Clan_Ghost_Bear

@SH_MM
@Serge
@DarkLabor
@Scav
Move this discussion to appropriate place as all this is going way offtopic and have completely nothing to do with PLA AFVs. And you have 3 threads to choose from for this, hehe:
http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/1576-french-flair/?page=7
http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/1527-the-leopard-2-thread/?page=22
http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/8-the-swedish-afv-thread-not-just-strv-103s/?page=7
 

Brits make fun of us while they can't even keep their motorists safe from Octopi:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-47144891

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/land-amphibious/3521-us-developing-abrams-upgrades-to-ensure-survivability-into-2030s/amp?__twitter_impression=true
 

Looks like it is back on... (maybe)
 
https://www.defence24.com/poland-goes-back-to-gepard-direct-fire-support-vehicle-schedule-announced
 
 
 

Is this project by KMW legit/being worked on?
https://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/1068772.html

 
 

The Main Battle System. A TARDEC concept that would move crewmen from the tanks into command vehicles,  enabling weight and crew savings over a 4-tank unit of Abrams by 50 percent.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1015742.pdf

The Main Battle System. A TARDEC concept that would move crewmen from the tanks into command vehicles,  enabling weight and crew savings over a 4-tank unit of Abrams by 50 percent.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1015742.pdf

The Main Battle System. A TARDEC concept that would move crewmen from the tanks into command vehicles,  enabling weight and crew savings over a 4-tank unit of Abrams by 50 percent.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1015742.pdf

I guess these are same turrets as well


What a contrived way to make an asinine statement
 

Clearer images:



"New Turret" refers to the turret citadel, with re-used equipment mounted on it.

https://www.rheinmetall.com/en/rheinmetall_ag/press/news/latest_news/index_16512.php

Of course dude, it's drawn by me, I post it about years ago in this thread, I still remember someone informed me that the spelling of its text are wrong 

Any Idea what he's talking about with the XM302? I couldn't find any info about it on the web.

https://btvtinfo.blogspot.com/2017/07/blog-post_91.html

So, did anyone else post pictures of the Marder 2 before?
My friends went to Koblenz and took these pictures:
 
They asked about the penetration of DM33, but apparently it's still being used by Japan so it's "classified"(surprisingly not other coutries).
Otherwise he'd be allowed to share it.

Perforated armor does not work particularly well against APFSDS in general.  Doesn't matter what country the factory is located in.  Perforated armor works by having an array of holes (thus the name) that are sized such that it is statistically likely that an incoming KE threat will catch one of the holes on the very edge.  This tends to mangle the KE threat and also yaw the penetrator so it hit slightly side-on.
 
APFSDS darts have a very high aspect ratio and a relatively small diameter, so they should be fairly easy to mangle and they should be enormously degraded if they rotate even slightly, right?  So far so good.
 
But APFSDS has a number of properties that also make it less vulnerable to perforated armor.  The biggest problem is that APFSDS is really, really fast.  If you impart a given amount of torque on an incoming projectile with a perforated stand-off plate, it will yaw less by the time it reaches the main plate if it's going faster.  A given amount of torque will impart a given angular velocity on a given penetrator, and with APFSDS the penetrators are moving so fast that they don't have much time to yaw before they strike the main plate.
 
On top of that, APFSDS has an extremely high moment of inertia about the yaw axes because it is so long.  A given torque applied to the rod will rotate it less.
 
Finally, APFSDS operates within a semi hydrodynamic regime, and the penetrators erode by design.  They're not like traditional, full-caliber AP rounds that live and die by penetrator integrity, and this makes it a lot harder to apply torques to them in the first place.
 
So, APFSDS is moving too fast to get turnt in time, it's resistant to getting turnt, and it's not easy to turnt it in the first place.  All my sources on the matter (e.g. Hazell 2016) say that armor arrays that try to yaw APFSDS don't work particularly well.  That said, a perforated array would work much better if the perforated array has more inertia.  So, a perforated array made out of, say, depleted uranium might work against APFSDS where steel would fail.  I have suspected in the past that this might be what the "DU mesh" in the Abrams' turret is, but @SH_MM has stated that he thinks a DU-based NERA array is more likely.  In any case, the design of the DU arrays in the armor have changed from model to model.
 
