skylancer-3441

https://upnorthlive.com/news/local/us-army-tests-combat-vehicles-for-next-generation-at-camp-grayling
article with video on MET-D demonstrator and RCVs
which shows MET-D's new interior with several monitors and couple of joysticks for people-other-than-commander-and-gunner

and also another video on RCVs

International Defense Review magazine have pubished a review of Victor Suvorov (Rezun)'s book "Inside the Soviet Army" in 1983-02 issue. Back in June during my visit at RSL library I decided to skip it, but Suvorov's illustrated two-page reply to that review caught my attention, so I've made photos of it instead:

separately photographed illustrations:

from https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6567119520996048896/ - 4 photos of slides from recent presentation on NGCV's RCVs

and another one from https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6567111444783996928/

On 7/17/2019 at 2:16 PM, LoooSeR said:

https://yuripasholok.livejournal.com/12022840.html

   M109 SPG with autoloader, mock up.

Spoiler

 

 

 

from International Defemse Revire 1983-09 - pages from article on that and some other SPH proposals fro US Army from 1980s

separately photographhed pics and their captions (don't pay attention to arrows)

and also FMC's advert from Army magazine, 1983-05

Hunter AFV was demonstrated again - at Singapore's National Day Parade

(from this video https://youtu.be/19SXqeRPB9Q?t=41 starting at 00:41)

and also there was another video, with 360 deg coverage,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzhwLH5TsEI&feature=youtu.be&t=26
which shows its engine hatch as they opens it (starting around 00:25-00:26)

for reference, photos of interior (of some version of Ladoga) from when it was in better shape - 1 in color and 2 b/w

On 5/1/2018 at 11:23 PM, skylancer-3441 said:

This conncept without a doubt appeared on pages of magazines of that time too

including Army 1996-10:


and also GettyImages has a 3Mp pic of mockup from some exhibition

upscaled fragment which shows APS launchers inside left turret cheek:

article on AUSA 1985 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1985-12

some pics photographed separately

article (in german) on AUSA 1985 exhibition, published in Wehrtechnik 1986-01

larger pic of Mowag 8x8 w/Ares 75mm cannon

larger pic of scalemodel of what would eventually become known as M109A5

btw, on this photo of M109A5 model one can spot at the background an red-and-black artist's drawing of some tank - also published b/w in Hunnicutt's book on Abrams, but it appeared earlier (and with caption which says it artist drawing of M1 replacement from General Electric) in IDR 1982-02

article on AUSA 1986 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1986-12

some pics photographed separately

article (in german) on AUSA 1986 exhibition, published in Wehrtechnik 1987-01

larger pic of scalemodel of M1 Abrams-based tank w/ some new turret

similar vehicle is well-known from artist's drawing

8 minutes ago, skylancer-3441 said:

article on AUSA 1983 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1983-12

[...]

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

 

article on AUSA 1983 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1983-12

additional photos of pics of scalemodel of 155mm liquid propellant SPH proposal from General Electric, which promised substantial increase in number of rounds carried by each vehicle

article on AUSA 1984 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1984-12

additional photos of different pics from this article

Satory I (1967) exhibition catalogue, English version, volume 2 
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/5bTB/3RVqfBy1w
https://imgur.com/a/yq2TwjX

screenshots from this video

IAI

RAFAEL

Elbit

...
https://www.idf.il/מאמרים/2019/רכב-הקרב-העתידי-של-צהל-נחשף/
this article (in Hebrew) is accompanied by another video on Carmel program demonstrators 

some screenshots

Back in early-mid 2000s there was a proposal with bulletproof windows and some add-on armor which provided better coverage of vehicle's frontal plates:

This one is (or might be) indeed new - in a sense that it (probably) was created recently -
although it seems to be composed using two screenshots from TVC channel's news program Sobytiya (Events) special report Zheleznaya Logika (Iron Logic), aired back in February of 2016

15 minutes ago, Lord_James said:

 

Isn’t that the M256E1 120mm L/55 test bed? 

No idea. I had no other thing to rely on except SuT's caption for this photo:

Google Translate GER->ENG

Quote

Picture 4: Trial XM 1 mod. from 1988 with the experimental cannon XM 291; here equipped with a 120 mm tube.

