Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

On 9/10/2017 at 0:18 AM, Mighty_Zuk said:

And there I thought they actually moved on to unitary ammunition. 

 

Also stolen from Otvaga:

 

Test footage of on-target firing from 100m distance.

After 3 shots:

9832153.jpg

 

The 4th shot hits the wooden beam:

9888472.jpg

 

GIF form. Notice the target also gets another piece off. Some speculated it to be shockwave-related.

giphy.gif

It's possible that a section of the sabot hit the wooden beam.

 

Edit: No way that that's 100 meters, look at the elevation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Taken from waronline.org Russian speaking Israeli defense forum. 

 

All this propaganda talk (1:50 - 3:00) is really unnecessary. And it's just a blatant insult to the engineers. 

Also at 4:20 (Blaze it) they use Armored Warfare footage and show a Merkava 2D as a Mark 4. Tsk tsk tsk. "Nye pravilnaya markovka druzya!"

Can't provide more commentary at the moment as I'm only half through the video.

20:07 - Apparently Leclerc is the most modern NATO tank. 

26:10 - Ability to control unmanned systems. However the current construction of the tank probably doesn't allow it to utilize this capability while on the move, or during engagement. They missed an opportunity to free up the 3rd crew member to do exclusively UAV/UGV operation duties.

32:55 - T-14's armored capsule does indeed have a spall liner. However it is painted white so it's not visible.

35:00 - T-14 will get soft-cover ERA bags. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

 

Taken from waronline.org Russian speaking Israeli defense forum. 

 

All this propaganda talk (1:50 - 3:00) is really unnecessary. And it's just a blatant insult to the engineers. 

Also at 4:20 (Blaze it) they use Armored Warfare footage and show a Merkava 2D as a Mark 4. Tsk tsk tsk. "Nye pravilnaya markovka druzya!"

Can't provide more commentary at the moment as I'm only half through the video.

20:07 - Apparently Leclerc is the most modern NATO tank. 

26:10 - Ability to control unmanned systems. However the current construction of the tank probably doesn't allow it to utilize this capability while on the move, or during engagement. They missed an opportunity to free up the 3rd crew member to do exclusively UAV/UGV operation duties.

32:55 - T-14's armored capsule does indeed have a spall liner. However it is painted white so it's not visible.

35:00 - T-14 will get soft-cover ERA bags. 

This is Zvezda, and Voennaya Priyomka. It is like totalshit2 of military-related TV shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Quote

Elements of APS for the universal combat platform "Armata".
3UOF24 100-mm munition for APS on BMP B-11 "Kurganets-25"
3UOF25 100-mm munition for "Afganit" APS with high-explosive fragmentation projectile 3OF77 and charge TKB-941 for tank Т-14, and Heavy IFV Т-15

 

Edited by LoooSeR
Damn, missed that translator put APC instead of APS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

So they are getting the 100mm gun now? 

Nope. They write APC instead of APS.

You can understand this when they say "Afghanit APC".

 

The 100mm ammunition is for the Afghanit APS of course.

 

But the interesting part is that they list 2 separate designations for the Afghanit's ammo, meaning there are probably 2 variants - 1 for the Armata family (T-14 and T-15) and 1 for the lighter Kurganets.

 

If I were to guess, the Kurganets uses fragment-free munitions as it will face a lower threat of top attack munitions (fragments help the Afghanit's horizontal launchers reach fairly high) and needs more focus on dismount protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Nope. They write APC instead of APS.

You can understand this when they say "Afghanit APC".

 

The 100mm ammunition is for the Afghanit APS of course.

 

But the interesting part is that they list 2 separate designations for the Afghanit's ammo, meaning there are probably 2 variants - 1 for the Armata family (T-14 and T-15) and 1 for the lighter Kurganets.

 

If I were to guess, the Kurganets uses fragment-free munitions as it will face a lower threat of top attack munitions (fragments help the Afghanit's horizontal launchers reach fairly high) and needs more focus on dismount protection.

Afganit is belived to use EFPs warheads in it's interceptors, not a fragmentation to hit incoming projectiles. Also, Afganit's hard kill system can't do shit against top attack munitions, thats why there is an extensive soft-kill system in development/developed for Armata/Kurganets/Boomerang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LoooSeR said:

Afganit is belived to use EFPs warheads in it's interceptors, not a fragmentation to hit incoming projectiles. Also, Afganit's hard kill system can't do shit against top attack munitions, thats why there is an extensive soft-kill system in development/developed for Armata/Kurganets/Boomerang.

According to whom? You don't need tube launchers for MEFP, and you certainly cannot defeat APFSDS with MEFP.

And when I said top attack I meant shallow angles of approach. I believe the Drozd was able to defeat ATGMs with 30° elevation relative to the tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

According to whom? You don't need tube launchers for MEFP, and you certainly cannot defeat APFSDS with MEFP.

And when I said top attack I meant shallow angles of approach. I believe the Drozd was able to defeat ATGMs with 30° elevation relative to the tank.

