Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Share
    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 535
    Points : 651
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:46 am

    Another question from my side.
    ATGM Kornet should not suffer any interference from Shtora as it only affects IR SACLOS ATGMs. Furthermore, ATGMs can only deviate to the left if the marker is set to the left of both emitters, which is hardly likely.

    Whynt Kornet is interfered provided both Kornet & SACLOS are 2nd generation ATGMs??
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:39 pm

    Most wire guided SACLOS missiles like TOW and AT-5 and HOT and Milan and METIS etc have a small flare in the tail of the missile... or newer versions have IR lamps there, and while the operator guides the missile simply by keeping the crosshair on the target the launcher has two optical ports... one a sight for the user to keep his crosshair on the target, and the other a gionometer which detects the flare or IR light from the tail of the missile to determine where the missile actually is so that its position in relation to the aim point can be calculated and control signals can be sent down the wires to command the missile to manoeuvre into the line of sight so it flys down the crosshair line to hit the target.

    The Kornet on the other hand is a laser beam rider, the launcher does not care where the missile is and has no gionometer to track it. The launcher has a coded laser beam of four colours and it is the missile that has a sensor looking back at the launcher that can see the laser beam. If the four colours are red, blue, green and yellow with say red in the top left, blue in the top right, green in the bottom left and yellow in the bottom right if the missile sees yellow it knows it is low and to the right so it manoeuvres itself up and to the left until it can see all four colours and then it knows it is in the centre of aim.

    When Shtora is operating it appears to be intensely bright in the IR frequencies so for the wire guided missiles the gionometer is trying to see the IR signal of the missile in the huge beams of the Shtora and it is like trying to see a candle in front of a search light... if the launcher can't see the missile then it can't guide it to the target... it doesn't know what course corrections to send.

    For the laser beam riding missile the missile is looking away from the target tank so Shtora can't interfere with its guidance... its only defence is smoke and by the time Kornet gets inside the smoke cloud it will be within about 200m of the target... so lets say it penetrates 50m into the smoke cloud before it loses sight of the laser beam it only has another 150m to the target... if the missile just carrys on straight it would have a fairly good chance of still hitting the target.

    An important factor of course is that because the sensor looks directly at the laser rather than looking forward at a laser beam reflecting off the target the laser used is 4 orders of magnitude less powerful and is not effected by the colour or reflectivity of the target. (4 orders of magnitude is 10,000 times less powerful... which means the laser sensor might mistake it for the reflections of a laser pointed at something nearby or the tanks own laser being used to get a range on a target.)
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 18, 2011 5:24 am

    Anyone that can something similar from different countries...

    Nakidka kits for Russian tanks and vehicles and cloaks for infantry reduce IR signature and radar and optical signatures all at once.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakidka


    My question is that with that big screen attached to the side of Israeli vehicles... how do they see to drive?

    Would be perfect against Javelin. Useless against everything else.
    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 535
    Points : 651
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Wed May 18, 2011 12:03 pm

    But Nakidka kits passive in nature & this an active counter-measure..besides deception feature of this device is good. Mean you can change tank to ICBM launchers. Also the efficiency of Nakidka is dubious against FLIRs

    My question is that with that big screen attached to the side of Israeli vehicles... how do they see to drive?

    If you see the second video the top mounter IR masking camera can deliver full 360 degree black/white visual coverage to inside crew
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3194
    Points : 3284
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  medo on Wed May 18, 2011 4:09 pm

    But Nakidka kits passive in nature & this an active counter-measure..besides deception feature of this device is good. Mean you can change tank to ICBM launchers. Also the efficiency of Nakidka is dubious against FLIRs

    Nakidka is passive and is effective against radar and FLIR to reduce the picture. This Israeli system is active, so it need additional energy to work. If energy generator in vehicle is not strong enough, there could be a problem in working of other systems.Also how is this system effective against image intensifiers and radars?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Israel ground arm

    Post  GarryB on Thu May 19, 2011 4:40 am

    But Nakidka kits passive in nature & this an active counter-measure..besides deception feature of this device is good. Mean you can change tank to ICBM launchers. Also the efficiency of Nakidka is dubious against FLIRs

    Nakidka reduces IR and radar signature, whereas this system seems to only operate against IR and it is likely much more expensive.