...
can't add another pic to previous post, for some reason, so this one goes here - photo of what is described as XM291, from IDR 1990-12

article on CATTB from IDR 1990-12

and also clippings

from IDR 1989-12 on MTAS

and from IDR 1990-05 on 140mm gun 

and render of CATTB from US Army's Weapon Systems Handbook of 1992:

and pic from Soldat und Technik 1992-01:

and pic of testbed w/XM291 gun - also from SuT 1992-01:

2 hours ago, Karamazov said:

The first photo seems to be from the TV program.

IIRC its from Voennaya Priemka on Zvezda channel,  episode titled "Armata - Terra incognita", which aired on September 13, 2015

article on AUSA 1980 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1981-01

article on AUSA 1981 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1982-01

article on AUSA 1981 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1982-02

article (in german) on AUSA 1981 exhibition, published in Wehrtechnik 1982-01

article on AUSA 1982 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1982-12

from that article on AUSA'82 - Ares concept turret w/75mm on nonexistent 6x6 wheeled chassis, which reminds me of ACVT and MPWS concepts - like one from cover of Armor magazine's January-February 1980 issue (although this one was with "gun pod" turret) (same drawings also available in Wheled versus tracked vehicles study final report, March 1985 on page 235 aka 3-73)

Article from International Defense Review 1981-12 "T-34 to T-80 "The Evolution of Soviet Battle Tanks PLUS the IDR's T-62 test report"

OCR text w/ larger pics (and same pics of better quality from other sources) moved next to their captions:

Quote

==1649==

The Evolution of Soviet Battle Tanks PLUS the IDR'sT-62 test report 
by D.H.C.Jenkins

 

In recent years, most Western nations have experienced great difficulty in developing and producing new battle tanks that are equal or better than those issuing from Soviet and Warsaw Pact factories. The philosophy has been, and still is, to produces new vehicle winch is a quantum improvement on the previous tank. This, however, is expensive both financially and in time. Western nations are increasingly turning to joint ventures in order to try and cut ultimate production costs but to date, these partnershps have all failed, resulting in further delays. Only one joint project is still alive, and the French and the Germans are attempting to design a tank for the 1990s, although the present indications are that this, too, may be doomed to failure. The result has been that individual countries are "going it alone" and producing ever more costly vehicles in sufficient quantities to provide anything approaching a balance to the vastly superior numbers of modern tanks deployed by the Soviets and their Warsaw Pact allies.

 
The Soviet Union has not yet subscribed to the "throw-away society" and as such has a different outlook. No old equipment is totally discarded. Effective and proven comportents in one design are generally retained in the succeeding generation of vehicles. Smplicity, effectiveness and numbers are the watchwords. Soviet tank design has, therefore, been evolutionary and could very well continue to be so even with the introduction of the T-80. 

Development history
The trend started during World War 2, with the introduction of the T-34. This was a very basic vehicle capable, however, of fulfilling its role. It was cheap to produce, simple to operate, and light. Crew training was minimal and the Soviet Army had no difficulty in finding the number of crews required to man the flood of vehicles being turned out. In battle they were no match for the heavier and more advanced German tanks in a one-to-one fight, but the Germans rapidly found that when their tanks had been expended, the T-34s were still there in quantity. A modified T-34, the T-34/85, entered service in 1944 and although withdrawn from Soviet Army service in the 1960s, it was still in action with the Vietnamese Army in 1973. The successor to the T-34 went into production in 1944, too. This was the T-44, a modified T-34/85. The turret was very similar, the suspension had been changed from the Christie-type to torsion bar and the hull was consequently lower. Unsuccessful attempts were then made to retrofit the T-44 turret with the D-10 100mm gun. A solution was eventually found by fitting a redesigned turret with the D-10 gun, to a stretched T-44 hull to produce a new vehicle designated T-54.

 
This tank was manufactured in very large numbers and six variants were produced before the introduction of the T-55, first seen in Moscow in November 1961. Subsequently a further three variants of the T-55 were produced. The only major change between the T-54 and the T-55 was the fitting of the uprated V-55 engine. All T-54s were then modified to T-55 standard, resulting in the Western designation of T-54/55 for all vehicles of this type. The tank was, however unpopular in many countries to which it was sold and in his book Modern Soviet Armor Steven Zaloga cites the case of Romania having had "such serious problems with its T-54s that it [has] approached several West German companies for bids to completely re-work the existing vehicles, adding new suspension, track, wheels, engine and other components."

