Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Ukrainian armor - Oplot-M, T-64M Bulat and other.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Proper, god-fearing Soviet tanks use four-stroke diesel engines.  When the tank is cruising, the engine should be happy and produce very little smoke.  But when the engine is suddenly changing RPM, th

BM "Oplot"     Ukrainian designers managed to make biggest panoramic sight i ever saw - overall weight of it is reaching 500 kg.            Oplot-M, or BM "Oplot" after addoption to service i

Undisputable evidence of Russian aggression against the Mighty and Unified Independent State of Ukraine! Behold these vehicles personally blessed by Ramzan Kadyrov when issued to GRU GSh FSB GIBDD spe

On 9/26/2018 at 11:38 AM, N-L-M said:

In larger 2-strokes, the overpressure problem is solved with a blower of some kind, usually an engine-powered supercharger (turbos don't work at low speed, but external blowing is also possible), which allows the crankcase to not be used for air pumping.

 

The solution used on soviet 5TDF (and probably also 6TD) is especially interesting, because it is a hybrid of turbo and a gear driven centrifugal blower. Primary power source for the blower is of course the gears that connect it to the crankshafts, but at higher engine speeds, the turbine begins to produce more and more power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 5 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
2 minutes ago, Karamazov said:

But Ukraine has 477 Godlike Objects. And more information with the experience of creating a new generation of tanks

And? Having several Soviet tanks don't automatically make you capable of designing and producing AFVs. And what "new generation" of tanks Ukraine created?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

And? Having several Soviet tanks don't automatically make you capable of designing and producing AFVs. And what "new generation" of tanks Ukraine created?

Object 477 - its colossal experience for any country and especially for Ukraine. As you can remember, Russia and Ukrain worked on it together. Russia after then created the Object 195 and T-14 after few years. Kharkiv KMDB have everything for the successful creation of a new generation of tanks: "brains", experience, production capacity. Everything except money. Anyway, they will have enough strength for a couple of demonstration tanks. Maybe foreign investors will help. Or the government will find money (hardly)

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Karamazov said:

Object 477 - its colossal experience for any country and especially for Ukraine. As you can remember, Russia and Ukrain worked on it together. Russia after then created the Object 195 and T-14 after few years.

/.../

   Majority of work was done on 477 by Soviet Union, not by separated Ukraine and Russia. Experienced is earned by designers and workers, not by country. I doubt that any of those who worked on 477 are still working on anything serious. Also, Object 195 was not a development of 477, while Armata was based on Object 195 and Object 299 ideas.

   

Quote

/.../

Kharkiv KMDB have everything for the successful creation of a new generation of tanks: "brains", experience, production capacity. Everything except money. Anyway, they will have enough strength for a couple of demonstration tanks. Maybe foreign investors will help. Or the government will find money (hardly)

   What? Kharkov barelly managed to poop out last Oplot tank out, they fucked up their work so much that Chinese military industry managed to grab Thai army and sell them their tanks. China signed a contract with Thai army, made and delivered big first batch of VTs in shorter amount of time that it took Kharkov to produce and deliver their yet another batch of 5 Oplots.

   Ukraine in all those years didn't managed to make anything more advanced than "yet another version of T-64" or "yet another version of T-80UD". I doubt that Kharkiv have enough "brains" left, any sort of serious production capability needed to create anything more sophisticated than a re-mix of Soviet-designed parts, and enough money to get out current situation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

 What? Kharkov barelly managed to poop out last Oplot tank out, they fucked up their work so much that Chinese military industry managed to grab Thai army and sell them their tanks.

Not just the slow manufacture of Oplots. I heard some rumors that there are serious quality problems with them too, and they are very unreliable. Except protection, VT-4 is better in every imaginable way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, heretic88 said:

Not just the slow manufacture of Oplots. I heard some rumors that there are serious quality problems with them too, and they are very unreliable. Except protection, VT-4 is better in every imaginable way.

   Quality isn't a priority for when you are trying to make PR stunt, which is what Object 477-based/derived tank will be, if Ukrainian official will try to actually make them. Although yes, Dozor-B, BTR-4s, Molot mortars are well known examples of low quality production weapon systems.

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

Majority of work was done on 477 by Soviet Union, not by separated Ukraine and Russia. Experienced is earned by designers and workers, not by country. I doubt that any of those who worked on 477 are still working on anything serious. Also, Object 195 was not a development of 477, while Armata was based on Object 195 and Object 299 ideas.

