Mike E

OK, I see what you mean.  Yes, I think the chally 1 and 2 are the only designs that have an actual notch in the glacis plate where the driver's position is.  However, the driver's position also greatly compromises the protection in the center of the hull of an Abrams as well:
 

 
Anything that can penetrate that driver's hatch isn't going to have too damn much in its way going through the turret basket.  To the left and right of the hatch are big cellular fuel tanks that add a considerable amount of extra protection.  Obviously, there aren't any centerline because that's where the driver is.  Additionally, the cutout in the armor is going to weaken it there because of free edge effect.

......
 
 
 

Just keep the A-10s in service or start slapping more rocket pods to skyhawks and F-4s you twats 
 
The 21st century is so fucking disapointing
 
the Japs are fags
 
America is getting ride of all the cool stuff 
 
i cant drive around in my ural picking up chicks in Minsk 
 
No more Czech beer and Political officers
 
Why even live? 

Really? I thought it was 235mm at 68 degrees, giving a LOS of around 630 mm.
680 mm was just an estimate someone he gave for the T-90A.

There is a 1 minute long video with that T-90A in Gumri shelling terrorists, i will post it later, when will get to PC.
Patriot Park. This is temporary exibition, tanks will be moved to new building after it will be finished. And yes, Kubinka tanks are slowly being moved to that new park.

Well, it lost to the Best tank ever made - the mighty Oplot-BM!

That MERA...i like this name  
    It is 2-piece device where both parts are equally important. As i understood explosives creates a shockwaves and vibration in ballistic part, that increase it's ability to fuck up HEAT jets and APFSDS (i guess). 
 
 
So, Object 477 could load it's 8-shots autoloader only when turret was in -+20 degrees arc to hull.

This is the thing; 
 
The US doesn't have their hands on Relikt, they might not even know the exact layout of it. As such, it is dubious to claim it can *defeat something it was never tested against*. The only feasible way of defeating Relikt is to use multiple tips, which are sacrificed during the process of defeating the ERA. Problem with this is that mass (and hence penetration) will be lost in the process. 
 
T-14 doesn't use Relikt, it either uses an improved version of it, or something completely different. 
 
With 7 gears, a high power-to-weight ratio, lot of torque, and a low ground pressure, cross-country speed should be at least 55 km/h. I can't tell you how fast it can accelerate, but I can tell you that it will be faster than anything in service right now. 
 
T-14 might become unmanned eventually, but it is a long way off. 

Yo dawg, check out my Marder.
 

 
It looks even "better" on the inside.
 

I present an alternative for worst StuG III vismod:
 

 
Base vehicle being a BMD-1 here

T-14 turrets without "metal shell" on top of them.

Those Bundeswehr videos are cool.  I have been watching them with the close captioning set to translate to English.  The results are...odd.
 

 

This is a 737-200.  It has two JT8D turbofan engines that live happily in pods underneath the wings, guzzling down air and Jet-A.
 

 
This is an ME-262.  It has two Jumo 004 engines that live... not exactly happily in pods under the wings, guzzling down air and whatever the Nazis had that was flammable.
 

 
 
This is an F-14A of VF-84 "Jolly Rogers."  It has two TF30 low bypass turbofans that sit at the end of long inlets with three variable-geometry shock ramps, a variable-position spill door and a boundary layer diverter per engine.  These elements are computer-controlled to optimize pressure recovery, oblique shock wave location, minimize spillage drag and keep flow distortion to a minimum.
 

 
 
 
Air intake design in combat aircraft turns out to be extremely complicated.
 
Unlike an airliner, which is expected to cruise at subsonic speeds all the time, and unlike a wunderwaffe, which is expected to vaguely work enough so that the Americans give you a cushy technical consultant's job after the war instead of leaving you for the Russians, a modern fighter air intake has to work well at subsonic speeds, at supersonic speeds, when the fighter is maneuvering, it must deliver undistorted air to the engines, and it must be as light and offer as little drag and other aerodynamic disruptions as possible.  Oh yeah, and nowadays it should contribute as little as possible to radar cross section.  Have fun!
 
