Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Name that AFV: The New Tank ID thread


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

Yes you did, that's one in the picture.  ;)

I am not sure that this is UA and not just UK. Majority of UAs were for Cyprus, and about 10 vehicles for Russian Army.

 

   UA was supposed to have gun muzzle reference system that is not visible on the photo because gun is in the way. There are almost no other visible differences, as UA modernisation of T-80Us is mainly FCS and gun-related changes. Thermal imager (Plisa) was offered as well, similar to T-80UE-1 Sp2, but on the photo that sight is covered by a tarp. The ERA block to the left of the gun can be different between T-80UK and UA AFAIK, with UA having both upper and lower part of K-5 ERA "wedge", wile UK have only 1 block, but i am not sure here as well. Never bothered much with those modernisation of 1.5 vehicles, that consist of getting some insignificant changes.

otvaga2004_tank_t80_04.jpg

 

1362111459_25D025A225D025B025D025BD25D025BA25D025A2-8025D025A325D02590.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 230
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Since nobody got it, I'll finish this one off.  It's the Martel "Mechanical Coffin".  Page 47, David Fletcher's book "Mechanized Force: British Tanks Between the Wars".  Martel had created some of the

Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.   The rules ar

From a Japanese magazine PANZER screenshot, it says:  This is a Type 61 tank with a sort of ad-hoc spaced armour, using for target practice in exercise.  The armour plates surrounding the tu

2 hours ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

No one has attempted this one yet?

No leads, no.  You implied it was British, correct?

 

50 minutes ago, Bronezhilet said:

Yeah that was the easy part. ;)

There doesn't seem to be any unusual items or attachments, so I'm going with either the troop carrier version or a mortar carrier again.

 

3 hours ago, Bronezhilet said:

Bonus round for infinite points:

8X4iJc1.jpg

A YA-4442 or something with a weird armored cab?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Scolopax said:

No leads, no.  You implied it was British, correct?

 

There doesn't seem to be any unusual items or attachments, so I'm going with either the troop carrier version or a mortar carrier again.

 

A YA-4442 or something with a weird armored cab?

It's indeed the normal troop carrier variant, the command variant has an extra antenna.

 

Well yes, it is an armoured cab. And it's a DAF but not a YA-4442.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2018 at 6:12 PM, Walter_Sobchak said:

Sorry for the image quality on this one.  And yes, this is an actual armored fighting vehicle.

 

20180625_1807591.jpg?w=680

 

 

 

Since nobody got it, I'll finish this one off.  It's the Martel "Mechanical Coffin".  Page 47, David Fletcher's book "Mechanized Force: British Tanks Between the Wars".  Martel had created some of the early tankettes in the late 1920's, but after a while, he decided those were too big.  So he created this silly thing.  A soldier was supposed to lay down in it and drive forward.  Once he got close to the enemy, it had a lift up panel he would use as armor and fire his rifle through.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scolopax said:

YA-5442 or another in the series.  That's my final guess, and I'm assuming that details on this thing are hidden in a book somewhere.

Nope!

 

It's a DAF YAZ-2300 'Mad Max'.

 

AUmAqwR.jpg

oTicdfo.jpg

pdtJOU2.jpg

hMW_jSStNETMuFH34cK-Aiyle58rEtXzHT9MyFSQ

When it was clear that the Netherlands army had to operate in ex-Yugoslav republics not much was known about the possible dangers. So in 5 weeks a unit called "770 Hrstcie" (770 repair company) build 20 armoured cabs for the YAZ-2300 which could be lifted over the cab by its own crane. The armoured cab itself was constructed with polymer plates in a steel frame. After it became clear that these cabs did not provide sufficient protection they were used as static emplacements for an encampment in Santici.  At least two variants existed.

 

Sources:

https://sites.google.com/site/dafmilitairevoertuigen/home/index/tactisch-militaire-voertuigen-1975-heden/daf-ya-2300/daf-yaz-2300-armoured

https://nimh-beeldbank.defensie.nl/beeldbank/indeling/detail/start/21?q_searchfield=daf+yaz-2300

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scolopax said:

Darn, I skipped over that series cause I was stuck with the idea that the thing only had 2 axles.  What I see now is an outrigger post behind the first set of wheels looks right now.  I figured the white paint job was UN related.

