Wiedzmin

Leopard 3SL mod B studie, front mounted engine and transmission 

vehicle have protection level - 120mm APFSDS from 1km, 120mm HL, 110mm HESH, all at +-30 deg, but at which height this level was reached will look later, as for KE part i think only upper part 

Btw @Molota_477 which report and variant of Leo3SL is this ?

btw one more variant of Leopard 3 hull 

@Molota_477

where this DM33 pics taken from ?

Type 99 turret

Type 15

120mm DM23

5 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

Are you sure about the Patria AMV? It obviously is designed with modular armor, but the Rosomak (with reduced armor protection) has a 3 mm spaced plate in front of 8 mm base armor. Rosomak-M has a 10 + 18 mm spaced array.

it's only basic structure armour, without any addons i will make version with addons later, if will have more info about it, don't have thickness of LAV25 and Stryker cermamic 

not sure about LAV25 having 36 deg(only about angle)

this is basic armour structure, without any addons

it's 2A46 and it's Frankenstein museum, they also have JS-2 with KV-2 turret mockup IIRC

14 minutes ago, sksslrkalqek said:

 

What does BS mean?
 

bullshit

Mk1-2 turrets

Mk3 without frontal part ?

mk3 hull

On 9/2/2020 at 7:03 PM, sksslrkalqek said:

Does anyone know the original version of this?

it's a BS, thats why nodoby post full report 

100mm APDS and 125mm HEAT

125mm APFSDS with core and 115mm APFSDS with core

Nakpadon armor pack

Namer assembly, pic with guy welding is view at hull side from a top, at driver "doghouse" area

7 minutes ago, heretic88 said:

is far superior to T-72A in every imaginable way.

did they try same test's with D-20 HE on Leo2 whic was tested on T-72 ?:)

@SH_MM

funny thing is, that real targets that represent T-80 etc was named  M1980 and M1990(expected in year 2000 lol), all of these was simple steel plate without spacing or whatever, just one steel plate(various thicknesses for M80 and M90) at 70°, and nothing wih "uh BRL1 hypothesised T-72" or any other bullshit.

as for BRL2 there was description that it was to heavy to fit on real tank, but wasn't much heavier than L2AV has...

3 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

 

This is the 38 mm core (DM13 prototype) or the 32 mm core (DM23 prototype) APFSDS? The previous document stated the inability of the 120 mm FRG tungsten round (38 mm core, I assume) to defeat BRL-1 at ranges greater than 2,000 meters.

there is no any details, only that at some point brits used XL22E1, C24 and C81/31 APFSDS and germans used some "DU" round made from US Stabaloy, proto-XM827 maybe?

maybe difference is angles, maybe they really used some protoDM23 later, i don't know, now when archives is closed mostly we need some time to wait until it will open again but... , or maybe somebody have some additional info? 

@skylancer-3441 maybe you have something ?

13 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

That also explains why the UK believed the M1 Abrams could be defeated using 125 mm monobloc APFSDS rounds at distances greater than 4,000 meters!

problem with UK round was yaw, thats why it's penetrated BRL-2 "randomly" 

there was also some tests with 

BRL1 at 60 deg

XM774 26 diam - 7,5km 50% of pen

BRL1 60 deg FRG  120 tungsten - 10km

BRL 2 60 deg same - 2km

and some DU tests etc...

11 hours ago, SH_MM said:

And what exactly makes you think that the turret front of the M1 Abrams can withstand the XM774 APFSDS

don't argue with religious fanatics

1 hour ago, STGN said:

1. Oh wow you got internal measurement from photogrammetry, you must be a genius

is that geometry is hard for your understanding? i don't see any reason why photogrammetry of real tank + measures check + pics of ripped of M1A1 sides is doesn't give you a chance to check all "LOS" that you need(especially when you can check where the plate is, where the hatch is etc), or you just god of 3d models and can make it more accurate than real tank ?

i think remembered you, you was on defenceforumindia ? 

is that your scheme ?

1 hour ago, STGN said:

Can you see the images I posted

same question 

1 hour ago, STGN said:

official drawings

have you ever seen any real factory blueprints lol ?

1 hour ago, STGN said:

But I look forward to your photogrammetry of the inside of the armor.

well, why don't you make your own ? to prove that everything is wrong ? 

1 hour ago, STGN said:

You mean that I argue

you trying to protect your believes, i'm not interested in that, if you want really discuss i'm interested, but all i see now, "all you data is from GJ!1" but i showed you that i used only external plates thicknesses, and you keeps put your fingers in your ears....

1 hour ago, STGN said:

because you are the one just posting a picture putting on values with out having any evidence or logic behind it.

oh funny thing, i though you was doing that, because i can't see any real arguments  

just to be clear, if you really want discuss "how we will get accurate LOS" ok go, i'm interested, if you keeps insists "oh all your pics a shit, because i think mine better" well, no go...

I am fully admit that I could be wrong in my estimates, but so far I've not seen any counter-evidence from you. Only "I believe that if ...", etc.  Please show your geometrically based figures, not some estimates like"theoretical if LFP los is 650mm, then turret 100% must be..." ?

1 hour ago, STGN said:

First argument: Gaijins 19,5" figure is wrong because it measures from the wrong point.

i use only GJ thickness of external plates, all other i get from photogrammetry and measures, what else you don't understand ?

1 hour ago, STGN said:

Second argument: The frontal turret armor of the Abrams is adjustable, it is not like the front hull armor with a solid monolithic plate of armor in the back, rather it is more like the bustle armor, you bolt armor plates to a "thin" back plate.

source ?

1 hour ago, STGN said:

from CIA drawings if you scale them to the tanks dimensions

scaling of schemes... good luck

1 hour ago, STGN said:

If your didn't get it the reason I mentioned the protection leve

i'm not interested in protection levels

1 hour ago, STGN said:

Which is base on the same images you posted though in a bit better resolution, here is a taste:

and ? i have high-res on that pics it's not secret, and they match photogrammetry 

1 hour ago, STGN said:

That "productions stages" drawing looks very much like its from a model kit, not actual turret

good luck to you with your hollywar

p.s and please do not confuse the words "argument" and "personal opinion", because all your "arguments" is just your words, without any sources or proves 

 Maybe you should read something before posting ? especially part about "M1(M1 105mm)" ?

my estimations ONLY for M1, why you trying to show me M1A1 and M1A2 ? 

11 hours ago, STGN said:

Where to start... I am guessing

try to start with arguments, i'm really not interested in reading wall of text without any arguments, with all respect.

for my estimates i used WT outer plates thicknesses that they posted in developer diary, because they used USG, so all these measures are correct.

for whole frontal part estimate i used photogrammetry of whole M1 and some measures that get from modelers(armorama site etc), i also used M1 dimensional scheme, and all that measures are coincided

as for 4inch frontal plates is often quoted in US sources, so at the moment i use that value, maybe you can give us USG of internal plate ?

or on what source all your claims is based ?

here is scheme showing production stages of M1 turret, so it's have same spacers as hull front, and i think overall same structure, and it corresponds with CIA scheme + i'm not tried to get "REAL SIKRIT SPECIAL ARMOR SCHEME!11" only thickness of frontal part.

as for your "armour values" investigation, BRL1 during trials was penetrated by XM774(26mm diam core) from 3km, and it's claimed that BRL1 target was 10% tougher than real M1, but i'm not interested in any armour calculations at the moment.

So, you registered here for reasonable discussion with proofs, or just to chat about that "in some game everything is not right! I think so! but I'm not sure ..." ?

it look like smoke grenade fires after damage(which is quite dangerous)

pics from Fu_Manchu