Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 630
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's interesting. Presentation (which contains this page) which available now on ontres.se is 110 pages long about 2-and-a-half years ago i've downloaded on my computer presentation which was 119

Waffentrager YOU FAKE BULLSXXT and FXXK OFF In case you guys here cannot read Japanese: It says "Height of lens assembly is about 380 mm" May be taken from a manual of digital came

I don't think there is a possible explanation, because people are beginning the argument from the wrong direction. People are making assumptions about the protection level, then try to find sources su

The main problem with the L30 isn't the fact that it's rifled, it's the fact that the propellant charge is pathetic.

Here's a picture of various L30 ammunition from @SH_MM's blog:

JTE14Lc.jpg

Now here's a picture of Rheinmetall 120mm ammunition:
 

 

36ErssN.jpg


Both have (within mm) identical caliber, so you can easily scale the images based on the width of the projectile.

Or, you don't even have to, because it's really obvious that the L30 ammunition is straight-walled while the Rheinmetall 120mm is bottlenecked, and is thus burning oodles more propellant with each shot.  Max chamber pressure is similar too, although the German gun may have a small edge.  Bottom line though is that the German gun turns a lot more nitrocellulose into boom with each shot, and its projectiles therefore kill things deader.

The design of the L30 breech is quite clever, and allows slight economy in the weight and size of the ammunition.  As you can see, it entirely lacks the metallic obturating case at the bottom of each cartridge.  A gun with an L30 style breech mechanism with bottlenecked, one-piece caseless ammunition would really be something.

I doubt this affects performance in the tank biathlon at all, although it is possible that the Leo 2 has received some FCS upgrades that the Chally 2 has no equivalent to.  Chally 2, hell, the entire British military has been cash-strapped and hurting for critical upgrades for years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Collimatrix said:

although it is possible that the Leo 2 has received some FCS upgrades that the Chally 2 has no equivalent to.  Chally 2, hell, the entire British military has been cash-strapped and hurting for critical upgrades for years.

 

I totally forgot the Chally 2 also has the same FCS as it did in 1998 (along with armor, gun, 1200hp engine)... now 20 years old. I feel like Britain is competing with Germany on how quickly they can self destruct their country. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord_James said:

 

I totally forgot the Chally 2 also has the same FCS as it did in 1998 (along with armor, gun, 1200hp engine)... now 20 years old. I feel like Britain is competing with Germany on how quickly they can self destruct their country. 

Germany at least keeps a small # of vehicles to close to top standard.  Upgrade programs should get an obsolete Leo 2 fleet up to date as quickly as you can get them through your factories.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SH_MM said:

Germany won.

 

https://www.dvidshub.net/news/280177/germany-takes-prize-strong-europe-tank-challenge-winner

 

Sweden got the second place, Austria came in third. Like last year, the lower places probably won't be officially revealed.

 

last I checked, 810 > 763: 

 

7 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

DfG_l9_W0AEvuds.jpg

 

... or is this chart wrong? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Serge said:

What ?

Leclerc MBT are not last !

 

Makes my day. 

 

Well if the numbers for the scores are to be trusted, there is only 86 points of difference between the US and the French team.

So between the 4th and the 7th place the contenders could as well be considered equals.

 

The Ukrainian will most likely always struggle because I don't think that they use standard NATO procedures (or something close to it) so those kinds of events will always be slightly different to what they are trained to.

Put a western crew with a western tank (hypothetically) on the tank biathlon and they will perform equally bad.

 

Dat edit war on the wiki page though xD

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Strong_Europe_Tank_Challenge&action=history

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Alzoc said:

 

Well if the numbers for the scores are to be trusted, there is only 86 points of difference between the US and the French team.

So between the 4th and the 7th place the contenders could as well be considered equals.

 

The Ukrainian will most likely always struggle because I don't think that they use standard NATO procedures so those kinds of events will always be slightly different to what they are trained to.

Put a western crew with a western tank (hypothetically) on the tank biathlon and they will perform equally bad.

Tank biathlon has WARPACT procedures?! :blink:

:lol:BEST-JOKE-EVER!!! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alzoc said:

 

Well if the numbers for the scores are to be trusted, there is only 86 points of difference between the US and the French team.

So between the 4th and the 7th place the contenders could as well be considered equals.

 

The Ukrainian will most likely always struggle because I don't think that they use standard NATO procedures (or something close to it) so those kinds of events will always be slightly different to what they are trained to.

Put a western crew with a western tank (hypothetically) on the tank biathlon and they will perform equally bad.

 

Dat edit war on the wiki page though xD

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Strong_Europe_Tank_Challenge&action=history

 

Yeah there are distinct groups in the scores.

