Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I made a model of the T-34M: Astute viewers will notice that the commander's cupola is wrong - it's supposed to be a T-50 cupola rather than the T-34/85 model I stuck on.  

Development of future Soviet tank in 80-s and was a continuation of works started in 1970-s under designation “Project 101”. Necessity for development was grounded by the development of next generatio

Supremacy of glorious T-72 over filthy Kharkovite tractor  

14 hours ago, ZloyKrolik said:

What myths & misconceptions? 

 

Basically, this:

West: Lets build few high quality tanks, and continuously upgrade them

Soviet: Lets build lots of low quality trash, and be satisfied with them

+ lots of errors about T-54/55, how to differentiate them, etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, heretic88 said:

 

Basically, this:

West: Lets build few high quality tanks, and continuously upgrade them

Soviet: Lets build lots of low quality trash, and be satisfied with them

+ lots of errors about T-54/55, how to differentiate them, etc. 

I hope you are refering to the misconceptions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, That_Baka said:

hope you are refering to the misconceptions.

Yes of course. The T-54 was a quite advanced tank for its time. It was neither low quality or poorly equipped. It was also upgraded continously, soviets always found something to add or improve. Quite sad that the people at the tank museum didnt realize this, and just repeating old BS...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2020 at 6:56 PM, LoooSeR said:

   BTR-82AT with new turret/combat module

Quote

   BTR-82AT armored personnel carrier with a new combat module

 

   The BTR-82AT armored personnel carrier with a new combat module and a set of protective and cage armor in terms of the composition of the armament complex, protection and the ability to solve tactical and fire missions, in fact, has turned into a wheeled BMP. Thanks to the implemented measures, the combat effectiveness coefficient of the BTR-82AT increased by 1.2 times compared to the BTR-82A.

 

   A set of protective and slat armor plates mounted on the hull and turret significantly increases the anti-bullet and anti-HEAT resistance when hit by ammunition from large-caliber machine guns and anti-tank rocket grenades.

   Additional protection installed on the BTR-82AT increased the combat weight of the armored personnel carrier to 17.25 tons, which limited the vehicle's ability to overcome water obstacles by swimming. However, when the uparmor kit removed from the machine, it is again capable of performing this task.

 

   At the Army-2020 International Military-Technical Forum, the BTR-82AT is being demonstrated for the first time with the BTR-BM remotely controlled combat module (DUBM).

 

   As the main and secondary weapons in the BTR-BM DBM, a 30-mm 2A42 automatic cannon and a 7.62-mm PKTM machine gun paired with it, respectively. In addition, a 9K111-1M Konkurs-M guided missile system with two 9M113M ATGM launchers was installed on the DUBM. As an auxiliary weapon, there are 6 launchers of the 902V Tucha smoke layingsystem.

 

   Thanks to the thermal imaging channel, the detection range of BMP-BTR-type targets at night increased from 1,200 m to 3,000 m. The presence of an automatic target tracking system significantly increases the likelihood of hitting moving targets on the move, regardless of the operator's training level. The combat module is controlled from the automated workstation of the gunner-operator, installed in the chassis of the combat vehicle, on which the DUBM is mounted.

 

 

   Possibly it is on this pic:

XgnqbuX.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

65UJ7sN.jpg

 

Quote

   The first Russian all-wheel drive planing amphibian will be presented at the Army 2020 exhibition. Mil.Press FLOT was told about this by Sergey Tereshenkov, chief designer and head of the machine manufacturer, Baltic Machine-Building Company (BMK). "Drozd" was created on the basis of the universal modular amphibious platform of the same name. It is capable of speeds up to 70 km / h on water and up to 100 km / h on land. A prototype amphibian is currently being tested.

 

   Drozd's hull is a load-bearing composite, thanks to the use of carbon fiber, the weight of the vehicle was reduced to 2 tons. The amphibian is capable of taking another 1.5 tons on board. The wheels of the car are retracted, which increases seaworthiness (up to 3 points at a wave height of 1.25 meters) and provides planing.

