Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    T-90 MBT: News

    Share

    cracker
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 232
    Points : 273
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  cracker on Thu May 07, 2015 7:54 am

    i need help, what gun all russian T-90A really use? and also de facto, do the modernised T-72B3 use the same gun+autoloader as the T-90A? (allowing to use longer APDSFS as the T-90A vs old basic T-72B?)

    so is it the 2A46M-5 gun on both tanks? what's the main difference compared to older 2A46 variants? concretely... The 2A46M-5 how does it compare with 120mm NATO guns? which of the following is more true?


    2A46M-5 < 120 L44 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55
    120 L44 < 2A46M-5 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55
    120 L44 < 120 L52 (french) < 2A46M-5 < 120 L55
    120 L44 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55 < 2A46M-5

    also, the 2A46M-5 is a L52 or L48 long caliber gun? Sources contradict...

    The gun and autoloader on T-90MS are also identical to T-90A / T-72B3? or is it even another variant? (i think it's just a 2A46M-5 with muzzle reference system)

    I pretty much don't care about T-80 gun, but it says the modernised T-80 saw their gun replaced by the 2A46M-4, which is the same as the M-5 adapted to T-80 autoloader, etc... So, is it as capable as the M-5? and sabot length? (by the way it should concern only the overhauled / modernised T-80u and T-80Bv that may even be called like T-80UM unofficially)

    so in the end, is the new 2A82-M1 well above 2A46M-5 performance?

    How is the performance of the 2A66 125mm gun on the object 187, and, the 2A75 gun on the 2S25 Spurt ?

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Thu May 07, 2015 8:23 am

    120 L44 < 2A46M-5 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55 < 2A82-1M according to energy

    first 4 have similar pressure(adjusted; smaller pressure rating on 125mm gun is bigger when converted to 120mm ), its only difference of caliber that matters here since the powder volume and quality is very similar.

    last one supposedly has a lot more pressure owing to larger propellant volume.

    KoTeMoRe
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3599
    Points : 3634
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Thu May 07, 2015 10:06 am

    Cyberspec wrote:
    franco wrote:Curious as to if the T-90AM is to be a modernization of the T-90's in storage or of the newer T-90A's of which there were only 350-400 received.

    Considering that the T-14 won't be entering service until 2017 (at the earliest), an upgrade of the T-90's would make sense. They'll keep UVZ busy and get a up to date tank on the cheap.

    As for the T-80's, only the U and BV (upgrade, ~150) are still in service.
    And with the economic slowdown would be happy to see 500 T-14 by 2020.

    IMO, 500 would be the maximum optimistic number by 2020. I think the T-80's will be retired after 2020.

    What economic slowdown? The issue is that the current 6 months crisis ripple effects is unlikely to go beyond 2016 because the main culprit, oil, is gaining back ground.
    Furthermore the Russian budget will have a surplus again this year, both due to cut backs and very conservative estimate regarding bbl and general Russian resilience.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Thu May 07, 2015 6:06 pm

    cracker wrote:i need help, what gun all russian T-90A really use? and also de facto, do the modernised T-72B3 use the same gun+autoloader as the T-90A? (allowing to use longer APDSFS as the T-90A vs old basic T-72B?)

    so is it the 2A46M-5 gun on both tanks? what's the main difference compared to older 2A46 variants? concretely... The 2A46M-5 how does it compare with 120mm NATO guns? which of the following is more true?


    2A46M-5 < 120 L44 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55
    120 L44 < 2A46M-5 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55
    120 L44 < 120 L52 (french) < 2A46M-5 < 120 L55
    120 L44 < 120 L52 (french) < 120 L55 < 2A46M-5

    also, the 2A46M-5 is a L52 or L48 long caliber gun? Sources contradict...

    The gun and autoloader on T-90MS are also identical to T-90A / T-72B3? or is it even another variant? (i think it's just a 2A46M-5 with muzzle reference system)

    I pretty much don't care about T-80 gun, but it says the modernised T-80 saw their gun replaced by the 2A46M-4, which is the same as the M-5 adapted to T-80 autoloader, etc... So, is it as capable as the M-5? and sabot length? (by the way it should concern only the overhauled / modernised T-80u and T-80Bv that may even be called like T-80UM unofficially)

    so in the end, is the new 2A82-M1 well above 2A46M-5 performance?

    How is the performance of the 2A66 125mm gun on the object 187, and, the 2A75 gun on the 2S25 Spurt ?


    T-90A has 6000mm length 48 calibres long and the gun is always 2A46M5.

    http://www.zavod9.com/?pid=10106


    http://topwar.ru/57191-tankovye-pushki-2a46m-5-i-2a46m-4.html


    The gun says can field all nomenclature 125mm rounds while the 2A46M ad M1 can not.

    http://gurkhan.blogspot.de/2011/10/90.html

    The performance of 2A82M1 is suppossed to be higher than L55 Rheinmetall.

    Дульная энергия пушки 2А82 существенно больше дульной энергией широко известной пушки Rheinmetall Rh 120/L55. По техническому уровню превосходство новой пушки оценивается в 1,2-1,25 раза.