 

Germany, Sweden

Austria

France, Poland, UK, US

Ukraine

 

I wish they gave a more detailed breakdown, its kind of a what?!? that the US got 7th and yet won the seperate Shoot-off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the website of the Austrian Truppendienst magazine (the official magazine of the Austrian military), a summary has been published by the Major of the Panzerbataillon 14:

 

https://www.truppendienst.com/themen/beitraege/artikel/die-setc18-im-rueckblick/

 

  • The Swedish team didn't finish first, because one of their soldiers got an injury during the last task, the "tanker olympics". Sweden got the last place in this discipline as a result.
  • The Polish team didn't bring its own training ammunition (is there a shortage in the Polish army?), so they did all live fire tests with high explosive ammunition (!). As this was proper HE ammo and not HE training/practice ammo, they were always the last to shoot (the hosts didn't want to replace the targets in the middle of the competition). This might also explain the poor score compared to other Leopard 2 users...
  • Leclerc required more maintenance than other tanks, but French army send more/better people to take care of that
  • Aparently the rules of the competition were slightly changed, so that having a three men crew wasn't indirectly punished (i.e. three men crews had to do less in certain competitions than four men crews). The Leclerc did a poor job at spotting targets.
  • The UK might reconsider the idea of equipping one tank regiment with AJAX vehicles, because  the Challenger 2 performed quite well. Supposedly the better shooting results of tanks with smoothbore guns might affect the decision wether the Challenger 2 LEP will adopt such a gun or keep the old rifled one.
  • The T-84's fire control system did not perform (significantly) worse than that of NATO tanks. The old Soviet-derived autoloader provided similar reload speeds compared to the manned tanks.The crews had combat experience and knew how to properly deal with drones (something that the US team apparently didn't knew).
  • Originally another German team was meant to participate, but a short time before the competition it was swapped. Still they were giving some preparattion. The Germans had higher physical fitness than others.
  • The stabilizer of (one or multiple) Leopard 2A6 tanks from Germany failed due to the unexpectedly high temperatures (and probably because they weren't replaced in the past years, as spare parts are low...). The gunners of the Leopard 2A6 tank(s) could compensate the lack of a stabilizer to some extend.
  • Germany will co-host next year's SETC aswell, but the Bundeswehr decided that they will only send teams to the challenge, which never participated before.
  • Canada, Croatia, Denmark ,Greece, Switzerland and the Netherlands had observers at the competition. Canada and Denmark will definetly not participate next year (Canada has no tanks in Europe, Denmark is switching from Leopard 2A5 to 2A7), the other countries might.
2 hours ago, DarkLabor said:

Tank biathlon has WARPACT procedures?! :blink:

 

It doesn't? Given that half of the participants are former members of the Warsaw Pact, I would expect that it might include some...

 

6 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

I wish they gave a more detailed breakdown, its kind of a what?!? that the US got 7th and yet won the seperate Shoot-off.

 

I've read different things regarding this shoot-off. Some sources say that it was the "inofficial" 14th task (the SETC however only included 13 rated tasks, unless something was changed from last year), which not all contenders did serious (like the Swedes according to the Truppendienst article). Based on videos the  "shoot-off" seems to be done from static positions at a shooting range with the targets being clearly visible. The offensive and defensive ops (for which exact scores were leaked) are also including gunnery, but from the move and without always knowing the location of the targets (the crews have to spot them).

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

 

Yeah there are distinct groups in the scores. 

 

Germany, Sweden

Austria

France, Poland, UK, US

Ukraine

 

I wish they gave a more detailed breakdown, its kind of a what?!? that the US got 7th and yet won the seperate Shoot-off.

 

A bit more communication on those events wouldn't hurt indeed.

Besides that it would makes some extra cookies for our tank nerd community, it would help to show to the general public that even with the current mess on transatlantic relations operational cooperation is still going on nevertheless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

On the website of the Austrian Truppendienst magazine (the official magazine of the Austrian military), a summary has been published by the Major of the Panzerbataillon 14:

 

https://www.truppendienst.com/themen/beitraege/artikel/die-setc18-im-rueckblick/

Is that an official press organism because, some statements are pure BS.
All trials are crew based which allows to have three and four man crews without disparity in the scoring.
Nobody from French Army got sent to Graffenwöhr after the fact.
Spotting targets... they mean the SITREP trial???

 

 

37 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

It doesn't? Given that half of the participants are former members of the Warsaw Pact, I would expect that it might include some...

It's just a dumb biathlon... They run in circle, shoot stuff. Get penalties if they miss...
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was posted on 4chan with a timestamp of a medal so it might be legit.

 

Quote

I was the commander on one of the Swedish tanks.