The hull is distinguished by mine protection and the ability to install light armor. The wheels are equipped with an on-the-go inflation system.

 

   The "environment change" time is 12 seconds, the car is capable of being thrown onto an unequipped coast at high speed and then continuing to move on wheels.

It also provides for the installation of various weapons - from machine guns and combat modules up to multiple launch rocket launchers.

 

   "Drozd" - patrol and reconnaissance amphibious planing vehicle. Empty vehicle weight - 2 tons, carrying capacity - 1.5 tons. The maximum speed on land is up to 100 km / h, on water - up to 70 km / h. The fuel range is 800 km on land and 300 km on water. The machine is equipped with a 260 hp diesel engine. weighing 120 kg. A three-speed automatic transmission works in tandem with it. The maximum angles of ascent and roll are 30 degrees, the height of the surmounted ledge is up to 0.5 meters. Clearance - 420 mm. "Drozd" is also equipped with a high-speed vertical winch for self-recovery, which is also an anchor winch.

https://flot.com/2020/ФорумАрмия95/

 

4eTb4zY.jpg

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Decided to collect all of variants of Vodnik that i can find. For those who are unfamiliar with Vodnik - this is a modular car, a platform to be precise, that was in development in late 80s-early 90s by GAZ and was supposed to be offered both for military and for civilian market. It was in production for some time in small numbers, so some amount of those vehicles are floating around. Initially design programm was ordered by MoD of USSR in mid 80s. Currently almost not used anywhere, except Uruguay.

   Car was build on a platrofm by adding 2 modules on top of it ("cabin" and "cargo"). Some parts of BTR-80 were used - torsion bar suspension, and some other parts of suspension.

   Prototype, 1994 IIRC

r1kHJag.jpg

 

Spoiler

C8qafM7.jpg

 

yPybiZb.jpg

 

FphHTg5.jpg

 

xDeBlgm.jpg

 

Op7sfqI.jpg

 

pxHAkAf.jpg

 

q6BlMmW.jpg

 

 

   Civilian versions:

rOnN3yF.jpg

 

Spoiler

Sport version:

6uphnZK.png

 

d88kl5r.jpg

 

MYgA2HY.jpg

 

   Military vehicles:

aPhIgWt.jpg

 

Spoiler

   APC:

oLuMqhs.jpg

 

   With MGs installed:

tcB2tnj.jpg

 

   APC, with turret and 14.5 mm caliber KPVT HMG

vbabUAH.jpg

 

   Uparmored variant:

TS3RpaM.jpg

 

   Another version of uparmored variant:

V5haHdY.jpg

 

   With BTR-82 combat module and 30 mm 2A72 autocannon:

HRrLDw8.jpg

 

   AA variant with proposed optical scanner-based AA combat module, some pics in AA thread

XQ8hFS8.jpg

 

   Light weight version, "buggy", GAZ-3937D Dragoon.

8P3FZAa.jpg

 

   Mortar carrier:

q6GaRMp.jpg

 

   Medevac:

qK3IWMe.jpg

 

   In Syria:

G6cgSzZ.jpg

 

Spoiler

m4EA7NO.jpg

 

T9dA5Mz.jpg

 

   Uruguay

UIpmB7s.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Looks like there is a vision system for AFVs that is going to be shown at Army 2020, "glass armor" type.

Quote

"Parallax" supervisory terrain observation and aiming system for BMP-3, operating on the principle of "transparent armor",

https://rostec.ru/news/rostekh-predstavit-svyshe-1100-razrabotok-na-armii-2020/

Link to post
Share on other sites

This accident is currently blocking a road I need to pass shortly. VT-34 (Czechoslovak ARV based on T-34-85) fell of the trailer after the truck crashed into another car. Photos under the link. 

https://www.idnes.cz/praha/zpravy/tank-spadl-z-navesu-nehoda-policie-kutnohorsko.A200821_153721_praha-zpravy_rsr/foto/RSR858adb_Ef8iHkTXsAA2arv1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIi72VA.jpg

 

Quote

   "High-precision complexes" of the State Corporation Rostec handed over the modernized prototypes of the Sprut-SDM1 tank for state tests. Over the next year and a half, vehicle will be tested in the field in the military formations of the RF Ministry of Defense.