According to pieces of patent that was leaked. AFAIK there was 2 EFP warheads aimed sideways in each rocket/interceptor. And what is MEFP? 

 

30° degrees is far from being top attack. It is like within angles at which HEAT shells can land at the vehicle because of distance and elevation differences between shooter and target. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:

Afganit is belived to use EFPs warheads in it's interceptors, not a fragmentation to hit incoming projectiles. Also, Afganit's hard kill system can't do shit against top attack munitions, thats why there is an extensive soft-kill system in development/developed for Armata/Kurganets/Boomerang.

 

That patent has nothing common with Afghanit and patented by another organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

According to pieces of patent that was leaked. AFAIK there was 2 EFP warheads aimed sideways in each rocket/interceptor. And what is MEFP? 

 

30° degrees is far from being top attack. It is like within angles at which HEAT shells can land at the vehicle because of distance and elevation differences between shooter and target. 

 

Do you still have a link to the leaked patent pieces?

I believe @Andrei_bt got it right, but I'm still curious about the patent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
    • By LoooSeR
      I want to show you several late Soviet MBT designs, which were created in 1980s in order to gain superiority over NATO focres. I do think that some of them are interesting, some of them look like a vehicle for Red Alert/Endwar games. 
           
           Today, Russia is still use Soviet MBTs, like T-80 and T-72s, but in late 1970s and 1980s Soviet military and engineers were trying to look for other tank concepts and designs. T-64 and other MBTs, based on concept behind T-64, were starting to reaching their limits, mostly because of their small size and internal layout. 
       
      PART 1
       
       
      Object 292
       
         We open our Box of Communism Spreading Godless Beasts with not so much crazy attempt to mate T-80 hull with 152 mm LP-83 gun (LP-83 does not mean Lenin Pride-83). It was called Object 292.
       
       
       
          First (and only, sadly) prototype was build in 1990, tested at Rzhevskiy proving ground (i live near it) in 1991, which it passed pretty well. Vehicle (well, turret) was developed by Leningrad Kirov factory design bureau (currently JSC "Spetstrans") Because of collapse of Soviet Union this project was abandoned. One of reasons was that main gun was "Burevestnik" design bureau creation, which collapsed shortly after USSR case to exist. It means that Gorbachyov killed this vehicle. Thanks, Gorbach!
       
          Currently this tank is localted in Kubinka, in running condition BTW. Main designer was Nikolay Popov.
       
          Object 292, as you see at photos, had a new turret. This turret could have been mounted on existing T-80 hulls without modifications to hull (Object 292 is just usual serial production T-80U with new turret, literally). New Mechanical autoloading mechanism was to be build for it. Turret had special Abrams-like bustle for ammunition, similar feature you can see on Ukrainian T-84-120 Yatagan MBT and, AFAIK, Oplot-BM.
          Engine was 1250 HP GTD-1250 T-80U engine. 152 mm main smoothbore gun was only a little bit bigger than 2A46 125 mm smoothbore gun, but it had much better overall perfomance.
          This prototype was clearly a transitory solution between so called "3" and "4th" generation tanks.
       
          Some nerd made a model of it:
      _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
       
       
      ........Continue in Part 2
    • By seppo
      Hello,
      this is my first post. Please no bully. :3
       
      Panzerkampfwagen 2000
      In 1988 Germany developed a concept for a tank with two crew men. In order to test whether it's possible for only two crew men to operate a tank effectively, a Leopard 1 and a Leopard 2 were modified. 


      Field trials were held in 1990 and subsequently it was concluded to be a viable concept in 1992. The project was however canceled, because the downfall of the Soviet Union meant, that a new battle tank was no longer needed. Furthermore Israel stealing submarines and reunification meant that the budget was not sufficient either.
       
      Neue Gepanzerte Plattform
      In 1995 a concept for a whole family of armored vehicles(SPAAG, MBT, IFV) was developed, where the MBT would be manned by two man, just like the Panzerkampfwagen 2000. A prototype was build and tested in 1997. However a further budget cut lead to the cancellation in 1998. Wegmann desgin: Turret + autoloader:
      http://www.patent-de.com/pdf/DE19644524A1.pdf
      Diehl developed an APS for this tank: AWiSS


      EGS:
      Hull length = 8,67m
      Full width = 3,98m
      Width between the tracks = 3,5m
      Height = 2,71m
      The intended combat weight for the complete tank was between 55t and 77t.
      Can anyone calculate the the cross section areas and the protection levels for the front and the side, assuming mid-90s filler materials were used?
       
      Thanks for your attention!
    • By Tied
      Yes
       
      i personally support it, by finding the KGB Felix Dzerzhinsky greatly improved state scurrility both inside the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and abroad (their jurisdiction was only domestic, but they kept the internationally influential people safe at night)   a dedicated defender of both the Revolution and all the Soviet peoples     what do you think of this news?
×
×
  • Create New...