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

skylancer-3441

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    273

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

 Content Type 

Everything posted by skylancer-3441

  1. skylancer-3441
    Without having a definition of what you mean by "enough", I have no idea what that statement means - also I woud guess that requirement of fitting 6'4-6'5 with gear and may be even winter clothes for extreme cold conditions was not in your mind. And that instragram photo does not even have people sitting iside this vehicle, so it basically shows nothing on that matter.
  2. skylancer-3441
    I guess one has to ask Czech, Slovak or Polish army about that - whether they are unstable or not. Those armies have - for 40 years - Dana Vz.77 SPH on Tatra chassis, which is 2.5 meters wide when measured by wheels, exactly like KAMAZ truck. And its 3.3 meters high when measured from the ground to turret's top BTW, reportedly Soviet Union borrowed some Danas in mid 80s for tests, and later even bought about 120 of them, although several years later during withdraval of Soviet army from former WarPac countries all those Danas were moved to Kazakhstan and later (in mid-late 90s) their turrets were scrapped. Ever since early 80s Soviet Army also tried to develop some 8x8 howitzer on tactical truck chassis of its own, under designations of 2S21 Msta-K and 2S26 Pat-K, using Ural-5233, Kraz 4R-3120 (also known as ChR-3120) and KrAZ-6316 trucks as chassis. And while KrAZ trucks turned out to be 2,8 meters wide (they were originally intended to be 2.5 meters wide, but it turned out that it's impossible if one also wants some very wide tires for lower soil pressure and better trafficability), Ural truck was ~2.5 meters wide, when measured by wheels. Using those they made at least 4 different prototypes: Ural-5233: KrAZ chassis: ... It seems to me that in case someone seriously wanted howitzer on tactical truck chassis, in Russian army of last 28 years, there was only one reasonable 2.7-3-meters-wide option - BAZ trucks.
  3. skylancer-3441
    /it took me some time, which i spent unsuccessfully trying to google that link without using quotation marks, which was stupid, before i recalled that there is a search bar on this forum, up there on the right, which lead me to my own post.../ This one: it's dead because ... well, I don't remember exactly, I either moved or renamed folder which contained that file, so cloud.mail.ru broke that link. And unfortunatelly they use autogenerator for public links, so i can't "revive" it, only create a new one https://cloud.mail.ru/public/72VE/BGtaQEVtN btw, back then this file was immediatelly reuploaded by someone else to other place https://drive.google.com/open?id=1gwjvEs4MGotOtyQKup3BVIoFUA4NUwXo
  4. skylancer-3441
    ...from article by Alexey Khlopotov, which appeared in Technika i Vooruzhenie 2017-09 https://imgur.com/a/0wK917f
  5. skylancer-3441
    new DTR issue http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com/#folio=1 with those renders:
  6. skylancer-3441
    From one of several Swiss military-related magazines, which are scanned and available on the Internet - Der Schweizer Soldat, Vol.43 (1967-1968) №09, page 203 - some very interesting mockup: Googletranslate to english: Apparently this is the same company as one which was responsible for P3 and APE 4x4s
  7. skylancer-3441
    I guess some Russian-speaking viewers watch it only with sound muted.
  8. skylancer-3441
    Speaking of relatively fast options - somewhere not online, I guess. Well, if we exclude option of buying on Ebay or somewhere else. It seems to me that in English-speaking countries large public libraries definitely should have IDR issues of 1970s. In non-English-speaking countries one probably have to look at largest of public libraries, or some very specialized libraries. For example for me personally it would require 500 mile trip to get to RSL aka Leninka (which is simply largest Russian public library) in Moscow. Even though I got this on Google Books, it took me smth like half a dozen man-hours to get a single article, and then sometimes they are only partly available. The thing is, in order to protect copyright and avoid been sued by publishers again, Google now by default puts everything on Google Books in that snippet view mode. One actually can ask them to review copyright status, to put any book in full view - which I did for about 400 other magazine issues and books over last 14 months - but