 

▼ The author at the controls of a T-62A during the IDR test drive. The T-62A can be distinguished from the T-62 by the raised loader's cupola with the 12.7mm Dshk AA machine gun.

==1650==

T-62 
The same basic design was than used in Ihe production of the T-62, first seen in 1965. The major change was the up-gunnig of the tank from the 100mm D-10T to the 115mm smoothbore U-5T. Many T-55 components are evident in the T-62 and it is conceivable that this was the start of a new trend in tank production — that of putting development vehicles into limited production, producing a number of variants, ascertaining the optimum combination of systems and then fielding a new tank in which all systems have been thoroughly tested, frequently in combat, without incurring the almost crippling test and evaluation expenditure of Western nations.
In its recent T-62 test drive IDR found that the tank was indeed basic in both its design and construction. External components lacked any form of finish and were, for the most part, fiimsily made. This conforms with the Soviet design philosophy that external components are of secondary importance and will be early casualties in battle. Therefore no time, money and effort are wasted in producing a solid, finished product. The tank has, however, been designed to make the maximum use of ground. The turret is small and well rounded, providing maximum protection from glancing shots, and the hull, with its Christie suspension and no top rollers, is low and squat. This gives the tank a low silhouette and make it very hard to spot when concealed in a hull-down position. It also makes the crew very uncomfortable. Inside the turret, space is extremely limited. The gunner sits on the left, below the commander and has little room in which to work. Indeed the commander's and gunners stations combined are hardly bigger than the commander's station alone in most Western tanks The loader, on the right of the turret, does have more room, but unless he is left handed his task is extremely difficult.
The driver's station is on the left of the hull. His seat can be adjusted for driving head-out, the normal driving position, or closed down whenever the turret is in operation.
Normally the T-62 is started using compressed air with a minimum pressure of 50kg/cm2. For IDR's test, however, the tank had to be bump-started as there was insufficient pressure in the air cylinders. The driver checks that the systems are functioning and then starts the engine, having first ensured that the engine oil pressure is between 6 and 7kg/cm2. If an air start fails, an electric starter can be used.
In common with most tanks, first gear it an emergency gear. To begin driving, second is selected and the hand throttle is set at 550-600rpm. It is at this point that the Western tank driver is thankful for the invention of the automatic gearbox. The T-62 has a crash gearbox and the driver has to double-declutch in order to change gear. Changing from second to third presented little difficulty but when it came to changing up into fourth gear, IDR found that the gear lever had to be moved across the complete width of the gate and was extremely stiff. It is no doubt this feature that has prompted reports that T-62 drivers are issued with a sledge-hammmer with which to persuade the gear lever to move into a different position. One user told IDR that training a US Army T-62 driver usually entails replacing the clutch at least twice.
Steering is by means of two tillers. These have three positions. When they are fully forward normal power is transmitted to the drive sprocket. To turn, one or other of the tillers must be pulled up to the first position, i.e. until resistance is felt for the first time. If both tillers are in first position a reduction gear is engaged and the tank slows down. From this position, however, smaller radius turns can be made by pulling a tiller up still further, to the second position. The second position effectively brakes the tracks and care must be taken to ensure that one tiller is not pulled into the second position if the tank is in fourth or fifth gear, since the resultant turn could be too severe. (It is by no means certain that the tank would throw a track in these circumstances, as a correctly tensioned track, i.e. when it hangs 60-80mm above the first roadwheel, is guided throughout its length by centre guides riding over the top and bottom of each road-wheel.) IDR initially felt it strange to have to pull both tillers completely up to the first position before starting a turn by pulling one of them up to the second position. This also required greater acceleration to maintain speed, which in turn led to clouds of black exhaust smoke.
IDR was unable to test the efficacity of the hydro-pneumatic clutch in the T-62 as the compressed-air bottles were being recharged during the drive. This clutch is engaged after moving off by the driver moving a lever, mounted on the clutch pedal, with his foot. It appears that use of this clutch does not facilitate gear changing but it does reduce clutch wear.

 

▼ An early photo of a T-64 with the characteristically small roadwheels and the IR projector on the left of the main gun. The driver's position is central in the hull. The open hatch is on the commander's station.