 

Something new

tLIQ0kh.jpg

Exf 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 9:26 PM, LoooSeR said:

I am not sure that this is UA and not just UK. Majority of UAs were for Cyprus, and about 10 vehicles for Russian Army.

 

It only has four smoke dischargers per side, T-80UK has six.....I reckon this is one of 'The Ten';)

 

PS - I didn't even like the T-80 until I found this place, now it's second only to the T-72 in my modern kit collection.  :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

It only has four smoke dischargers per side, T-80UK has six.....I reckon this is one of 'The Ten';)

 

PS - I didn't even like the T-80 until I found this place, now it's second only to the T-72 in my modern kit collection.  :rolleyes:

I see 6 per side (at least on the left side of the vehicle, right side is obscured by Shtora IR dazzler). 4 smoke grenade launcher is not exclusive to T-80UA as photos of T-80UA shows 6 per side, like on T-80UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bronezhilet said:

 

 

Should be easy.

 

Bonus points:

  Reveal hidden contents

iBkmgP8.jpg

 

Top is AMX-D, or AMX-13 ARV

 

Bottom made me think of a Hungarian Csaba, but both parties of people in the pic and your posting of all things Dutch leads me to it being an Alvis-Straussler AC3D armored car.

 

 

 

WLxPFrf.jpg

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

There are clearly only four on the tank's right side. 

 

Six is the exclusive number of launchers AFAIK, exclusive to the T-80UK.....Given the rarity of the T-80UA, I'd be inclined to suspect that the tanks with Shtora and six launchers are more likely to be misidentified T-80UKs.

 

T-80UA have 6 launchers per side. I also was told on otvaga forum that vehicle on photo is UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

Véhicule blindé de combat d'infanterie

 

Sorry but missed.

A VBCI looks like this (one of the variant at least):

 

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/var/dicod/storage/images/base-de-medias/images/operations/afghanistan/15-10-10-afghanistan-le-vbci-en-vallee-de-tagab/le-vbci-en-vallee-de-tagab-4/903240-1-fre-FR/le-vbci-en-vallee-de-tagab-4.jpg

 

But the vehicle on the right of the photo is indeed a VCI variant (VCI literally stands for IFV, and VBCI for armored IFV)

Hint it was a modular plateform just the way the boxer is nowadays and was supposed to replace the AMX 13 for the export market.

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 SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Toxn
      So I got a request recently from {NAME REDACTED} as to whether we have a how-to guide or something for competitions. After a few moments of bitter, bitter laughter at the decade-plus of my life that I've spent cobbling together things that can maybe, sort-of, squint-your-eyes produce a facsimile of a realistic vehicle, I thought I'd share my process:
       
       
      Note: I was half-right - we definitely have supplementary info for aspiring pretend tank designers pinned to this very board.
       
      Finally, I'm inviting our forum grognards and past winners to share their process for folk that haven't been here since before the last ice age, so that all can benefit.
    • By Proyas
      Hi guys,
       
      Does anyone know of any military studies that analyzed the reload speeds for different tanks? The question occurred to me when I watched this video tour of the T-55's interior: 
       
      https://youtu.be/TEDhB9evPvw
       
      At the 10:00 mark, Mr. Moran demonstrates how the loader would put a shell into the tank's cannon, and the effects of the turret's small size and of the loader's awkward seating make it clear that the process would be slow. My question is: how slow? 
       
      Side question: Am I right to assume that storing the tank shells all over the inside of the turret like that is an inherent design flaw of the T-55 that makes it inferior in that regard to modern tanks? 
       
      Thanks in advance. 
    • By Collimatrix
      Sturgeon's House started with a community of people who played tank games.  At the time, most of us were playing World of Tanks, but I think there were a few Warthunder and even Steel Beasts players mixed in there too.  After nearly five years, we must be doing something right because we're still here, and because we've somehow picked up a number of members who work with, or have worked with tanks in real life.

      I know that @AssaultPlazma served as an Abrams loader, @Merc 321 and @Meplat have helped maintain and restore privately-owned armor, and @Xlucine has volunteered in a tank museum.  I'm sure I'm missing several more!

      So, what are your favorite personal tank stories?

×
×
  • Create New...