heretic88

Sorry that I meddle in this, but on that photo, is not a T-72B. Late T-72A from 1983.

Yes, we'll pay for this with 400 hours of overtime  

Well, not just T-72s... We had similar experiences with T-55s too. On the other hand, polish built T-34s were excellent, probably the best...
We usually sent air defense stuff (ZSU-23-4, 2K12 Kub, 2K11 Krug, etc) for capital repair to poland, and the quality of maintenance works was always excellent. Strange that Bumar Labedy was an exception,  when other polish manufacturing/maintenance plants were capable of first class work...

Well hard to wirte for patryotism resons but indeed - polish made T-72M1 alway was theriblle quality. Polish Army in 80's had the same problem - soviet made T-72M1 was quite OK, polish ones - Jusus fuckin Christ!  - like in pdf linked in my previous post. All is depend on non-existinq quality controll in Bumar-Labędy. And big hurry whit running up T-72M1 production in Poland.
 
BTW - funny quiz for you guys - how many producktion lines T-72M1 was in socjalyst Poland?
And which components where banned by Soviets for productioon in Poland?

Merry Christmas everyone!
 
Regarding polish T-72 reliability... Was there any difference between domestic and export models? Just asking this because according to old hungarian tankists, there were problems with polish built tanks. One example, a hungarian colonel's memoirs:
 
"A szovjet gyártmányú T-72-esekkel elmentünk több mint kétezer km-t, mire elkezdtek beégni a porlasztócsúcsok, 3-4 ezer km után pedig a turbófeltöltő csapágyai kibuktak a 25 ezres fordulattól. Utána elhasználódtak a bolygóműves kihajtás átömlő furatai, melyek a sok tengelykapcsolót meg egyebeket működtetik. Szóval összességében megbízhatóak voltak. Viszont a lengyel gyártmányú T-72-esek, melyekkel Tatán a negyedik zászlóaljam volt felszerelve, pocsék módon voltak szerelve, 50 kilométert sem mentek el, ha a gyári szerelőbrigád nem végzett rajtuk javítást."
....
"Használtunk csehszlovák gyártmányú T-72-ket is. Végszerelésükben lényegesen jobbak voltak, mint a lengyelek, de gyengébb minőségűek, mint az eredeti szovjet. A csehszlovák kocsik ugyanis hibridek voltak - az előmelegítő román, az üzemanyagtartály magyar, a Gödöllői Gépgyárból, az optika keletnémet, Jena-Zeiss, a motor lengyel."
 
Translation:
Soviet built T-72s ran more than 2000km, when the injector heads began to seize, after 3-4 thousand kilometers the bearings of the turbocharger (obviously not turbo - my correction) began to fail due to 25.000 rpm. Later, the planetary transmission's (oil) outlets began to wear out, which controlled the clutches and other devices. All in all, they were reliable. On the other hand, the polish built T-72s, my 4th battalion on Tata was equipped with,  were terribly badly built, they didnt even ran 50 kilometres unless the factory's mechanics didnt perform repairs on them.
...
"We used czechslovak built T-72s too. They were remarkably better built than polish, but still weaker than the original soviet. Czechslovak tanks were hybrids - pre heater romanian, fuel tanks hungarian from Gödöllő Machine Factory, optics east german, Jena-Zeiss, engine polish."

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

Who needs that? You only need one or two strong guys  Watch from 2:45...
 
 

Also do not forget the soviet evaluation about M-60A1 protection. They clearly state that from head on, the M-60 is fully immune to even 115mm APFSDS...
"От бронебойно-подкалиберных снарядов танковых пушек калибра 100, 122 и 115 мм лобовые проекции танка защищены следующим образом:
·       башня - при курсовых углах обстрела ±30° – с дистанции более 3000 м ; при 0° – при стрельбе в упор;"
 
Measurements fully support this, mantlet LOS thickness is more than 380mm in most areas. Yes it is cast armor, but even with a very pessimistic 80% value, its still above 300mm.
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/404154-fwd2018-04-03-m60a1-gunshield-and-mantlet-measurements/

On hydrostatic driven wheel loader you have 2 methods of braking. First, is simply let your foot off from the accelerator pedal. The pressure in the system acts on the pump, slowing down the machine. Most of the time you use this method. But sometimes, this is not enough, for example emergency braking, or simply holding the machine when pushing up material to the pile. This is why you have a conventional brake too, on my machine it is located on the drive shaft that powers the front axle, it is a simple disc brake. It is also used as a parking brake.