◄ One of theT-62As used by the US Army for training. A fuel pannier can be seen on the rear deck above the gap between the 4th and 5th roadwheels. The long tube on the rear of the turret is for stowing the snorkel and above this is the cartridge-case jettison hatch. An interesting point about the track pins is that they are not held in place at the outer edge of the links, leaving them free to move into the centre. This effect is countered by a raised piece of metal (the pin hammer), welded on to the hull forward of the drive sprocket, which knocks the pins back into position each time they pass over the sprocket.

► View, from the commander's seat, of the T-62 gunner's position with the telescope (right) and periscope (left) prepared for right-eye use. Key: 1 - IR power supply; 2 - Traverse handwheel; 3 - TPN1-41-11 infrared monocular periscope night sight; 4 - Gunner's duplex controls with coax and main gun firing switches on left and right handles respectively; 5 - TSh2B-41U primary telescope day sight; 6 - TNP-165 vision block.

►► The right-hand side of the T-62 driver's compartment. One of the steering tillers can be seen, just to the left of the gear lever and gate. From the left the top three positions in this gate give 3rd, reverse and 4th gears and the bottom row gives 2nd, 1st and 5th. The yellow bands give the US translations for the Russian switch designations. The box below the two vision blocks is the gyrocompass for use when driving submerged on a river crossing.

==1651==
Manoeuvrability is, thus, not one of the strong points of the T-62. Driving the vehicle is tiring and the ride is relatively uncomfortable.
The T-63 is lightly armoured and much of its passive protection is derived from its low silhouette. Active protection is, in some measure, provided by the engine smoke generator. This consumes 10 litres of fuel per minute and produces a smokescreen 250-400m long, lasting for up to 4 minutes, depending in wind strength. When the system is in operation, the driver must fully depress the accelerator to avoid starving the engine of fuel and should not be in higher than third gear.
In the event of operations in an NBC environment, a PAZ (NBC) pack protects the crew from radioactive dust by air filtration and slight over-pressure. It is tripped automatically by an RBZ-1 gamma-ray sensor.
The vehicle is powered by the V-55, V-12 diesel engine, with a maximum power output of 430kW at 2,000rpm, giving a maximum road speed of 80km/h. When driving cross-country, fuel consumption is between 300 and 330 litres per 100km. This is reduced to between 190 and 210 litres when giving on roads. Between 320 and 450km can be covered by the T-62 on its normal fuel tanks. This is increased to between 450 and 650km if the two jettisonable auxiliary fuel ranks, on the back of the vehicle, are used.
Maximum firing range of the U-5T 115mm gun, limited by the sighting range wthe TSh2B-41U gunner's telescope, is 4800m when firing the HE18 round, although it is unlikely that this extreme range would ever be used, except when the tank is in a static firing position (a Soviet speciality). Theoretical maximum effective anti-tank range, therefore, is 2,000m, although Middle East experience indicates that it is nearer to 1600m. Up to 40 rounds of 115mm fixed ammunition can be carried. These are stowed in open racks around the turret and hull and experience has shown that even a glancing blow from an incoming round can detonate them with catastrophic results. Stowage is also provided for up to 2,500 rounds of 7.62mm ammunition for the PKT coaxial machine gun. The T-62A also has a 12.7mm AA machine gun mounted on the loader's cupola with 500 rounds stowed externally.

 

T-64 and T-72
Before the first T-62 was seen in public, it became known in the West that a new Sowet tank, designated M1970, had been desigrind. According to some sources this design was never produced, but a tank did go into production in the late 1960s. It was totally different from any previous Soviet tank, mounted a 125mm gun in a new turret and had a new running gear. The appearance of this tank led to great speculation by analysts in the West. A new dimension was added to the "threat" and the corridors of power from Bonn to Washington resounded with calls for the production of more powenful and better protected tanks to combat this new vehicle.
For several years Western defense agencies designated this tank the T-72 and it came as something of a shock when a second new vehicle was displayed in Moscow in 1977. At first the second new vehicle was thought to be a new model T-72, but closer analysis revealed significant differences between the two tanks This prompted a change in the Western designations and the earlier vehicle became known as the T-64.
The major differences between the T-64 and the T-72 are the engine and running gear. Photos show that the arrangement of exhaust grills on the rear of the vehicles differs, indicating that a different engine has been used. It it probable that the T-64 has a diesel engine producing a maximum power output of 560kW with a power to weight ratio (kW/t) of 15:1. According to some IDR sources, this engine is a departure from conventional types, being a flat, five-cylinder design, with horizontally-opposed pistons. In contrast, the T-72 has the V-64, an uprated version of the V-55 diesel in the T-62. This produces 580kW, at 3,000rpm and gives a power to weight ratio of 14:1.
The T-64 has six small, stamped, dual road wheels and torsion bar suspension. The double-pin steel track is supported on four top rollers. The T-72 running gear comprises six large, die-cast, dual road wheels, also with torsion bar suspension. The single, dry-pin steel track is supported on only three top rollers.
Modifications to the turret are minor and consist of the re-location of the infra-red searchlight from the left of the main armament, on the T-64, to the right for the T-72. The AA machine gun, too, is different. The T-72 has a new pintle-mounted 12.7mm gun mounted to the rear of the commander s cupola. This can only be operated from the head-out position, in the same way as on the T-62. On the T-64 the AA machine gun is also mounted on the commander's cupola but it appears as if it can be fired remotely.