    The main question is will it work against all IR frequency options (short, medium, and long wave IR sensors)... and of course the obvious problem will it also work against LLLTV or digital TV... especially when the target is moving?


    If you see the second video the top mounter IR masking camera can deliver full 360 degree black/white visual coverage to inside crew

    Except that the camouflage are limited to being displayed on fixed displays... what if one fails in combat?
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1938
    Points : 2103
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon Sep 05, 2011 11:16 pm

    Some info and pics on a new Russian tank engine (translated from Gur Khans blog)

    The Fiery Heart of the Russian Tanks
    http://sovietoutpost.revdisk.org/?p=21#comment-35

    Interesting....it looks like 2 V-6 engines joined together, meaning a 12 cylinder engine yet relatively compact.

    Austin

    Posts : 6235
    Points : 6641
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Austin on Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:23 am

    Cyberspec wrote:The Fiery Heart of the Russian Tanks
    http://sovietoutpost.revdisk.org/?p=21#comment-35

    Interesting....it looks like 2 V-6 engines joined together, meaning a 12 cylinder engine yet relatively compact.

    Looks like its on the catalog , some specs on the new engine

    http://chtz-uraltrac.ru/catalog/items/206.php

    How does it compared on fuel consumption and other parameters compared to western counterparts ?
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1938
    Points : 2103
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Cyberspec on Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:25 am

    Austin wrote:
    Cyberspec wrote:The Fiery Heart of the Russian Tanks
    http://sovietoutpost.revdisk.org/?p=21#comment-35

    Interesting....it looks like 2 V-6 engines joined together, meaning a 12 cylinder engine yet relatively compact.

    Looks like its on the catalog , some specs on the new engine

    http://chtz-uraltrac.ru/catalog/items/206.php

    How does it compared on fuel consumption and other parameters compared to western counterparts ?

    Looks like it's comparable to the latest German diesel engines...

    http://www.mtu-online.com/mtu/products/engine-program/diesel-engines-for-wheeled-and-tracked-armored-vehicles/engines-for-heavy-vehicles/
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:07 am

    Looks like it's comparable to the latest German diesel engines...

    Which is rather impressive considering less than 2 years ago everything the Russians made was crap and they are 30 years behind NATO etc etc.

    Very interesting looking at the above pictures showing the turret bustle from different angles.

    The left side of the turret bustle is all ERA blocks protecting the side of the turret bustle, yet the right sight appears to have a large rectangular tool bin with three latches on it.

    Would love to see better pictures of the turret bustle from above... those roof access hatches look interesting.

    Thanks for those pics BTW Kratos1133...

    Austin

    Posts : 6235
    Points : 6641
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Austin on Thu Sep 08, 2011 10:20 am

    Just to get the record straight

    The US and Russian equivalent of tank versus tank of their respective generation were

    T-72 was made to match US M60
    T-80 was made to match US M1A1
    T-90/90AM was made to match M1A2/A2 Tusk
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Some info and pics on a new Russian tank engine (translated from Gur Khans blog)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:15 pm

    Well technically no...

    At the time the T-72 was being mass produced as a numbers tank the US numbers tank would probably have been the M48.

    The Soviet equivalent to the M60 would have been the T-64.

    Austin

    Posts : 6235
    Points : 6641
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Austin on Sat Sep 10, 2011 6:54 pm

    Documentary on T-80


    Austin

    Posts : 6235
    Points : 6641
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Documentary on T-80

    Post  Austin on Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:29 pm

    If smooth bore gun of T-80 tank can fire HE-Frag round against bunkers, fortification etc why do they specially need rifled bore to fire HESH round ?