    Muzzle energy of the gun 2A82 is significantly more muzzle energy as the widely known gun Rheinmetall Rh-120/L55. On a technical level, the superiority of the new gun is estimated at 1.2-1.25 times.

    cracker
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 232
    Points : 273
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  cracker on Thu May 07, 2015 9:05 pm

    ok thanks, 2A46M5 is already a fantastic gun by the way. My favorite among current fielded models, i rate it superior to any western 120 cause of the russian HE rounds, ATGM and also the autoloader.

    2A82M-1 is then 20 to 25% superior to L55 120! wow that's fantastic.

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon May 25, 2015 8:23 am

    The author of the article below argues the MOD must urgently order the T-90AM as a preliminary step before inducting the Armata. He says there is a significant commonality in some of the systems between the T-90AM and Armata, which would allow tank commanders and maintenance staff to much easier switch to the Armata when it's avilable than transitioning from the T-72B3 to the Armata.

    He also argues that the T-90AM could serve as a back up option in case of any development set backs with the Armata.

    Interestingly, he says the T-90AM would be armed with the same gun as the T-14

    Urgently order the T-90AM while waiting for the Armata
    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Mon May 25, 2015 2:20 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:The author of the article below argues the MOD must urgently order the T-90AM as a preliminary step before inducting the Armata. He says there is a significant commonality in some of the systems between the T-90AM and Armata, which would allow tank commanders and maintenance staff to much easier switch to the Armata when it's avilable than transitioning from the T-72B3 to the Armata.

    He also argues that the T-90AM could serve as a back up option in case of any development set backs with the Armata.

    Interestingly, he says the T-90AM would be armed with the same gun as the T-14

    Urgently order the T-90AM while waiting for the Armata
    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88
    too late, and there is no extra budget. just order some T-14 systems that could be compatible with T-90A and fit it on those tanks.
    there is also little advantage with fitting the new gun to the T-90, first of all unless they use bustle AL the gun is not used to its full potential due to gimped rounds. not to mention there is no fume extractor, you have to make an air pump for it.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Mon May 25, 2015 2:56 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    Cyberspec wrote:The author of the article below argues the MOD must urgently order the T-90AM as a preliminary step before inducting the Armata. He says there is a significant commonality in some of the systems between the T-90AM and Armata, which would allow tank commanders and maintenance staff to much easier switch to the Armata when it's avilable than transitioning from the T-72B3 to the Armata.

    He also argues that the T-90AM could serve as a back up option in case of any development set backs with the Armata.

    Interestingly, he says the T-90AM would be armed with the same gun as the T-14

    Urgently order the T-90AM while waiting for the Armata
    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88
    too late, and there is no extra budget. just order some T-14 systems that could be compatible with T-90A and fit it on those tanks.
    there is also little advantage with fitting the new gun to the T-90, first of all unless they use bustle AL the gun is not used to its full potential due to gimped rounds. not to mention there is no fume extractor, you have to make an air pump for it.

    That is not true, the new gun has higher pressure and is longer it provides better performance with existing rounds and Svinets 2 is already pretty good, not to mention they are developing new rounds lets see what they will bring and due the situation that they are upgrading T-90AM into armament one could expect they could develope a new ammunition with better performance that can be used in both autoloaders of T-90AM and T-14.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9457
    Points : 9949
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  George1 on Mon May 25, 2015 6:21 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:The author of the article below argues the MOD must urgently order the T-90AM as a preliminary step before inducting the Armata. He says there is a significant commonality in some of the systems between the T-90AM and Armata, which would allow tank commanders and maintenance staff to much easier switch to the Armata when it's avilable than transitioning from the T-72B3 to the Armata.

    He also argues that the T-90AM could serve as a back up option in case of any development set backs with the Armata.

    Interestingly, he says the T-90AM would be armed with the same gun as the T-14

    Urgently order the T-90AM while waiting for the Armata
    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88

    an order for T-90 even with the old gun would be useful until armata enters the army

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Mon May 25, 2015 9:19 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:The author of the article below argues the MOD must urgently order the T-90AM as a preliminary step before inducting the Armata. He says there is a significant commonality in some of the systems between the T-90AM and Armata, which would allow tank commanders and maintenance staff to much easier switch to the Armata when it's avilable than transitioning from the T-72B3 to the Armata.

    He also argues that the T-90AM could serve as a back up option in case of any development set backs with the Armata.

    Interestingly, he says the T-90AM would be armed with the same gun as the T-14

    Urgently order the T-90AM while waiting for the Armata
    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88
    I have been saying this for a while now....thank god it might happen. 

    Ordering the AM would help curb the difference of performance in Russian MBT's. The T-14 is ages ahead of the B3, and the AM is somewhere in between. 

    Add the newer-gun and it will still be an amazing performer. With the newest-generation ERA it will be impenetrable to the West's rounds with a gun to match.