 

▼ A column of T-72s, with the new turrets, prior to embarking on a submerged river crossing The new design, full-length rubber skirting pfates have been removed, possibly to prevent them being torn off dunnn the crossing.

==1652==


Main and coaxial armament details are identical for both tanks. The main armament is a 125mm smoothbore gun, firing high-velocity APFSDS, HEAT and HE rounds. Muzzle velocity is in excess of 1,600m/s for the APFSDS and 905 and 850m/s for the HEAT and HE rounds respectively. A 7.62mm PKT machine gun, identical to that in the T-62, is mounted coaxially on the right of the main gun. Evidently the commander is responsible for serving the coaxial MG. An automatic loader serves the main armament, although the systems differ in their method of operation. In the T-72, charges and projectiles are stowed in single-round boxes with the charge above the projectile. Up to 40 of these boxes are mounted on a turntable on the inside of the turret. The different types of round do not have to be in specific positions since a computer keeps track of the position of each round. Once the commander has selected the type of round he wishes to fire, the computer indicates the position of the nearest one and the turntable rotates until the box is under the loading mechanism. With the barrel at a 4° elevation datum position, the box is then hauled up until the projectile touches the rear of the breech. A swing-arm rams it into the gun and the box is then lowered slightly, to allow the charge to be rammed in the same way.
The T-64 loading mechanism appears to be more complicated. The projectile is stowed vertically alongside the charge, which means that the projectile has to be turned before it can be rammed, with the charge following it.
Some analysts believe that the T-64 was produced as an interim measure between the T-62 and the T-72. Recent observations may lead to this supposition being contradicted and it is possible that the T-72 is the follow-on to the T-62 with the T-64 being a leap sideways from the evolutionary chain.
First acknowledged western sightings of the T-64 were at the beginning of the 1970s, though it may have been deployed even earlier. Since then, the T-64 has been issued to the Soviet Army in large numbers. In 1979 it was estimated that over 2,000 were in service with GSFG. Little is seen of these vehicles but many photos of the T-72 have been released. For some reason the T-72 is being shown off. This was demonstrated during the visit of the French Defense Minister to Moscow in 1977, where he and his party were shown the T-72, although they were not permitted to see inside it. The T-72 has also been exported to countries outside the Warsaw Pact — IDR sources say that the current purchase price of a T-72 is about $2 million. Pictures have also been released of the T-72 with a new turret showing that the back-up stadiametric rangefinder has been removed. This exposure is a typical Soviet behaviour and leads to the conclusion that another tank, possibly a much-improved version of the T-64, is to become the standard Soviet battle tank. An additional argument has been advanced which states that the original T-64 has experienced many operational problems and that this is being hidden from prying eyes. These problems have been cited as including: inaccuracy oj the powerful smooth-bore gun; a tendenci to shed its tracks; and above all, a disastrous reliability record for the engine, which is also

 

► Early model T-72s on parade during the West 81 exercises. The light metal thermal jacket on the main armament is held in place by clips along the top edge. (The tank on the right has lost the end section of the thermal jacket.)

==1653==

==1654==
extremely smoky. Critics of the T-64 say that it was originally intended to become the Soviet MBT, but that its performance and reliability proved so poor that modernized T-55s, and subsequently T-72 export tanks, had to be used publicly in place of it. This view holds that T-64s in GSFG are merely training tanks, with their improved sucessors already stored secretly in forward locations.