 

   Sprut-SDM1 will be tested in sea and high altitude conditions, in different climatic zones, including at air temperatures from -40 to +40 ° C, shooting tests are provided for at each stage. Based on the results of state tests, the design documentation for the new tank will be approved with the assignment of the letter "O1", which will allow to start serial production. Subsequently, following the results of the work of the interdepartmental commission, the machine will be recommended for adoption by the Russian army.

 

   "The modernized light amphibious tank "Sprut-SDM1" has become more mobile due to the installation of the engine, transmission, suspension assemblies, chassis information and control system, which have already been tested on BMD-4M and BMP-3. In addition, it was possible to achieve an increase in command control; the updated vehicle has a software and hardware complex for operation as part of an automated tactical control system. Combat power is enhanced by a new digital fire control system. There are no analogues of Sprut-SDM1 in the world, and therefore it has a high export potential,” said Vladimir Artyakov, First Deputy General Director of Rostec State Corporation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2020 at 4:29 PM, LoooSeR said:

   Hey, MT-LB may be put to rest, finally. It is possible it will be replaced with JGBT-LB MGTT-LB.

Quote

   The new multi-purpose tracked tractors MGTT-LB and MGSH-LBU, which are modifications of the oldest of the Russian Federation Ground Forces vehicles of this class MT-LB, will be shown for the first time at the Army 2020 military-technical forum. This was reported by RIA Novosti with reference to the press service of JSC Remdiesel.

 

   “At the upcoming Army expo, we will for the first time demonstrate the modernized MGTT-LB and MGSh-LBU crawler tractors, which were worked on as part of the "Reconstruction" experimental design work on the tactical and technical assignment of the Russian Defense Ministry. As a result, we were able to increase such indicators as mobility, protection, ergonomics, handling, payload and firepower, ” said the company representative.

   It is known that prototypes of modernized machines of Remdiesel JSC have already been manufactured and are being tested.

 

   The Army 2020 forum will be held from August 23 to 28, 2020 at the main exhibition site of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the Patriot Park.

 

QsLPgh4.jpg

 

   At Army 2020:

fFyxqZ2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2020 at 3:54 AM, LoooSeR said:

   BTR-82AT with new turret/combat module

  Quote

   BTR-82AT armored personnel carrier with a new combat module

 

   The BTR-82AT armored personnel carrier with a new combat module and a set of protective and cage armor in terms of the composition of the armament complex, protection and the ability to solve tactical and fire missions, in fact, has turned into a wheeled BMP. Thanks to the implemented measures, the combat effectiveness coefficient of the BTR-82AT increased by 1.2 times compared to the BTR-82A.

 

   A set of protective and slat armor plates mounted on the hull and turret significantly increases the anti-bullet and anti-HEAT resistance when hit by ammunition from large-caliber machine guns and anti-tank rocket grenades.

   Additional protection installed on the BTR-82AT increased the combat weight of the armored personnel carrier to 17.25 tons, which limited the vehicle's ability to overcome water obstacles by swimming. However, when the uparmor kit removed from the machine, it is again capable of performing this task.

 

   At the Army-2020 International Military-Technical Forum, the BTR-82AT is being demonstrated for the first time with the BTR-BM remotely controlled combat module (DUBM).

 

   As the main and secondary weapons in the BTR-BM DBM, a 30-mm 2A42 automatic cannon and a 7.62-mm PKTM machine gun paired with it, respectively. In addition, a 9K111-1M Konkurs-M guided missile system with two 9M113M ATGM launchers was installed on the DUBM. As an auxiliary weapon, there are 6 launchers of the 902V Tucha smoke layingsystem.

 

   Thanks to the thermal imaging channel, the detection range of BMP-BTR-type targets at night increased from 1,200 m to 3,000 m. The presence of an automatic target tracking system significantly increases the likelihood of hitting moving targets on the move, regardless of the operator's training level. The combat module is controlled from the automated workstation of the gunner-operator, installed in the chassis of the combat vehicle, on which the DUBM is mounted.

