The Soviet Tank Thread: Transversely Mounted 1000hp Engines

[Karamazov]

7 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

There is no reason to believe ARAT 2 has ceramics, it's a single curved ERA tile.

To clarify, M32 is the ARAT 2 reactive tile.

Sorry for misleading.
Yes you are right. Maybe these plates have ceramics in their composition, as i heard, but they are definitely ERA.

[Beer]

11 hours ago, N-L-M said:

That's ARAT 2, which is also ERA. Covers the hull ARAT 1 and the bare turret side, thus again suggesting that the turret side is equivalent to the ARAT 1 skirts.

 

Yes but we know from Iraq and Yemen that the turret side can be penetrated with quite a lot of weapons when hit from the sides. Hence why I said that having there an era (like in T-90M) is an advantage even if it doesn't cover 100% of the turret side (for whatever reason). 

[N-L-M]

25 minutes ago, Beer said:

Yes but we know from Iraq and Yemen that the turret side can be penetrated with quite a lot of weapons

Which is presumably why ARAT-2 is a thing on the turret too, yes.

But the basic point I was making was that it appears that the turret side is broadly equivalent in protection to the hull side with ARAT-1, which is presumably good enough to stop certain threats.

And I think you'll agree that ARAT-1 skirts and therefore also the turret side give a damn sight better protection from the side than the thin steel flanks of a T-64 style turret.

[Beer]

Yes, agree, but the tanks and the philosophy is so different that direct comparison is difficult. The side armor of late T-series tanks cover no ammo, it has much smaller area and it's so angled that it can't be hit from frontal 60°arc. IMO the turret side armor of Abrams or Leopard was not made for stopping direct side attack either but it had to be stronger because unlike in T-series the turret sides can be hit from the frontal arc and there is a lot of ammo behind it. 

[N-L-M]

23 minutes ago, Beer said:

IMO the turret side armor of Abrams or Leopard was not made for stopping direct side attack either

So, this is objectively wrong.

From the Swedish trials doc, note the side protection of the ammo bustle.

And note that that was a downgraded armor package.

[Wiedzmin]

35 minutes ago, N-L-M said:

And note that that was a downgraded armor package.

and note that crew compartment doesn't have this requriment 

 

 only +-45

 

and there is no any "downgrade" for sides 

[FORMATOSE]

 

Does the T-90M retains all features of the T-90MS or some of them have been omitted for cost saving reasons ?

 

1 hour ago, N-L-M said:

And note that that was a downgraded armor package.

 

Source ?

[Jackvony]

9 minutes ago, Sovngard said:

 

 

Source ?

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43988687?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=depleted&searchText=uranium&searchText=armor&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Ddepleted%2Buranium%2Barmor&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_SYC-4341%2Fcontrol&refreqid=search%3A77f797823879932df638d4f4113f2905&seq=3#metadata_info_tab_contents

 

 

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/wsh2012/22.pdf

 

https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T004&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=4&docId=GALE|A62968489&docType=Brief+article&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=ZGPP-MOD1&prodId=ITOF&contentSet=GALE|A62968489&searchId=R1&userGroupName=nysl_se_usma&inPS=true

 

"GD, U.S. Army Sweeten M1 Offers to Greece, Turkey With New Armor Package." Defense Daily, 30 May 2000. Gale General OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A62968489/ITOF?u=nysl_se_usma&sid=ITOF&xid=1c5e6a6f. Accessed 28 Oct. 2019.

Spoiler

By Vago Muradian

General Dynamics [GD], with the blessing of the U.S. Army, has offered Greece and Turkey a highly-sophisticated armor package to entice the countries into buying the company's M1-series tank.

The new armor, developed by the Army, offers the same level of protection as the depleted uranium armor used by U.S. forces, but without using the controversial material.