 

T-80
Well over ten years have passed since the introduction of the T-64 and a new Soviet tank is now known to exist. What is this tank? In the West it has been designated, for lack of surer indication, the T-80.
The T-80 has a high-pressure 125mm main gun and fires improved ammunition including HVAPFSDS with, possibly, a DU penetrator. It is said to weigh approximately 48.5t and may have hydropneumatic suspension. Experiments have been carried out in the Soviet Union with the use of gas turbine engines in tanks and two T-80 prototype series were produced, one with the gas turbine engine and one with an uprated diesel similar to that which powers the T-64. It is unlikely, however, that the turbine does power the T-80.
The most significant change is the addition of compound armour to the hull and turret, accounting for the increase in weight, and giving the vehicle the characteristic box-shape of modern NATO tanks. This armour could either be very similar to the British Chobham armour — samples of which have reached Russia from the FRG—or it could be a special, Soviet-designed laminate armour such as is used on the glacis plate of the T-64/72. The T-80 has been described as looking like a T-64 or-72 with add-on armour and this is likely to be the case, particularly since the appearance of the T-72 with a new turret.
A study of the evolutionary chart on p.1652 shows the likelihood of the hull coming from one vehicle, in this case the T-64, and a new turret (or a drastically modified T-72 turret) being mated to produce the new tank. The choice of hull could well be that of the T-64 with its innovative small roadwheels and engine. The T-72 engine will barely fit into its engine well and the possibility of further uprating it, to cope with the extra weight of the T-80, seems remote.

 

The benefits of evolution
The main aim of Soviet tank designers appears to be to design and produce tanks as quickly and cheaply as possible without diminishing the size of the tank park. The evolutionary concept has enabled them to do so and has also brought other benefits. Firstly a measure of standardization is always present, and time and effort do not have to be wasted in totally converting crews from one type of vehicle to another. The Soviet Army retains many old tanks as training vehicles, thus not risking damage to its prime materiel while still maintaining crews proficient in the skills required to fight their tanks. The concept also provides the designers with the capability of thoroughly testing components and adopting or rejecting them for the successive generation of vehicles.
The last innovative Soviet tank design was the T-64, and this was possibly because the hull had not been prepared in time for the introduction of the T-62. There is thus no reason to believe that the T-80 is also totally innovative and there are already rumours of the T-80 follow-on being ready to go into production.

 

▲ Cut-away drawings of a Soviet T-72 MBT apparently used as training aids and showing the interior layout of the tank from both the side and the rear. Note the rotating ammunition stowage ring at the base of the turret, with the semicombustible charge clipped on the top of each projectile for automatic loading via the hoist (10). The drawings also indicate the thickness of armour on the tank. If they are accurate and if previously published dimensions (see IDR 8/1977, p 1032) are still correct, then the armour thickness on the glacis plate can be estimated at approximately 200mm measured at 90° and approximately 600mm measured horizontally. This glacis armour appears to be made up of three layers although the exact composition is not known. Armour thickness on the turret roof, measured at a point to the rear of 7 in the side view, is estimated at 60mm and the thickness of the bow plate, measured at a point forward of the front roadwheel, is approximately 80mm.
Key: 1 — FG-125 headlights; 2 — Steering tillers; 3 — NBC protection systems; 4 — Gear lever; 5 - Gun elevation drive; 6 — TPD-2 gunner's sight; 7 — TPN1-49-23 gunner's night sight; 8 — Spotlight for TKN-3 commander sight; 9 — AA machine gun; 10 — Ammunition hoist; 11 — Antenna base; 12 — Turret bin for deep-fording equipment and rations; 13 — Engine; 14 — Gearbox; 15 — Supplementary fuel tank; 16 — Projectile and charge containers; 17 — Rotary base; 18 — Gunner's seat; 19 — NBC decontamination; 20 — Driver's seat; 21 — Parking brake; 22 — External stowage; 23 — Manual turret traverse gear; 24 — Traverse indicator; 25 — Breech; 26 — 7.62mm coaxial machine gun; 27 — Commander's cupola episcopes; 28 — Skirt plates; 29 — Machine gun ammunition boxes; 30 — Radio; 31 — Hydraulic turret traverse drive.
▼ An artist's impression of the T-80 which has been described by those who have seen actual photos, as very nearly exact. Of particular note are the small road wheels, typical of the T-64, and the apparent lack of special armour skirting plates. Main armament is a new, 125mm, high pressure gun, developed from that of the T-64 and T-72, firing improved ammunition. The lack of an IR projector is indicative of the use of image-intensifying or thermal imaging night sights. A further point of interest is the provision of two banks of smoke grenade dischargers. Untill recently all Soviet battle tanks used an integral engine smoke generator to provide smoke protection. T-64s in GSFG have, however, beem seem with smoke grenade dischargers. It is possible, that these T-64s have a new engine which is not compatible with a smoke generator, and that this engine is also mounted in the T-80.