in this particular case they would definitely deny such request. With recent news of books from 1923 going into Public Domain this January, this IDR's book could be put in full view somewhere in - what, 2078? Although judging by Popular Mechanics and Life magazines, sometimes Google makes a deal with publishers of some important magazines, in order to allow full view but not downloading (=no "download pdf" option. One still can, obviously, manually save all pages) - of those magazines which are still not in Public Domain. But I have no idea whether anyone in - whoever is a copyright holder for IDR right now - would be interested in doing that, even if someone asks them. Anyway, I don't think they will listen me on historical importance of old issues of their magazines been freely available. Alternatively one might hope that some day Internet Archive's scanning project would include IDR issues, and that they would become available under their "borrow" option. Unfortunately currently they work on much smaller scale than Google did, and they do not use whichever scans are available at GoogleBooks and Hathitrust, and judging by what they usually endorse - defense and military oriented publications are definitely not their top priority, so this also seems rather far from now. It's pity that even though people in different countries have scanned - unofficially - a whole bunch of different magazines from the past - IDR, Jane's Defense Weekly, Soldat und Technik, Military Technology and many others - are not among them. People obviously have different priorities - even those which definitely have access to such magazines and from time to time do upload articles from older issues, translated into Russian, to their blog
  9. skylancer-3441
    those photos, and several others, could be downloaded at 12Mpix resolution from original posts in Weibo there https://www.weibo.com/2818916890/Hhiq6BO1a and there https://www.weibo.com/2818916890/Hh8pHy3gb by manually replacing small part of link to each image - with this https://wx1.sinaimg.cn/mw690/a805421agy1g0b3qqcwlvj23342bknpe.jpg becoming this https://wx1.sinaimg.cn/large/a805421agy1g0b3qqcwlvj23342bknpe.jpg another photo of this model, from a different angle:
  10. skylancer-3441
    Jane's article was more precise with words - "for the first time in the Middle East" because apparently it's third time this model appears at exhibitions, and second time it looks like this - all desert-ish
  11. skylancer-3441
    Still, dissatisfaction was there, and all the way back it 1964 (prototype was built 2 years later) Chelyabinsk proposed (second version of) object 775 without such weakspot. Although they achieved that partly because driver was not in hull. first and second version of 775: But in 1975 they came up with Object 785 which reportedly lacked that weakspot too, and this time driver was in hull (in a reclining position - someting that apparently was tested all the way back in 1962-1964 on modified t-54s and pt-76; something that was proposed on first version of 775; and something that finally could make its way into Russian Army with Armata only now, decades later... along with steering wheel. Which is another thing (lack of thing) they were not satisfied with for decades, all the way since T-54s and T-10s in 1950s, which is why Object 770 has it's motorcycle-type steering wheel: ) And then over the last 45 years there were at least 7 more projects without that UFP weakspot, with T-14 been like 8th one.
  12. skylancer-3441
    Well, not exactly zero, obviously, considering that t90m still has upper frontal plate, position of driver, and engine/transmission quite similar to t72, or t64 (and all that thanks to Kharkov attempt to fulfill request of fitting than-next-generation tank into 36 metric tons). I guess it's still smth like 96 man-hours to remove or change engine, isn't it?
  13. skylancer-3441
    Another article on Bradley from this book, about IDR's journalists' experience with Bradley, - and it's even worse this time, with an entire page 88 been not available at all. GoogleBooks' text version of any given page ends with some words from following page, so I was able to get those words about turret, which are there in text-only version of this article behind spoiler, - but nothing more. It's either locked or I just was not able to figure out a specific phrase which would be available on that page only and nowhere else.
  14. skylancer-3441