The T-14 almost certainly has ERA built in, and there is no reason to expect that future Russian ERA will look like 1980s vintage K1 "postage stamps".
 
 
The grain size will only go down so much from a single rolling operation.  To get ideal grain sizes, the process needs to be rinsed and repeated a few times.  That costs.

So only thing they had to "deflect" criticism of their beloved Arjun is insults. DRDO should use their skulls as Arjun armor, it will be first MBT impenetrable for direct nuclear warhead hit.

The AN-94 of tank guns?
 
It's a better idea than two actual main guns, which is likely not going to end well if the Russians already had issues with unwanted rotation mounting autocannons.
 
At that point your best bet is likely supersizing the 76 & 90mm CT autocannons we already developed.
 
I can't really speak to the quality of this suggestion, but it's a way to pound out two shots really fast.

Double cannons FTW! 
 

Is there any way Sherman tanks could be upgraded at reasonable cost to still have a role on the battlefield? Assume that your military will never fight with a world-class army (U.S., Russia, China, etc.) and instead will only fight with second-rate armies using 1990s technology at best, or with terrorists, or go on peacekeeping missions. 
 
I'm thinking that the Shermans could have their turrets removed and modern autoloading turrets from other armored vehicles--like the 105mm Stryker gun, or the 40mm autocannon from the CV10, or the 30mm from the BMP-2 (would any of these fit in the Sherman's turret ring?)--could be dropped in, along with their sensors and computers. ATGM launchers could be installed as well. Explosive reactive armor bricks could be attached to the outside, as is common among modern Russian tanks. 
 
Assume that your Sherman fleet is 1,000 tanks, in various states of (dis)repair, so you have enough spare parts to last for many years. 
 
What do you guys think? Thanks. 
 

K-2 is not possible IMHO in polish condition. One factory in Poland want to have cooperation whit South Korea and K2 but it's only marketing proposition. This factory (Cegielski) haven't know-how, politican support, MoD offciall support etc. IMHO no chance to real K-2 in Poland. Not whit this goverment and MoD. Seriously doubt. So despite the fact that K-2 is very good tank - not this time.
And brown nose MoD want any possible weapons system from USA so, despite Leopard 2 in Poland, M1A1PL have some chanses to become real.  And it's very good tank too -depiste 40% bigger  LCC then Leopard's 2 and...lack panoramic thermal viewer for Tc in most verison. And M1A2 will be to expensive for my country.
 
 

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

Well sometimes knowledge in silver but shut the fuck up is pure gold. That what I think about those on AW forum.
 
Point by point:
 
Yes, mostly true.
PT-91M/M1 have better vs KE armour then Leopard 2A4 and as base armour - mucht more weaker then L2A4 against HEAT. But PT-91M/M1 whit ERAWA-2 is mucht better protected then Leopard 2A4. Sad, but it's fact. But from the other hand - Leopard 2A4 outdated PT-91 in all other aspects and tank crews don't event want to lisen about T-72M1/PT-91/Pendakar tank. They just want's Leo-2.
 
 
yes, it's true in case old 2A4.
 
No, not true. AMAP-B is OK, "base armour" in Leopard 2A4 is shit -that's the problem.  Whole protection accoding to polish PGZ shoud be "over 2A5 level" but on test WITU dicover that is not even on this level. Rest is classify but definetly AMAP-B is not problem...in relatio to weight is very good. 
 
 
Part of polish MoD is working on G2G whit USA about take  300-400 M1A1 and upgrade it in Lima.  Estimated cost is ~3bln $ It's forced against polish industry (PGZ want's to deal whit Germans or mod.PT-91M) or Army (they want Leopard 2 tanks). It's just slowly doing by last year - IMHO chance are 50/50 couse nobody (despite part od MoD) want's M1A1PL in Poland.