56 minutes ago, Pascal said:

Quote

authors claimed that having a lower mass of armor, the BMP-3 is virtually at the same level in terms of protection as the american IFVs

It goes more like this: BMP-3 armor is close to that of (as a bit worse, but close to the better) M2A1 ifv at a lower weight.

Comparison to M2A1 is from another article of the same issue, one titled "Osobennosty korpusa i bashni BMP-3" /Characteristics of hull and turret of BMP-3/:

Quote

Уровень защиты БМП-3 близок к американской БМП М-2А1, при этом масса брони БМП-3 меньше на 4 т, что подтверждает более рациональное компоновочное решение отечественной ВГМ.

Quote

The level of protection of the BMP-3 is close to the american IFV M-2A1, while the weight of armor of the BMP-3 is 4 tons less, which confirms a more rational layout solution of the domestic MTV (military tracked vehicle - skl.).

2 hours ago, Pascal said:

The BMP-1/2 still remained as a basic, "Afghan" D isn't something which comes by default to BMP, compared to the added armor on the Bradley.

More than that, even basic next-generation BMP, BMP-3, got no add-on armor on the sides of the hull, only 43mm of aluminum alloy ABT102 - which is enough only against 7.62 B32 (Voprosy Oboronnoy Tekhniki /Issues of Defence Equipment/, series XX, iss. 86 (1979), p.20)

Still, among several articles on BMP-3 printed in Vestnik Bronetankovoy Techniki /Armored Vehicles Herald/ 1991-05, in one titled "BMP-3 - infantry fighting vehicle of next generation", authors claimed that

Quote

имея меньшую массу брони, БМП-3 практически находится на одном уровне с американскими БМП по защищённости

eng:

Quote

having a lower mass of armor, the BMP-3 is virtually at the same level in terms of protection as the american IFVs

...I wish they were virtually paid or virtually employed with the same degree of fulfilment as their own "virtually" 

Any information on distance at which Afghan variant's side armour would stop 14.5? At least B-32, for a start

...

lower frontal plate and whole rear end of BMP were vulnerable from the beginning, and it has not changed with Afghan variant, first one would stop 23mm only from 2200 meters, second one would stop 14.5 from 1600 metres - compared to Bradley's protection of both against 14.5 from 200 and 250m respectively

(all numbers from SAIFV report

aka Infantry Fighting Vehicle Task Force Study results, 1978-04, chapter IV, page 16)

article on AUSA 1978 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1979-01

article on AUSA 1979 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1980-01

article on AUSA 1975 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1975-06

article on AUSA 1976 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1977-01

article on AUSA 1977 exhibition, published in International Defense Review 1978-01

adding ":large" to end of url of pic uploaded on twitter allows to get a larger version of it, with resolution limited to 2048x2048 instead of 1200x675 pix
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_qwfwPUYAIVr21.jpg:large

and btw it also seems possible to upload and see on twitter pics at resolution up to 4096x4096 - with links like this one: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_segYMWkAAsLcD?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
which i got looking at post with this image via mobile.twitter.com

and also it seems possible to get the same image limited to 4096x4096 by adding ":4096x4096" to end of regular link
like this: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_segYMWkAAsLcD.jpg:4096x4096

and even more than that - by adding ":orig", like this

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DpAZnMDXUAQ_DlZ.jpg:orig
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DpAZnMDXUAQ_DlZ?format=jpg&name=orig

obviously, one can't get picture larger than it's original resolution,
and so far I haven't found any pics longer of wider than 2048 pix, uploaded before mid-May of this year. photos posted as early as August of 2014 turn out to be  longer and/or wider than 2048pix, like one in this post for example https://twitter.com/USArmy/status/505105128085393409