    Well the main reason why India went for rifled bore of Arjun was it could fire HESH round.

    Acrab

    Posts : 6
    Points : 11
    Join date : 2011-10-01

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Acrab on Sat Oct 01, 2011 5:37 pm

    Austin,
    can you tell what are the major difference between the Leopard 2A4 & 2A5 & 2A6?
    TIA

    Austin

    Posts : 6235
    Points : 6641
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    major difference between the Leopard 2A4 & 2A5 & 2A6?

    Post  Austin on Sat Oct 01, 2011 6:37 pm

    Acrab wrote:Austin,
    can you tell what are the major difference between the Leopard 2A4 & 2A5 & 2A6?
    TIA

    Acrab , this is a good site that would answer your question on Leopard
    http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm

    Austin

    Posts : 6235
    Points : 6641
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Austin on Sun Jan 15, 2012 6:07 pm

    What is Active Suspension ? I have read Japanese new Type 10 and South Korean latest tank have it ( some say partially )

    Indias FMBT one of requirenment is to have Active Suspension.
    avatar
    runaway

    Posts : 348
    Points : 369
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  runaway on Sun Jan 15, 2012 7:18 pm

    Austin wrote:What is Active Suspension ? I have read Japanese new Type 10 and South Korean latest tank have it ( some say partially )

    Isnt that hydralic suspension, where you can adjust the tilt of the chassis to your liking?
    Like we swedish had on the S tank from the 70´s, a tank destroyer where you aim with the chassis mostly.
    The need of that to a turret tank i dont know really.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:27 pm

    AFAIK active suspension means the suspension is adjusted in real time for a smoother ride.

    In modern sports cars you can often push a button to alter the suspension, so on a motorway you can set the suspension to hard so you get a better feel for the road. On gravel you might set it a bit softer to reduce the vibration and soften the ride to make it more comfortable.

    Each setting adjust the range the suspension can move and what it reacts to, so if you hit a real pothole on that motorway you will really feel it as the hard setting limits the range of the suspension.

    Active suspension I presume takes all the bumps out but if you are barreling along on a flat hard surface it will stiffen up the suspension to make for a better ride... if you hit a pothole it will expand the range of suspension so it doesn't feel like you just hit a brick wall, if you leave the road and start driving on light gravel then it will soften the suspension a little, while on rocky country it will loosen it a lot.

    Having the right suspension setting improves control and handling by not only making the ride easier on the passengers (and electronics and fuel and ammo) but also keeping the wheels/tracks in better contact with the surface being traveled over.
    avatar
    Pugnax

    Posts : 98
    Points : 89
    Join date : 2011-03-15
    Age : 53
    Location : Canada

    t-95

    Post  Pugnax on Thu Sep 06, 2012 5:37 am

    Thanks for verifing the deficiences of t_90.yep sub,no auto transmission,no steering wheel(tiger 41)Loads 7.5 secs yet a good crew can do 3 every minute and a half.Check your own link,tank is pathetic
    .
    avatar
    Pugnax

    Posts : 98
    Points : 89
    Join date : 2011-03-15
    Age : 53
    Location : Canada

    t-95

    Post  Pugnax on Thu Sep 06, 2012 5:45 am

    I was just stating the technical issues.A trained crew must be active,the moment a gunner,driver and commander arent searching for targets they are dead.A crew isnt basket of jobs,its all inclusive(know everybody elses job).


    Last edited by Pugnax on Thu Sep 06, 2012 6:04 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : needed to be expanded upon)
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  TR1 on Thu Sep 06, 2012 6:07 am

    Pugnax wrote:Thanks for verifing the deficiences of t_90.yep sub,no auto transmission,no steering wheel(tiger 41)Loads 7.5 secs yet a good crew can do 3 every minute and a half.Check your own link,tank is pathetic
    .

    lol.
    A good crew can do 3 a minute in a half? what nonsense is this.