    "relatively" It's much narrower, compared to what could be expected given Namer's width when measured by tracks - partly because of those antimine seats and because of whatever is located behind them on this pic: in the end soldiers seat in wery tight knee-to-knee configuration, although on those two pics its partly because of backpacks they wearing. different seats + not wearing backpacks inside = much more spacious, look at this Bradley photo: or T-15 Armata, to that matter:
  15. skylancer-3441
    aroud 3:42-3:43 when they replace 3d model of that vehicle to 3d model of Boxer - one can somewhat compare those two. To me it looks like that thing was about 20 feet long and 6 feet 3 - 6 feet 7 high by hull's roof excluding turret, and (as seen on 3:36) rather wide, - overall, hull allmost as big (mere feet-and-a-half shorter) as that of the Bradley. It looks smaller in earlier part of the video, when it materializes around 2 soldiers - but than it shoul have gun barrel length of like 5 or 6 feet.
  16. skylancer-3441
    ermm... I kinda already posted that pic - even earlier than at otvaga forum - on previous page of this tread.
  17. skylancer-3441
    btw, it's on par with soviet late 80s BMPT (Obj.781 Sb.8). Overall, 299-based HIFV looks just like BMPT-as-it-should-be (in case one thinks of it as of BMP-T, aka IFV-H, still retaining distmountable infantry) I guess it looks better in tablechart - when one proposes IFV with 8 so-called "active dismounts" instead of just 4. With just 4 - it would be on par with some pity old version of Mowag Tornado from early 60s ...although Porsche's Durchburch-Spz proposal still had one more of those guys:
  18. skylancer-3441
    ...and let's not forget what appears to be 4 portholes, 2 on each side - I guess that's what those 2 rectangular holes at the back are intend to portray. Also visible on that image which appeared earlier:
  19. skylancer-3441
    barrel lenght of main gun at this new pic is some 2 feet 2 inches, or about 66cm, shorter than on that older pic. Also hull turned out to be somewhat higher. Though not by mach, as this comparison with BMP-2, aligned by bottom, clearly shows: height on the inside is about 4 feet (120 cm). Shoulder width of 22,5 inches (57 cm) per person - about as mach as US designers provided for dismounts in Bradley - fine if one does not wear much gear or body armor or winter clothing. But with any of that - anyone higher than 5'11 would not fit properly. Considering that apparently they planned to produce it in like early-mid 00s, and that by this time average russian male conscript (in real life Russia) was about 5'10 - that makes it uncomfortable for half of the manpower of would-be-Soviet-Army-of-00s. And all that - not even including forearms. BTW, when measured excluding tracks width - lower part of hull of this thing is also narrower than same part of BMP-2's hull, even when measured on the outside, let alone on the inside. Although to be fair BMP-2 spends allmost an entire feet of width on fuel tank and storage space, which are located between seats of dismounts. comparison with tank:
  20. skylancer-3441
    that video with 3d models and crew in mockup of future vehicle's interior kinda reminds me of FCS adverts from mid-00s, The main difference is - monitors got bigger.
  21. skylancer-3441
    And here is an article from International Defence Review on Bradley - which was reprinted in 1982 in Volume 13 "Tracked armoured vehicles" (of The International Defence Review Special Series) - a compilation of articles which appeared in IDR in late 70s. This time I wasn't so lucky, so an entire page 62 was obtained only in plain text without any formatting, which is a mess. So I've decided to exclude it from text version of article. it repeats this page https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uiug.30112075689338;view=1up;seq=12 anyway
  22. skylancer-3441
    article from Armed Forces Journal International, issue of May 16, 1970 (via GoogleBooks, which unfortunatelly shows this magazine in snippet view mode only. So, it's possible to recover text over the course of several hours, all of it - in case one is lucky enough, but puctires are all gone)
  23. skylancer-3441
    With this phrasing - you are setting a bar too low, compared to what they (soviet army and especially soviet defense industry) had advertised as achievable, and were paid big bucks (well, roubles and other goods) to provide.
  24. skylancer-3441
    They were testing 100/115/125mm HE against 160mm monolitic steel armor too
  25. skylancer-3441
    Just look at this photo:
×
×
  • Create New...