A ton of information here:
 
http://otvaga2004.ru/na-zemle/na-zemle-1/bm-1945-1965_20/

About the last Soviet tank design, some sort of "what if ...." - http://btvt.info/2futureprojects/490_21vek.htm

You tried to say Ptuin, communist, garbage tractor made for illiterates is superior to the Trump, liberating Freedom making Murica Tank!
 
  

22 BRM-1K and 16 BPsV. And all of them are currently modernized by WZM from Poznan - at least 5 vehicles are after that. 
 
The modernized version received:
- new optoelectronic head ZIG-T-2R
- SR HAWK (V)RE battlefield surveillance radar
- IR binoculars JIM LR
- Radmor RRC-9311 AP, AN/PRC-150(C), AN/PRC-117G and AN/PRC-152A radios
- Honeywell TALIN 5000
- MIMIC mine detector
- AP4C and DPO NBC detectors
- SSP-1 OBRA-3 LWR
- Berberys-C multispectral camouflage
- new passive night-vision vehicle devices
 
 

Wonderfull photos of polish "golden autumn" and tanks from 10 Tk Bde by press 11 "Lubuska" Armoured Division.
Photos made by Senior Staff Warrant Officer  Rafał Mniedło:
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

MTLB:
 

A lesser known fact is that certain soviet AFVs can also neutral steer, for example the MTLB and all its derivatives, and everything based on the GM-123 chassis, like SP Artillery or certain elements of the 2K11 Krug SAM system.
Here a beautifully restored 2S3M, at 1:55
 

A lesser known fact is that certain soviet AFVs can also neutral steer, for example the MTLB and all its derivatives, and everything based on the GM-123 chassis, like SP Artillery or certain elements of the 2K11 Krug SAM system.
Here a beautifully restored 2S3M, at 1:55
 

The neutral steer, or pivot steer, means the tank drive one track forward while the other track backward, to perform a turn-on-spot. 
The very first tank with neutral steer, believe it or not, is the German A7V in WWI. 

Here is the transmission of A7V. 

The transmission incorporate two independent gearbox, each connected to a 100-hp engine. The gearbox use clash gears to select speed, and bevel gear to select forward or reverse. It's easy to perform a neutral steer. 
 
Those tanks with electric transmission(St.Chamond, Porsche Tiger, etc.) can easily perform neutral steer, for their twin driving electric motors can rotate in opposite direction. And tanks with twin driving hydraulic motors(Panzer IV mit Hydrostatischem Antrieb) can neutral steer in a similar manner. 
 
As mentioned above, the simplest way to neutral steer is to have seperated gearboxes or sub-transmissions driving both tracks. US airborne tank M551 Sherridan and Ukraine T-84 Oplot are modern approach of this manner. Althought they neutral steer with tracks driving in different speed, thus they cannot pivot steer precisely on the central spot. 


 
The neutral steer capability is more common on dual-flow transmission. 
A dual-flow transmission, or “双流传动” in Chinese, means the power flow from engine into the transmission splitted into driving power flow and steering power flow, then they join together with mesh gears or planetaries. Control these power flows allows the driver to change speed and steer left or right. 
 
The dual-flow principle itself came up even earlier than the tank. The 1899 Vedovelli Priestley electric taxi equipped with double differential steering system, is capable of neutral steering. 

And the first tank with dual-flow transmission is the Schneider-Renault SRB, then evolved into the Char B1 heavy tank. 


The Char B1 tank's dual-flow principle is quite simple. The power splitted into two: the driving power flow into gearbox and drive the main differential; the steering power flow into the appareil Naëder, a hydrostatic pump-motor assembly, can rotate on different speed and direction. 

Char B1 can use appareil Naëder to control its hull howitzer precisly, this principle inspired the Swedish Strv 103 tank. And the US M1 Abrams tanks use a HSU(Hydrostatic Steering Unit) based on the same principle of appareil Naëder. 

(To be continued)

Now it is totally obvious that rearming T-14 with 152mm gun is impossible. New tank needs to be designed.
In my opinion, T-14 is a massive waste of money and time. Fully agree with Hlopotov, Objekt-195 was ready for production, it was equal or better than T-14 in every way, it was a huge mistake of abandoning it. Yes it was expensive, but so is T-14. 9 years lost in vain.
 
http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2018/10/blog-post_0.html