   Possibly it is on this pic:

XgnqbuX.jpg

 

m4f5NVk.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   BMP-3 with Parallax observation system.

lDdAGSZ.jpg

 

 

It's a little curious choice to demonstrate the Parallax on a BMP-3 first. If anything, there are tons of new AFVs with unmanned turrets that can benefit much more from this technology (and also they already have built in 360 deg camera systems, its just a matter of adapting the software and plugins in the visor). As for the visor it seems just like a commercially available VR visor right? It should have a mounting system integrated into tank crew helmet, just like the infantry mounts NVD devices to their helmets.

 

Lastly, i like the BMP 3 Manul very much. @LoooSeR could you please translate what it says in this picture? It's too pixelated for Google Translate.

 

bj8HMae.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, alanch90 said:

It's a little curious choice to demonstrate the Parallax on a BMP-3 first. If anything, there are tons of new AFVs with unmanned turrets that can benefit much more from this technology (and also they already have built in 360 deg camera systems, its just a matter of adapting the software and plugins in the visor). As for the visor it seems just like a commercially available VR visor right? It should have a mounting system integrated into tank crew helmet, just like the infantry mounts NVD devices to their helmets.

 

Lastly, i like the BMP 3 Manul very much. @LoooSeR could you please translate what it says in this picture? It's too pixelated for Google Translate.

 

Spoiler

bj8HMae.jpg

 

   Nothing interesting on this placard, like frontal engine, amount of dismounts (8), max speed, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

   BTR-BM turret on BTR-82AT also have up to 70 degr. main gun elevation, can be reloaded from inside, about 1.9t with ammunition loaded.

Ky1VSua.jpg

 

Spoiler

9bddwpn.jpg

 

EgLMBtoXoAAQFCT?format=jpg&name=large

 

G51Yj5j.jpg

 

pymtGkE.jpg

 

EgLMBtpWsAAzgaX?format=jpg&name=large

 

   Typhoon-PVO, pic showing it inside:

jCfvodH.jpg

 

Spoiler

Nd0fU93.jpg

 

   Anti-UAV vehicle "Rat' " equipped with laser.

veAcJvb.jpg

 

   Detection with radar, microwave and laser can be used against UAVs. Vehicle is build using parts from Kamaz, armored against bullets 7N13 and B32 and mine protection (up to 4 kg under wheels and vehicle belly).

 

Spoiler

25yTFtz.jpg

 

tZ2F8ld.jpg

 

ofyfX08.jpg

 

Bsm1Yjj.jpg

   UAV detection at 3.5 km max with radar and optical system, 2.5 km - directed radio-electronic jamming, 1.5 km - automatic search and jamming of radiosignals, up to 1 km - direct destruction of UAV with a laser.

 

E3Srusf.jpg

 

Spoiler

rCnP3Ru.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Well, that was embarrassing. Somebody was using expired GL-ATGMs from stocks or something else was wrong.

 

27:18 - T-90A misses target with GL-ATGM (hit ground before getting to "tank"), 2nd launch was not shown (i suspect missed, announcer didn't told about hit), 3rd missile hit. 1 out of 3.

 

36:20 - T-80U cannon vibrates like on those videos of Oplots from European tank competition. 37:08 - missile launch, missed (flies over target). Next GL-ATGM (37:44), same thing - missile flies above target, missed. 3rd one managed to hit a tank. 1/3

 

45:15 - T-80UE-1, GL-ATGM flies way above target. 2nd one hit (not sure if it was solid hit), 3rd also probably was hit. 2/3

 

54:57 - T-72B3s. 4 GL-ATGM launches, all 4 hits. 4/4

 

1:11:10 - T-80BVM. 1st missed, managed to hit a forst about 150-200 meters behind targets, didn't saw 2nd one (announcer didn't told about hit, i guess it missed as 1st and 2nd were launched very quickly and on videofeed of targeted tanks there were no hits) and 3rd one hit a tree behind targets. 0/3

 

So, in total 16 GL-ATGM launches, 8 hits.