"At the time we adopted depleted uranium, it was the only material that gave us the level of protection we wanted," Peter McVey, vice president for international business at GD's Land Systems Division, told sister publication Defense Daily International during a telephone interview last week. "The new armor we are offering for the first time to Greece and Turkey offers similar protection through a combination of metals and geometry without using heavy metals. We're confident that after testing the new armor package, Greece and Turkey will be very pleased with it."

GD and the Army are pulling out all the stops in the bid to win the Greek and Turkish competitions for more than 1,200 tanks, recovery vehicles and bridging equipment. While Turkey has traditionally bought American tanks, Greece's fleet includes Leopard-series tanks built by Germany's Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, a newer version of which is competing against the M1A2 in both countries. The Leclerc by France's Giat Industries and the Challenger II by Britain's Vickers are competing against the M1A2 in Greece for about 250 tanks, while the competitors for the Turkish order for as many as 1,000 tanks includes a diesel-powered version of the M1A2 System Enhancement Package, the Leclerc, the Leopard 2A6 and the T-84 by Ukraine's Kharkov Design Bureau.

The Army launched the effort to develop the new armor package after GD in 1993 lost the competition to supply Sweden with a new tank in part because of the U.S. government's refusal to allow export of the depleted uranium armor package. Sweden chose the Leopard 2 Improved tank equipped with a new armor package that did not use heavy metals, but was superior to the U.S. armor offered at the time. The composite armor developed by Sweden, dubbed the Swedish armor package, has become Krauss-Maffei Wegmann's export standard and has been offered to Greece and Turkey.

"The new armor is a much better package than provided in Sweden because we and the Army are smarter than we were then," McVey said. "We have learned how to use materials and geometry to improve the armor protection from previous generations without having to get into the DU [depleted uranium] material. We have passed along technical details to both customers through classified channels, and I would say we are equal, or better than, the competition in terms of protection."

The armor is referred to as the third-generation package because the protection system is the third type fitted to the M1-series since its introduction nearly three decades ago. The first versions of the M1 were equipped with composite Chobham armored developed by Britain, which at the time was considered the best in the world. The British armor was succeeded by the DU, or heavy armor, which equips front-line versions of the M1. The third-generation armor, however, is intended for export because the Army sees no need to assume the cost of replacing the DU armor in existing tanks with the new protection package.

McVey added he is confident GD is offering not only the best protection, but also the best price and industrial package in both competitions. In Greece, GD has offered a comprehensive workshare package to Greece's state-owned armored vehicle-maker, ELVO, while in Turkey the company is allied with BMC, part of Turkey's Chicarova Group and Nurol.

The question is politics, which is a factor in every overseas weapons competition, he said, adding that the dynamics are different in Greece and Turkey.

Greece in particular, as a member of the European Union, has in the past come under intense pressure from fellow members to buy European, lobbying pressure that has successfully cost U.S. contractors.

For example, in 1998 senior Greek defense officials promised their U.S. counterparts that Northrop Grumman [NOC] would be awarded the country's order for four airborne early warning aircraft. But less than a week after Greek political leaders were confronted by E.U. leaders who challenged why Greece continued to buy American, the radar plane order was shifted to the Erieye by Sweden's Ericsson and France's Thomson-CSF.

Several months later, in early 1999, E.U. lobbying pressure convinced Greek officials to embrace the multinational Eurofighter combat jet over the F- 15 fighter by Boeing [BA]. The loss of the Greek order, coupled with Israel's decision to buy more F-16 fighters by Lockheed Martin [LMT], doomed production of the F-15.

Greek officials downplay the importance of E.U. pressure, adding that the Erieye and Eurofighter were selected on merit, not politics.

That said, McVey continues to closely watch political developments in both Greece and Turkey.

Greek officials have indicated that before the winning tank is selected, the country must first gain formal entry into the European Monetary Union. That is expected to happen on June 19. The European Parliament recently approved Greece's membership in the Euro group of nations. Second, a new armaments director must be appointed to replace Toannis Sbpokos. Until Sbpokos is replaced, it is unlikely a winning tank will be selected, sources said. Analysts and executives have said, however, they expect a winner to be announced during the Defendory 2000 sea-air-land exposition to held in Athens Oct. 3-7.