    The auto loader is the future (or the past for certain nations Wink ) sorry. Once the US gets rid of the archaec loader (and it will whenever the next MBT comes around), you will sing its praises.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 06, 2012 11:20 am

    Thanks for verifing the deficiences of t_90.yep sub,no auto transmission,no steering wheel(tiger 41)Loads 7.5 secs yet a good crew can do 3 every minute and a half.Check your own link,tank is pathetic

    I drive a car with an automatic gearbox... changing gear manually is not that hard, and actually gives you more control... there is a hill near where I live which has a tight twisty road. My car is only a 1.8 litre and is pretty gutless so when I try to drive up that hill I have enormous trouble... in first gear I go too slow and hold up traffic, but if I put my foot down and it changes up to second I lurch forward too fast for the corners.

    In a manual car I can select between third and second gear for speed and power so I can go as fast as I want when I want.

    In a tank you are controlling two tracks. Controlling them with levers actually makes the vehicle easier to control.

    If you think for half a second pushing one lever forward and one lever backwards you can turn the tank on the spot. You have the ability to have complete control of the turn because you have complete control of the tracks... you can turn right by pushing forward on the left lever, or pulling back on the right lever, or both for a very sharp turn on the spot. Your turning circle can be from zero to infinity... much harder... more work with a steering wheel.

    Don't understand the rest of your post, you will have to elaborate.

    moment gunner ,driver and commander arent searching for targhets they are dead. Acrew isnt basket of jobs,its all inclusivie.

    Sorry but WHAT?

    The crew of a tank all have very specific jobs and the equipment to perform those jobs only. The only exception is the Commander who can fire the gun if needed. Otherwise the driver cannot look for targets he has a pathetic view in any current tank way down in the hull with a narrow forward view. The commander has to direct him from his position up high because the driver can't see over most terrain barriers including small hedges and bushes and folds in the ground.
    The Gunner has a very narrow field of view... perhaps 30-40 degrees wide and would be wasting his time trying to find his own targets... it would be like trying to find targets looking through a straw.

    The commander has the best view on the tank and it is his job to find targets and also to find threats. It is the commanders job to find targets and threats and allocate them to his gunner to engage. While the gunner is engaging the commander is looking for other targets or monitoring potential threats. Gunner engages targets he is directed to by the commander till they are destroyed to his satisfaction or the commander gives him a new target.

    Very simply the Driver drives, the Gunner shoots, and the commander commands... ie directs the driver and gunner and allocates jobs to them.

    Manual loaders add about 5 tons to a vehicle and are subject to fatigue and sleep deprivation and injury.

    They might load the first few rounds quickly... might, but how good are they bouncing cross country at 30km/h?


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:11 am

    BTW just watched those tank videos... Pugnax!...

    Loads 7.5 secs yet a good crew can do 3 every minute and a half.Check your own link,tank is pathetic

    When they are talking about loading three rounds in one and a half minutes they are talking about loading ammo into the autoloader. As shown in the video that requires three men, one outside with the pile of ammo to be loaded into the tank that has to be unpacked and handed up to the crewman standing on the tank. The crewman standing on the tank then hands the projectile or propellent charge to the third crewman inside the tank who places the component into the autoloader system and then programs the ammo type into the autoloader system.

    90 seconds to load 6 parts of ammo is pretty damn good in my opinion, with 3 projectiles and 3 propellent charges all being stored in specific places in the autoloader magazine and the ammo type recorded in the system so that when the gunner or commander selects the ammo type the autoloader will turn to the closest available round ready to load.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Pugnax

    Posts : 98
    Points : 89
    Join date : 2011-03-15
    Age : 53
    Location : Canada

    t-90

    Post  Pugnax on Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:37 am

    Western manual loaders,however archaic are getting 6-9 down range per minute.I guess its all training.

    Sponsored content

    Re: General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:34 pm