 

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 N-L-M
      ATTENTION DUELISTS:
      @Toxn
      @LostCosmonaut
      @Lord_James
      @DIADES
      @Datengineerwill
      @Whatismoo
      @Kal
      @Zadlo
      @Xoon
      detailed below is the expected format of the final submission.
      The date is set as Wednesday the 19th of June at 23:59 GMT.
      Again, incomplete designs may be submitted as they are and will be judged as seen fit.
       
      FINAL SUBMISSION:
      Vehicle Designation and name

      [insert 3-projection (front, top, side) and isometric render of vehicle here)



      Table of basic statistics:

      Parameter

      Value

      Mass, combat


       
      Length, combat (transport)


       
      Width, combat (transport)


       
      Height, combat (transport)


       
      Ground Pressure, MMP (nominal)


       
      Estimated Speed


       
      Estimated range


       
      Crew, number (roles)


       
      Main armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed)


       
      Secondary armament, caliber (ammo count ready/stowed)


       

       
      Vehicle designer’s notes: explain the thought process behind the design of the vehicle, ideas, and the development process from the designer’s point of view.

      Vehicle feature list:
      Mobility:

      1.     Link to Appendix 1- RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.

      2.     Engine- type, displacement, rated power, cooling, neat features.

      3.     Transmission- type, arrangement, neat features.

      4.     Fuel- Type, volume available, stowage location, estimated range, neat features.

      5.     Other neat features in the engine bay.

      6.     Suspension- Type, Travel, ground clearance, neat features.

      Survivability:

      1.     Link to Appendix 1 - RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.

      2.     Link to Appendix 2- armor array details.

      3.     Non-specified survivability features and other neat tricks- low profile, gun depression, instant smoke, cunning internal arrangement, and the like.

      Firepower:

      A.    Weapons:

      1.     Link to Appendix 1- RFP spreadsheet, colored to reflect achieved performance.

      2.     Main Weapon-

      a.      Type

      b.      Caliber

      c.      ammunition types and performance (short)

      d.     Ammo stowage arrangement- numbers ready and total, features.

      e.      FCS- relevant systems, relevant sights for operating the weapon and so on.

      f.      Neat features.

      3.     Secondary weapon- Similar format to primary. Tertiary and further weapons- likewise.

      4.     Link to Appendix 3- Weapon system magic. This is where you explain how all the special tricks related to the armament that aren’t obviously available using Soviet 1961 tech work, and expand to your heart’s content on extimated performance and how these estimates were reached.

      B.    Optics:

      1.     Primary gunsight- type, associated trickery.

      2.     Likewise for any and all other optics systems installed, in no particular order.

      C.    FCS:

      1.     List of component systems, their purpose and the basic system architecture.

      2.     Link to Appendix 3- weapon system magic, if you have long explanations about the workings of the system.

      Fightability:

      1.     List vehicle features which improve its fightability and useability.

      Additonal Features:

      Feel free to list more features as you see fit, in more categories.

      Free expression zone: Let out your inner Thetan to fully impress the world with the fruit of your labor. Kindly spoiler this section if it’s very long.


       Example for filling in Appendix 1
    • By N-L-M
      Restricted: for Operating Thetan Eyes Only

      By order of Her Gracious and Serene Majesty Queen Diane Feinstein the VIII

      The Dianetic People’s Republic of California

      Anno Domini 2250

      SUBJ: RFP for new battle tank

      1.      Background.
      As part of the War of 2248 against the Perfidious Cascadians, great deficiencies were discovered in the Heavy tank DF-1. As detailed in report [REDACTED], the DF-1 was quite simply no match for the advanced weaponry developed in secret by the Cascadian entity. Likewise, the DF-1 has fared poorly in the fighting against the heretical Mormonhideen, who have developed many improvised weapons capable of defeating the armor on this vehicle, as detailed in report [REDACTED]. The Extended War on the Eastern Front has stalled for want of sufficient survivable firepower to push back the Mormon menace beyond the Colorado River south of the Vegas Crater.
      The design team responsible for the abject failure that was the DF-1 have been liquidated, which however has not solved the deficiencies of the existing vehicle in service. Therefore, a new vehicle is required, to meet the requirements of the People’s Auditory Forces to keep the dream of our lord and prophet alive.