 

[Beer]

2 hours ago, Sovngard said:

Does the T-90M retains all features of the T-90MS or some of them have been omitted for cost saving reasons ?

 

I always thought the export MS was inferior to the domestic M. Correct me if I'm wrong but for example M shall have the new 2A82 gun from T-14 (with added fume extractor) while the MS has old 2A46M gun like the A and S.

[Zadlo]

3 hours ago, Beer said:

I always thought the export MS was inferior to the domestic M.

 

T-90SM (not MS) is improved version of T-90S, not export version of T-90M.

[Beer]

Yes, that's what I thought - it's an improved S inferior to the M. 

[Wiedzmin]

 

so here it is, and they also changed ERA block from one that could protect from the side, to one that can give protection only at +-30

 

 "great" coverage of frontal part

 

also lookin on new turret "neck" maybe they try "lift up" turret, and give more declination angles, or just retarded turret design

 

[LoooSeR]

   It does look like a measure to make a space for driver's head.

[alanch90]

11 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:

so here it is, and they also changed ERA block from one that could protect from the side, to one that can give protection only at +-30

They discarded 2S24? why?

EDIT: Seems like 2S23. And i see that it now leaves space available for storage box, which was impossible with 2S24.

[Wiedzmin]

7 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   It does look like a measure to make a space for driver's head.

it look like another stupid decision

 

 

and here they decide that it's beter to make hole, rather than place laser warning sensors on ERA block(because in current position if ERA detonated there a 100% chance that sensor will "survive and continue to function" lol)

[LoooSeR]

2 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:

it look like another stupid decision

 

Spoiler

 

 

and here they decide that it's beter to make hole, rather than place laser warning sensors on ERA block(because in current position if ERA detonated there a 100% chance that sensor will "survive and continue to function" lol)

 

   Well, all questions are to customer and why they are giving priority to some crew conveniences over protection. Laser sensors on the right were probably moved out of the way of commander's optics in the hatch, which is also kind of strange decision. He already have panoramic sight and sticking a camera on tank sides isn't bad idea either.

[Wiedzmin]

 

interesting, if they used T-90A hull's there must be reinfoced hull roof, but it's not, it have T-72 style hull roof with added "damper"

 

also interesting turret roof ERA with antislip cover plate, and some sort of damper or 2nd ERA block

 

 

and they also added little plate between those hull roof dampers

[heretic88]

Ivan Zenkevich and a BRDM-2

 

 

[alanch90]

8 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:

 

interesting, if they used T-90A hull's there must be reinfoced hull roof, but it's not, it have T-72 style hull roof with added "damper"

 

also interesting turret roof ERA with antislip cover plate, and some sort of damper or 2nd ERA block

 

 

and they also added little plate between those hull roof dampers

Look at the placement of the turret ERA tiles screws! They are in different positions in each picture! 

[Beer]

Because the top is a recent picture of the T-90M being prepared for the parade and the lower picture is probably old one of the export T-90SM - at least I presume. There are more differences. The first ERA segment next to the gun has different order of the top and bottom tile for example. 

[Wiedzmin]

3 hours ago, alanch90 said:

Look at the placement of the turret ERA tiles screws! They are in different positions in each picture! 

 

 

typical modern russian quality 

[LoooSeR]

   T-34-85s repaired in St.Petersburg. I think some of them are those Czech tanks that we got from Laos.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[LoooSeR]

 

[Beer]

21 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

   T-34-85s repaired in St.Petersburg. I think some of them are those Czech tanks that we got from Laos.

 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

They are definitely post-war production. I don't know how post-war Soviet produced vehicles exactly looked like but these all look just like those I know from our museums here - they have T-55 headlights and much higher manufacturing quality than the rushed WW2 ones (steel plates cutting, welding etc.). 

[LoooSeR]

   Eastern Military District pre-TB2020 competition, few photos.

 

Spoiler