind it. 

 

If the engineers at KM didnt want the mantlet to be a weakspot there's also every reason to believe that they put thicker NERA blocks in there. 

To clarify myself, as far as i know the overall mantlet/trunnion KE resistance of the Leopard 2 (B-tech level) is between 250 and 350 mm . That does not mean the mantlet/trunnion has a KE resistance of 350 mm overall necessarily.

The barrel length of the L44 is given at 5280 , which works out with the rest of the drawings. Yet, there is a problem. The length of the gun assembly (muzzle to breech block mechanism end) is given at 5593. In my scaled drawings that length is about 5550 mm.

Also, the ~300-350 mm RHAe against KE estimate includes the trunnion block. Using the  approximate thickness efficiency of the turret faces i got an actual mantlet KE resistance range of around 180-220 mm RHAe.