The main work was done by Kharkov KMDB while the USSR was alive. Of course, they didn’t do anything more serious than a "BM Oplot", but that doesn’t cancel their development capabilities. But as I said, they have money difficulties. And this is the most important problem.
 

2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

What? Kharkov barelly managed to poop out last Oplot tank out

This will not prevent them from making test samples of tanks. But they can only dream of mass production.
 

2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Ukraine in all those years didn't managed to make anything more advanced than "yet another version of T-64" or "yet another version of T-80UD". I doubt that Kharkiv have enough "brains" left, any sort of serious production capability needed to create anything more sophisticated than a re-mix of Soviet-designed parts, and enough money to get out current situation. 

As you said, Object 477 is a Soviet mbt. By the same principle, they can use it to "re-mix of Soviet-designed parts", i think.  Of course, if they didn't sold everything to China for example. 

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

The main work was done by Kharkov KMDB while the USSR was alive. Of course, they didn’t do anything more serious than a "BM Oplot", but that doesn’t cancel their development capabilities. But as I said, they have money difficulties. And this is the most important problem.

/.../

   Work was done across many participants of Soviet military industrail complex. They can't suddenly now pull those capabilities out of nowhere. Just for example - gun(s), ammunition, armor - were developed outside of Kharkov.

   But not only capabilities - Soviet Union had way more serious military trails/acceptance/development procedures than current Ukraine, which was a reason and a moderator of 1980s MBT projects.

   Having money will not solve this. In fact having money would make it worse, as plenty of projects will be used to steal them instead.

 

1 hour ago, Karamazov said:

/.../

This will not prevent them from making test samples of tanks. But they can only dream of mass production.

/.../

   Azovets 2.0? Assemble a single vehicle from crap and then toss it into a trash bin?

 

1 hour ago, Karamazov said:

/.../

As you said, Object 477 is a Soviet mbt. By the same principle, they can use it to "re-mix of Soviet-designed parts", i think.  Of course, if they didn't sold everything to China for example. 

   USSR didn't finished 477s. It is hard to remix of unfinished and not serially produced systems.

 

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

Just for example - gun(s), ammunition, armor - were developed outside of Kharkov.

I do not condone anyone, but they themselves can make guns and shells. KBA-3 for example, but this is just a modification of 2A46M.

 

3 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Azovets 2.0? Assemble a single vehicle from crap and then toss it into a trash bin?

Azovets was made by engineers from "Azov" nazi-regiment
 

3 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 USSR didn't finished 477s. It is hard to remix of unfinished and not serially produced systems.

Yes, all works were transferred to the Russian Federation at the mid 90s. If i remember correct, "Nota" prototype stored in RF. But KMDB have more information about it, for obvious reasons. They can use (will use, if new project will start) this information. 

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

I do not condone anyone, but they themselves can make guns and shells. KBA-3 for example, but this is just a modification of 2A46M.

Exactly. It is just a Soviet-made tank cannon that was re-named.

 

10 hours ago, Karamazov said:

Azovets was made by engineers from "Azov" nazi-regiment

I know that, i was referring to PR noise vs results.

 

10 hours ago, Karamazov said:

Yes, all works were transferred to the Russian Federation at the mid 90s. If i remember correct, "Nota" prototype stored in RF. But KMDB have more information about it, for obvious reasons. They can use (will use, if new project will start) this information. 

It is great that they have piles of documents, problem is that:

1) Tank design was not finished before project died, it needs more R&D

2) Creation of systems that Soviet Union never produced or even had as test/prototype samples

3) Production of test vehicles will be needed, testing in order to make it work, especially brand new autoloader and FCS.

  

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 Monochromelody
      The Al Khalid derived from Norinco Type 90IIM MBT. It was in the early 90s, when India started to test their Arjun MBT. Pakistanis looked for a MBT design that could be produced by herself. 
      Norinco provided their own Type 90IIM prototype, this is an MBT design which comprised many Western components, such as engine and transmission. 

      There were 4 prototypes for Al-Khalid development, namely P1, P2, P3 and P4. 
      P1 has a Chinese tank diesel engine with ZF LSG3000 transmission. 
      P2 has a British Perkins CV12 Condor diesel engine with French SESM ESM500 transmission. 
      P3 has a Ukrainian KMDB 6TD-2 2-cycle boxer engine with its own twin planetary gearbox. 
      P4 has a German MB871 engine with ZF LSG3000 transmission, similar to South Korean K1 MBT. 

