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

TokyoMorose

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    219

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Everything posted by TokyoMorose

  1. TokyoMorose
    That fuel efficiency stat worries me, the V903 is not a modern engine in any sate of the term, and they are only aiming for 20%-25%? Sure, they are majorly boosting power (although being a opposed piston two-stroke, that peak power figure is likely in a *very* narrow power band) - but the first V903 was laid down in 1967! This has all the markings of the L60 & Kharkov diesels written over it, I at least hope they are reliable even if the efficiency and power bands end up garbage.
  2. TokyoMorose
    As far as I am aware, it *is* a Norinco tank, being the warmed over Type 90-II... which form part of a bigger family consisting of the Type 90s, the VT1A/MBT-2000, the VT4/MBT3000 (I do like VT names much better, that was a good move), and the whole 98/99/99A domestic family. Pakistani involvement in the Al-Khalid is basically limited to final assembly and the name, although they have long been wanting to increase the amount of domestic content (such as locally producing gun blanks instead of importing them).
  3. TokyoMorose
    Nice of them to leave the markings on from the mill there. Quick research shows that to be 7020 (Constellium's only defense alloy made at Issoire in T651 processing), and that's an alloy not too commonly used as armored hulling.
  4. TokyoMorose
    Personally, I blame the end of the Cold War - many 'western' governments more or less convinced themselves that they had no major threats likely and that existing equipment was 'sufficient'... so procurement has often been the first thing on the chopping block to save funds. The IDF & Israeli government crucially has a different view. The issues are pretty simple when you take into account the governments don't care.
  5. TokyoMorose
    The 2700hp MT-883 was the version developed for the EFV, this thing looks like the EFV but Korean. If they get it working, it'd be tempting to offer it to the USMC.
  6. TokyoMorose
    If they actually manage to get the 120mm Smoothbore, that'll be the most important advance in the whole Challenger family since the TOGS on the CR1 Mk 2...
  7. TokyoMorose
    I probably should have corrected myself - the later Sherman gun sights were highly influenced by the T-34 Sights. The M70 (and it's variants) took in lessons from the T-34 Gun Sights. I know there was some comparison documents on that site, but I can't find them ATM.
  8. TokyoMorose
    The Brits way the Brits modeled things, any non-kinetic parts of ammo that are hit are likely to kaboom and take out the machine, and so ignoring the fact that the ammo is separated in an armored compartment, ignoring that in frontal hits that the rear of the turret is the hardest thing to penetrate in a tank (as you have to punch through the *entire* turret) the Brits said that hull-bottom stowage for live ammo segments has the least chance of being hit. This is technically true comparing the amount of frontal area in which it is theoretically possible to hit the ammo, but this is ignoring the facts that the hull is less armored & that they can't separate off the ammo storage behind bulkheads with their stowage arrangement. Due to the ammo separation it's virtually impossible to K-kill an Abrams by hitting the ammo, while a Chally 2 was K-killed when a friendly HESH shell hit an open hatch... and the blast detonated the hull ammo stowage. TL;DR - The Brits judged purely by amount of frontal area ammo is stowed in, irrespective of how armored or safe that area is. By that logic, T-72s have the safest ammo stowage of any modern tank...
  9. TokyoMorose
    I'll have to tear through documentation, but from what I've read at Samsonov's site the Sherman optics were highly influenced by the T-34's optics, and many German sights were quite poor. (Not all, of course, the Germans had a vast array of different sights in production during the war)
  10. TokyoMorose
    I was going to say, 455HB seems pretty incredible for a serial produced cast steel anything!
  11. TokyoMorose
    For the inevitable conquest of the UK, they will have their drivers on the proper side!
  12. TokyoMorose
    Hmm, L-3 still technically has the 1500hp version of the AVDS-1790 up for offer. They might pick that up. Could also get an Allison tank transmission to go with it.
  13. TokyoMorose