       
      Over the past decade, the following threats have presented themselves:

      A.      The Cascadian M-2239 “Norman” MBT and M-8 light tank

      Despite being approximately the same size, these 2 vehicles seem to share no common components, not even the primary armament! Curiously, it appears that the lone 120mm SPG specimen recovered shares design features with the M-8, despite being made out of steel and not aluminum like the light tank. (based on captured specimens from the battle of Crater Lake, detailed in report [REDACTED]).
      Both tanks are armed with high velocity guns.

      B.      The Cascadian BGM-1A/1B/1C/1D ATGM

      Fitted on a limited number of tank destroyers, several attack helicopters, and (to an extent) man-portable, this missile system is the primary Cascadian anti-armor weapon other than their armored forces. Intelligence suggests that a SACLOS version (BGM-1C) is in LRIP, with rumors of a beam-riding version (BGM-1D) being developed.

      Both warheads penetrate approximately 6 cone diameters.

      C.      Deseret tandem ATR-4 series
      Inspired by the Soviet 60/105mm tandem warhead system from the late 80s, the Mormon nation has manufactured a family of 2”/4” tandem HEAT warheads, launched from expendable short-range tube launchers, dedicated AT RRs, and even used as the payload of the JS-1 MCLOS vehicle/man-portable ATGM.
      Both warheads penetrate approximately 5 cone diameters.

      D.      Cascadian HEDP 90mm rocket
      While not a particularly impressive AT weapon, being of only middling diameter and a single shaped charge, the sheer proliferation of this device has rendered it a major threat to tanks, as well as lighter vehicles. This weapon is available in large numbers in Cascadian infantry squads as “pocket artillery”, and there are reports of captured stocks being used by the Mormonhideen.
      Warhead penetrates approximately 4 cone diameters.

      E.      Deseret 40mm AC/ Cascadian 35mm AC
      These autocannon share broadly similar AP performance, and are considered a likely threat for the foreseeable future, on Deseret armored cars, Cascadian tank destroyers, and likely also future IFVs.

      F.      IEDs

      In light of the known resistance of tanks to standard 10kg anti-tank mines, both the Perfidious Cascadians and the Mormonhideen have taken to burying larger anti-tank A2AD weaponry. The Cascadians have doubled up some mines, and the Mormons have regularly buried AT mines 3, 4, and even 5 deep.

      2.      General guidelines:

      A.      Solicitation outline:
      In light of the differing requirements for the 2 theaters of war in which the new vehicle is expected to operate, proposals in the form of a field-replaceable A-kit/B-kit solution will be accepted.

      B.      Requirements definitions:
      The requirements in each field are given in 3 levels- Threshold, Objective, and Ideal.
      Threshold is the minimum requirement to be met; failure to reach this standard may greatly disadvantage any proposal.

      Objective is the threshold to be aspired to; it reflects the desires of the People’s Auditory Forces Armored Branch, which would prefer to see all of them met. At least 70% must be met, with bonus points for any more beyond that.

      Ideal specifications are the maximum of which the armored forces dare not even dream. Bonus points will be given to any design meeting or exceeding these specifications.

      C.      All proposals must accommodate the average 1.7m high Californian recruit.

      D.      The order of priorities for the DPRC is as follows:

      a.      Vehicle recoverability.

      b.      Continued fightability.

      c.       Crew survival.

      E.      Permissible weights:

      a.      No individual field-level removable or installable component may exceed 5 tons.

      b.      Despite the best efforts of the Agriculture Command, Californian recruits cannot be expected to lift weights in excess of 25 kg at any time.

      c.       Total vehicle weight must remain within MLC 120 all-up for transport.

      F.      Overall dimensions:

      a.      Length- essentially unrestricted.

      b.      Width- 4m transport width.