For good subsonic performance, the air intake has to produce smooth, gradual transitions in flow as it is decelerated and finally fed into the engine.  This produces a decrease in dynamic pressure and a corresponding rise in static pressure.  A relatively simple and light inlet design can do this well.
 
For supersonic flight, things get more complicated.  The air must be decelerated to subsonic velocity by a shock wave, or, ideally, by a series of shocks.  The exact position and angle of the shock waves changes with mach number, so for very best efficiency, the intake requires some sort of variable geometry.
 
The first supersonic fighters used nose-mounted intakes.
 

 

 
In a number of designs, there were central shock-producing spikes that also doubled as radar mounts:


 

 
In these designs the shock cone could translate forwards and backwards some amount to optimize shock location.
 
However, as radar became more and more important to air combat, shock-cone mounted radars ceased to be large enough to fit the wide, powerful radar sets that designers wanted.  The air intakes were moved to the sides and bottom of the aircraft.
 

 
This Q-5 is a particularly good example because the design was originally based one that had a nose-mounted intake (the J-6/MiG-19).
 
Putting the intakes on the sides does get them out of the way, but it causes another problem.  Airflow moving over the surface of the fuselage develops a turbulent boundary layer, and ingesting this turbulent boundary layer into the engines causes problems in the compressors.  Aircraft with intakes mounted next to the fuselage, therefore, require some means of keeping the boundary layer air from getting into the engines.  Usually this is accomplished by having a slight offset and a splitter plate:
 

 
However, there are other means of boundary layer management.  The JSF and the new Chinese fighter designs use diverterless supersonic inlets:
 

 
In these a bump in front of the inlet deflects the boundary layer away from the engine intake using sorcery advanced fluid dynamics.  This system is lighter, and probably allows better stealth than traditional inlet designs.
 
Fighters must be able to maneuver, sometimes violently, and this can affect airflow into the engines.  Placing the air intakes underneath the fuselage, or underneath the wings helps the situation at high angles of attack, as the fuselage or wing helps deflect the airflow towards the intakes:
 

 
The intake location of the F-16:
 

 
and also the MiG-29:
 

 
Take advantage of this fact.
 
 
Finally, air intakes are potentially large sources of radar returns, so on modern designs they have to be tailored to minimize this problem.  One of the biggest ways to do this is to hide the engine's compressor blades from the front, as large, whirling pieces of metal are very good radar reflectors:
 

 
As you can see, the compressor face of the engine in the YF-23 is almost completely hidden.  You can also see that the inlet duct avoids right angles that would act as retroreflectors, and that it has an unusual boundary layer management system.




There is a lot more ground to cover, but these are the basics of how combat aircraft air intakes work, and why they look the way they look.

The Sabra was the first tank to be shown unless you want to call that Chinese amphibious IFV thingy a tank. 
 
A T-72 comes from outta nowhere in the "T-99" Armata section. Type 99 does as well. 
 
I like how the Altay and K2 are practically the same, yet the Altay is better. 
 
HA! T-14 ARMATA BEST TANK! BETTER THAN ACTUAL ARMATA!

It's kinda the forum motto.
 

This is Molot picture, giving idea how turret looks like.

Nikolai! What is this bullshit? It has sheet metal for armor!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkLr3U7xbXE

Look at this abomination! This is T-54/55 upgrade.

 
 

 

 

 

 

People really havent heard of spaced armor in the states now have they

T-90s? The National Guard is knocking out Armatas every other week these days!

Say what you want about the PLA
 
But they definitely got the camo down for when they go to war in minecraft 

Finally! I've been waiting for this day, for many, many years.
Could you translate the posters? If not I know a few other Russian speakers, but thanks for sharing this.
(It's 3 AM my time, and I'm hysterical with joy right now cause of this...just...amazing)

Thank him for his service for me. There is a good chance he could of been covering my fat ass while I struggled out of a BMP if things hit the fan