    As much as I like to believe the army is finally going the route of "good enough" - they had that option with the modified Puma years ago and turned it down for the GCV wunderwaffe. I doubt the army's ability to resist feature creep as the program goes on.
  14. TokyoMorose
    Oh, I know *a superstructure* is required for the crew working space, but that poorly thought out thin steel box with basically no sloping (which results in the step) is a sad excuse for the design. At the very least, they could have fitted large composite blocks on the front of the step to at least attempt to provide protection.
  15. TokyoMorose
    I actually do like the turret of that, as far as BMPT-type turrets go, and the idea of having a large amount of small missiles for precision shots on targets that don't justify the big ATGMs also seems like a good idea. But that turret belongs on a VT-5 (maybe the older, heavier, but cheaper VT-2 if they really want to save money...) chassis, and needs to ditch that silly superstructure design.
  16. TokyoMorose
    And people thought stepped hulls went out of fashion half a century ago! Hah! (Just... why does this exist in this form...)
  17. TokyoMorose
    While I don't recall anything regarding the loading system for MBT-70 and its handling of Missiles (there were two autoloader designs, one from GM, one from Rheinmetall - the GM one worked better...), but the MBT-70 APFSDS is overperforming by a good deal in WT. That said, other changes to the game lineup have made this largely a moot point. (It is amusing that the APFSDS penetrates so well, it makes the HEAT and Missiles basically redundant despite the APFSDS never being intended to be the main round issued and purely a short-range backup)
  18. TokyoMorose
    It worked like any other T-64 pattern autoloader in operation, the 2A21 variant of the 115mm on T-64 had split ammo. As far as I am aware, you cannot manually load 115mm fixed-case ammo in case (pun intended) of emergency. Which is nice, because the 115mm cartridges are gigantic, and in the incredibly compact T-64 that'd be hilariously sad to try to manipulate.
  19. TokyoMorose
    I have no idea, and can only tell you it is likely a Kharkovite plot to confuse tankists of the motherland, and thus undermine defense while stuffing their pockets with profits from overly complicated instrument readout.
  20. TokyoMorose
    Was that for a vehicle called the tigerwolf, perchance?
  21. TokyoMorose
    Simple really, hit something really firm at a high speed. Tank roadwheels are tough, but not invulnerable. Something like hitting a railroad track side on at speed may well cause a dent like that.
  22. TokyoMorose
    You sure about that? According to that Army chart it's called the "1M2A4" - I'm not sure I even trust them to manage the Bradley. (But that chart is a comedy of goofs - at least one typo, magical 100mm Kornets, not bothering to account in potential ammunition advances for guns, no counting of protection at all, magic 8-balling the optics on T-15, really confusing TOW nomenclature...)
  23. TokyoMorose
    All I want to add in here, for my two cents, is that manufacturing cassettes for armor is substantially less complex than welding together large complex assemblies of aluminum or titanium. That said, cast titanium is certainly an... *interesting* choice from LUBAWA.
  24. TokyoMorose
    Ah, but the AVDS-1790 isn't a 50s design. It's a 40s design, they were first tested in 46 (in their original gasoline form as AV1790). With that said, the advantages of a newer engine do probably outweigh that of updating the AVDS... they almost certainly have lower maintenance requirements, better fuel economy, and other such niceties. I'm also disappointed if not surprised in using the X1100 transmission, even though it really isn't that great - if they want to stick with Allison the newer 5043 MXH covers the same power ratings, more compact, lighter, and better performing. This is also a good time to bring up that not putting the Abrams ARV into production and continuing on with the M88 to save money in the short term was a mistake. (And this addendum is unrelated: but boo Caterpillar, go Cummins!)
  25. TokyoMorose
    Don't forget that the TH-301 was basically an improvement of their work for TAM. I don't understand the sudden IFV-cum-Tank fetish. (I understand the money, and the idea of TDs... but trying to replace the MBT with a lightly armored vehicle will end in pain)
×
×
  • Create New...