                                                                    i.     No more than 4 components requiring a crane may be removed to meet this requirement.

                                                                   ii.     Any removed components must be stowable on top of the vehicle.

      c.       Height- The vehicle must not exceed 3.5m in height overall.

      G.     Technology available:

      a.      Armor:
      The following armor materials are in full production and available for use. Use of a non-standard armor material requires permission from a SEA ORG judge.
      Structural materials:

                                                                    i.     RHA/CHA

      Basic steel armor, 250 BHN. The reference for all weapon penetration figures, good impact properties, fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 150mm (RHA) or 300mm (CHA).
      Density- 7.8 g/cm^3.

                                                                   ii.     Aluminum 5083

      More expensive to work with than RHA per weight, middling impact properties, low thermal limits. Excellent stiffness.

       Fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 100mm.
      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1 vs CE, 0.9 vs KE.
      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.33 vs CE, 0.3 vs KE.
      Density- 2.7 g/cm^3 (approx. 1/3 of steel).

      For structural integrity, the following guidelines are recommended:

      For light vehicles (less than 40 tons), not less than 25mm RHA/45mm Aluminum base structure

      For heavy vehicles (70 tons and above), not less than 45mm RHA/80mm Aluminum base structure.
      Intermediate values for intermediate vehicles may be chosen as seen fit.
      Non-structural passive materials:

                                                                  iii.     HHA

      Steel, approximately 500 BHN through-hardened. Approximately twice as effective as RHA against KE and HEAT on a per-weight basis. Not weldable, middling shock properties. Available in thicknesses up to 25mm.
      Density- 7.8g/cm^3.

                                                                  iv.     Glass textolite

      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 2.2 vs CE, 1.64 vs KE.

      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.52 vs CE, 0.39 vs KE.
      Density- 1.85 g/cm^3 (approximately ¼ of steel).
      Non-structural.

                                                                   v.     Fused silica

      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 3.5 vs CE, 1 vs KE.

      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 1 vs CE, 0.28 vs KE.
      Density-2.2g/cm^3 (approximately 1/3.5 of steel).
      Non-structural, requires confinement (being in a metal box) to work.

                                                                  vi.     Fuel

      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1.3 vs CE, 1 vs KE.

      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.14 vs CE, 0.1 vs KE.

      Density-0.82g/cm^3.

                                                                vii.     Assorted stowage/systems

      Mass efficiency vs RHA- 1 vs CE, 0.8 vs KE.

                                                               viii.     Spaced armor

      Requires a face of at least 25mm LOS vs CE, and at least 50mm LOS vs KE.

      Reduces penetration by a factor of 1.1 vs CE or 1.05 vs KE for every 10 cm air gap.
      Spaced armor rules only apply after any standoff surplus to the requirements of a reactive cassette.

      Reactive armor materials:

                                                                  ix.     ERA-light

      A sandwich of 3mm/3mm/3mm steel-explodium-steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.

      Must be spaced at least 3 sandwich thicknesses away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 81% coverage (edge effects).

                                                                   x.     ERA-heavy

      A sandwich of 15mm steel/3mm explodium/9mm steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 3 sandwich thicknesses away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 81% coverage (edge effects).

                                                                  xi.     NERA-light

      A sandwich of 6mm steel/6mm rubber/ 6mm steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 1 sandwich thickness away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 95% coverage.

                                                                 xii.     NERA-heavy

      A sandwich of 30mm steel/6m rubber/18mm steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 1 sandwich thickness away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 95% coverage.

      The details of how to calculate armor effectiveness will be detailed in Appendix 1.

      b.      Firepower

                                                                    i.     2A46 equivalent tech- pressure limits, semi-combustible cases, recoil mechanisms and so on are at an equivalent level to that of the USSR in the year 1960.

                                                                   ii.     Limited APFSDS (L:D 15:1)- Spindle sabots or bourelleted sabots, see for example the Soviet BM-20 100mm APFSDS.

                                                                  iii.     Limited tungsten (no more than 100g per shot)

                                                                  iv.     Californian shaped charge technology- 5 CD penetration for high-pressure resistant HEAT, 6 CD for low pressure/ precision formed HEAT.