      Norinco and Pakistanis planned to adopt one of the Western powerpack at first, but due to CoCom (Coordinating Committee for Export to Communist Countries) restrictions, China is under embargo, which means China would not import weapons form Western countries. Obviously P3 powerplant would be the only choice. All those descriptions on the internet about ESM500 in Al-Khalid is fatally wrong. 
       
      The Al-Khalid pre-production batch and production version all equipped with Ukrainian KMDB 6TD-2 powerpack.
      It is an extremely compact design, the engine laid transversely in engine room, twin planetary gearboxes connect to both left and right end. The 6TD-2 has two crankshafts: the front one drives the mechanical supercharger, while the rear one drives the gearboxes. The cooling system covering the whole engine room, the engine itself has no mechanical connection to the cooling system, and the cooling system doesn't need mechanical drive. The cooling system based on a unique principle: exhaust gas driven ejector. The exhaust gas from the engine is injected through the outlet ducting, produce a low pressure in the outlet side, that will suck in cold air from the inlet side. This principle is also used in the T-64, T-80UD and T-84, but as far as I know, Swedish Ikv 91 is the only western tank that have similar cooling principle. 
       
      As a result, the total length of powerpack is significantly shortened, much more shorter than the European powerpack mentioned above. This leads to a spare storage room between the fighting compartment and the engine compartment. This storage is for extra ammunition and fuel, when turret points 3 or 9 o'clock, the top cover of the storage could be opened from outside, containing 10 rounds for main gun, with projectiles on the outsides, semi-combustible charges on the inside.
      The data table from HIT also describe the ammunition capacity as 39+10, means that 22 ready rounds in the T-72 type carousel autoloader, 17 backup rounds scatter around the fighting compartment, and extra 10 rounds could be carried in the storage room. 
       
      The driver of Al-Khalid control the vehicle via steering wheel and an automatic gear control box. The steering wheel and gear control box send electrical signals to the computer, then computer control the hydraulic servo actuator to perform engage and disengage of brakes and clutches, making steering and gear changes, as well as adjusting the speed and torque of the engine.
       
      Mechanically the gearboxes are nearly the same as T-64s and T-72s, but have different side reducer unit. The KMDB side reducer unit is designed as a secondary gearbox, acting like a forward-reverse selector. When both reducers were put into reverse, the vehicle can reverse using the normal forward ranges. From 1st gear to 4th gear, all could be used as high speed reverse, and that's why KMDB said this is a 7F4R gearbox system. And if only one reducer was put into reverse, the track will be driving in opposites direction, causing the vehicle turns within its tracks, a.k.a. pivot steer or center steer. T-84 also applied this driving and steering system.  
       
      The advantages of Al-Khalid's powerpack is the versatility: all 3 types of MBT in the Pakistanis arsenal, T-80UD, T-84, Al-Khalid, share the same engine and gearbox. 
    • 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 delfosisyu
      Hey guys. This is my first post in this forum.
       
       
       
      I want to find out sources for 2 information.
       
       
       
       
      Firstly, a friend of mine told me about the accuracy of T-80B tested in 1980s.
       
       
       
       
       
      T-80B      1000m   1500m     2000m
                      
                      87%       66%       46%
       
       
       
       
       
      I asked him where he found this data. But he told me he forgot where he did find this since too much time passed from that moment.
       
       
       
       
       
       
      The Second one is about Russian ballistic computer's range-finding rate.
       
       
      One day, one of my friends who speaks russian quite well showed me a product info. of russian(maybe ukrainian) gunner's primary sight.
       
       
      It was written that range-finding rate of the sight after laser fired-off 0.3~3.0 seconds. 
       
       
      I totally forgot the address of that product brochure.
       
       
       
      I'd be very appreciated if you help me finding links of these information.
    • By Walter_Sobchak
      I realized that we don't actually have a thread about the British Chieftain tank.  
       
      I posted a bunch of Chieftain related stuff on my site today for anyone who is interested.  The items include:
       
      Magazine Articles
       
      1970 article from ARMOR
      1970 article from IDR  - Chieftain-Main Battle tank for the 1970s
      1976 article from IDR - The Combat-Improved Chieftain – First Impressions
      1976 article from IDR - Improved Chieftain for Iran
       
      Government reports
       
      WO 194-495 Assessment of Weapon System in Chieftain
      WO 341-108 Automotive Branch Report on Chieftain Modifications
      DEFE 15-1183 – L11 Brochure 
      WO 194-463 – Demonstration of Chieftain Gun 
       
      WO 194-1323 – Feasibility study on Burlington Chieftain

×
×
  • Create New...