We trained for 4 months before SETC. The Germans trained for a full year. They have already selected their crews for next year and are probably gonna start training soon.

Sweden only lost to Germany since we came in last in the "Tanker Olympics".
That is because we had one guy fall and injure his knee during the event.

 

 

 

twEuhGz.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, some countries like the Ukraine even have competitions to decide which crew will be send to Grafenwoehr. However as mentioned earlier, the German unit didn't know one year ahead of time that they will participate at SETC 2018, because the original plans saw another unit participating.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 7:55 PM, Xlucine said:

The US team really win on style points, hopefully we see the other teams following suit next year

 

You are kidding.....They almost missed the yellow car!  :lol:

 

The Challenger was clearly the winner with its perfect execution of the white people-carrier.  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Similar Content

    • By Beer
      I haven't found an appropriate thread where to put some interesting rare stuff related to WW2 development, be it industrial one or makeshift field modifications. 
       
      Let's start with two things. The first one is a relatively recently found rarity from Swedish archives - a drawing of ČKD/BMM V8H-Sv tank. The drawing and a letter was found by WoT enthusiasts in Swedish archives in 2014 (the original announcement and the drawing source is here). The drawing is from a message dated 8th September 1941. One of the reasons why this drawing was not known before may be that the Czech archives were partially destroyed by floods in 2002. Anyway it is an export modification of the V-8-H tank accepted into Czechoslovak service as ST vz.39 but never produced due to the cancelation of all orders after Münich 1938 (for the same reason negotiations about licence production in Britain failed). Also later attempt to sell the tank to Romania failed due to BMM being fully busy with Wehrmacht priority orders. The negotiations with Sweden about licence production of V8H-Sv lasted till 1942, at least in May 1942 Swedish commission was present in Prague for negotiations. The tank differed compared to the base ST vz.39 in thicker armor with different front hull shape (armor 60 mm @ 30° on the hull front and also 60 mm on the turret; all sides were 40 mm thick). The tank was heavier (20 tons) and had the LT vz.38 style suspension with probably even larger wheels. The engine was still the same Praga NR V8 (240-250 Hp per source). The armament was unchanged with 47 mm Škoda A11 gun and two vz.37 HMG. The commander's cupola was of the simple small rotating type similar to those used on AH-IV-Sv tankettes. It is known that the Swedes officially asked to arm the tank with 75 mm gun, replace the engine with Volvo V12 and adding third HMG to the back of the turret. In the end the Swedes decided to prefer their own Strv/m42. 

      Source of the drawing
       
      The second is makeshift field modification found on Balkans. It appears Ustasha forces (and possibly some SS anti-partizan units) used several Italian M15/42 medium tanks with turrets from Pz.38(t). There are several photos of such hybrids but little more is known. On one photo it is possible to see Ustasha registration number U.O. 139.

      Few more photos of such hybrid.
       
      It appears that the source of all those photos to be found on the internet is this book, Armoured units of the Axis forces in southeastern Europe in WW2 by Dinko Predoevic. 
       
    • By SuperComrade
      I was recently looking at the Japanese wikipedia page for the Chi-Ha tank, and it had this section on the name of the tank:

       
       
      I have never heard of such nomenclature, and obviously I don't have access to such documents since I don't live in Japan. There is no reference for this part, so can anyone confirm that they actually did use "MTK" etc.?
    • By Monochromelody
      70 years ago, January the 2nd, 1951. To the North of Seoul, in the mountains and hills near Go-yang-tong(高阳洞), British 1RUR dug in and fought against advancing PVA forces. 1RUR got a task force called Cooperforce to support, this is a tank unit from Royal Tank Regiment and Royal Artillery, equipped with Cromwell tanks. 
      When Matthrew Ridgeway assigned the order of withdraw in this afternoon, the US force covering British force's left flank quickly escaped from their sector, leaving the British were completed unawared and uncovered. 
      When the night falls, was cold and dark in the valley. 1RUR had to withdraw in the darkness. All of a sudden, a US spotter aircraft flew over the valley, drop some illumination flares upon the retreating convoy. 
      Fierce battle broke out when flares fall down, PVA firing from all directions, the cold valley became deadly kill zone. Some PVA soldiers put away their rifles, assaulting with hand grenades, satchel charges and Bangalore torpedoes. They even set up mortars on the hill, laying shells with direct fire. 
      200 British soldiers and artillerymen were killed or captured in one night. 1RUR's Battalion Commander Tony Blake was believed KIA. Cooperforce was completely knocked out, all 12 tanks were destroyed or captured by light infantry. Leader Ashley Cooper were also killed. 


    • By Zadlo
      I'm interested how good K21 would be as a torch in engagements against North Korean armour with such a lot composites in a structure.
       


×
×
  • Create New...