                                                                   v.     The general issue GPMG for the People’s Auditory Forces is the PKM. The standard HMG is the DShK.

      c.       Mobility

                                                                    i.     Engines tech level:

      1.      MB 838 (830 HP)

      2.      AVDS-1790-5A (908 HP)

      3.      Kharkov 5TD (600 HP)

                                                                   ii.     Power density should be based on the above engines. Dimensions are available online, pay attention to cooling of 1 and 3 (water cooled).

                                                                  iii.     Power output broadly scales with volume, as does weight. Trying to extract more power from the same size may come at the cost of reliability (and in the case of the 5TD, it isn’t all that reliable in the first place).

                                                                  iv.     There is nothing inherently wrong with opposed piston or 2-stroke engines if done right.

      d.      Electronics

                                                                    i.     LRFs- unavailable

                                                                   ii.     Thermals-unavailable

                                                                  iii.     I^2- limited

      3.      Operational Requirements.

      The requirements are detailed in the appended spreadsheet.

      4.      Submission protocols.

      Submission protocols and methods will be established in a follow-on post, nearer to the relevant time.
       
      Appendix 1- armor calculation
      Appendix 2- operational requirements
       
      Good luck, and may Hubbard guide your way to enlightenment!
    • By Collimatrix
      Shortly after Jeeps_Guns_Tanks started his substantial foray into documenting the development and variants of the M4, I joked on teamspeak with Wargaming's The_Warhawk that the next thing he ought to do was a similar post on the T-72.
       
      Haha.  I joke.  I am funny man.
       
      The production history of the T-72 is enormously complicated.  Tens of thousands were produced; it is probably the fourth most produced tank ever after the T-54/55, T-34 and M4 sherman.
       
      For being such an ubiquitous vehicle, it's frustrating to find information in English-language sources on the T-72.  Part of this is residual bad information from the Cold War era when all NATO had to go on were blurry photos from May Day parades:
       

       
      As with Soviet aircraft, NATO could only assign designations to obviously externally different versions of the vehicle.  However, they were not necessarily aware of internal changes, nor were they aware which changes were post-production modifications and which ones were new factory variants of the vehicle.  The NATO designations do not, therefore, necessarily line up with the Soviet designations.  Between different models of T-72 there are large differences in armor protection and fire control systems.  This is why anyone arguing T-72 vs. X has completely missed the point; you need to specify which variant of T-72.  There are large differences between them!
       
      Another issue, and one which remains contentious to this day, is the relation between the T-64, T-72 and T-80 in the Soviet Army lineup.  This article helps explain the political wrangling which led to the logistically bizarre situation of three very similar tanks being in frontline service simultaneously, but the article is extremely biased as it comes from a high-ranking member of the Ural plant that designed and built the T-72.  Soviet tank experts still disagree on this; read this if you have some popcorn handy.  Talking points from the Kharkov side seem to be that T-64 was a more refined, advanced design and that T-72 was cheap filler, while Ural fans tend to hold that T-64 was an unreliable mechanical prima donna and T-72 a mechanically sound, mass-producible design.
       
      So, if anyone would like to help make sense of this vehicle, feel free to post away.  I am particularly interested in:
       
      -What armor arrays the different T-72 variants use.  Diagrams, dates of introduction, and whether the array is factory-produced or a field upgrade of existing armor are pertinent questions.
       
      -Details of the fire control system.  One of the Kharkov talking points is that for most of the time in service, T-64 had a more advanced fire control system than contemporary T-72 variants.  Is this true?  What were the various fire control systems in the T-64 and T-72, and what were there dates of introduction?  I am particularly curious when Soviet tanks got gun-follows-sight FCS.
       
      -Export variants and variants produced outside the Soviet Union.  How do they stack up?  Exactly what variant(s) of T-72 were the Iraqis using in 1991?

      -WTF is up with the T-72's transmission?  How does it steer and why is its reverse speed so pathetically low?
       
       
    • 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 
          

×
×
  • Create New...