    Book.
    Senior Lieutenant
    Senior Lieutenant

    Posts : 667
    Points : 730
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Book. on Mon May 25, 2015 10:50 pm

    India Iraq Peru Algeris is see

    Buy T90 to confidant sale

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Tue May 26, 2015 10:40 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    That is not true, the new gun has higher pressure and is longer it provides better performance with existing rounds and Svinets 2 is already pretty good, not to mention they are developing new rounds lets see what they will bring and due the situation that they are upgrading T-90AM into armament one could expect they could develope a new ammunition with better performance that can be used in both autoloaders of T-90AM and T-14.
    but will it be enough? there is also question of whether the much higher muzzle velocity will aid the performance or hamper it- ex. as the impact velocity gets closer to (or starting at 1.6km/s, dunno maybe function of what composition/alloy)2km/s, DU loses its shearing property that handily gives about 10% improved performance against a tungsten counterpart. then there is the minor problem of the gun lacking a fume extractor, you will need an air compressor installed so your crew dont pass out after firing.

    me personally i would focus on HEAT rounds for the older tanks- those dont require a very powerful gun and is a very good way to keep the opposing side's armor designers on their toes. they would have to design armor against two very different modes of defeat - heck with the western focus on APFSDS as a sort of gay bulge against armor you could use this to "condition" their designers into making armor that is good enough for APFSDS but horribly inefficient against HEAT.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Tue May 26, 2015 10:45 am

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    That is not true, the new gun has higher pressure and is longer it provides better performance with existing rounds and Svinets 2 is already pretty good, not to mention they are developing new rounds lets see what they will bring and due the situation that they are upgrading T-90AM into armament one could expect they could develope a new ammunition with better performance that can be used in both autoloaders of T-90AM and T-14.
    but will it be enough? there is also question of whether the much higher muzzle velocity will aid the performance or hamper it- ex. as the impact velocity gets closer to (or starting at 1.6km/s, dunno maybe function of what composition/alloy)2km/s, DU loses its shearing property that handily gives about 10% improved performance against a tungsten counterpart. then there is the minor problem of the gun lacking a fume extractor, you will need an air compressor installed so your crew dont pass out after firing.

    me personally i would focus on HEAT rounds for the older tanks- those dont require a very powerful gun and is a very good way to keep the opposing side's armor designers on their toes. they would have to design armor against two very different modes of defeat - heck with the western focus on APFSDS as a sort of gay bulge against armor you could use this to "condition" their designers into making armor that is good enough for APFSDS but horribly inefficient against HEAT.
    It would be worthwhile....specially if the auto loader could be modified to fire the new high-penetration long-rods that will be equipped on the T-14. I assuming adding a fume extractor would not be hard. 

    HEAT is becoming more and more useless by the day... Composites and reactive armor, along with spacing have all put it off of the lime light. There is a reason long-rods are the item to be had right now.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Tue May 26, 2015 12:46 pm

    Mike E wrote:
    HEAT is becoming more and more useless by the day... Composites and reactive armor, along with spacing have all put it off of the lime light. There is a reason long-rods are the item to be had right now.
    meh, thats what long rod fanatics/ people with lack of imagination want you to say, but HEAT is here to stay. I mean how else are you going to fck up that tank more than 4km away from you?

    and the great thing about HEAT is that there many more things to play with it than long rods- change the liner, explosives and their geometryr, add multi-stage warheads, put some time-delay, add a top attack mode, add some frag effects, maybe an EMP stage, etc. etc. its no wonder the Soviets loved them.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Tue May 26, 2015 1:57 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    but will it be enough? there is also question of whether the much higher muzzle velocity will aid the performance or hamper it- ex. as the impact velocity gets closer to (or starting at 1.6km/s, dunno maybe function of what composition/alloy)2km/s, DU loses its shearing property that handily gives about 10% improved performance against a tungsten counterpart. then there is the minor problem of the gun lacking a fume extractor, you will need an air compressor installed so your crew dont pass out after firing.

    me personally i would focus on HEAT rounds for the older tanks- those dont require a very powerful gun and is a very good way to keep the opposing side's armor designers on their toes. they would have to design armor against two very different modes of defeat - heck with the western focus on APFSDS as a sort of gay bulge against armor you could use this to "condition" their designers into making armor that is good enough for APFSDS but horribly inefficient against HEAT.


    It would be worthwhile....specially if the auto loader could be modified to fire the new high-penetration long-rods that will be equipped on the T-14. I assuming adding a fume extractor would not be hard.

    HEAT is becoming more and more useless by the day... Composites and reactive armor, along with spacing have all put it off of the lime light. There is a reason long-rods are the item to be had right now.

    Enough in tank duel at combat relevant ranges? Well no tank has enough penetration nor accuracy to fight that in such environments, they would end up landing mobility, optical and firepower kills before they would land actual kills but that is of low concern since the job is to neutralize the threat from enemies advancing armor it is not your personal duty to kill everyone inside a tank and to make sure every single subsystem is completeley shred to pieces. Destroy the engine and its capability to fight and you already have achieved what you have to achieve, because in this traditional concept of Tank vs Tank you don't have 1 vs1, you have tank formation vs tank formation. You keep on shooting your target untill the gunner sees signs of effect then he moves on to next target, because therea re still enemies that will try to shred you to pieces, so he won't have time to look exactly what kind of damage is done on the tank if he stops shooting back or it looks like he is destroyed through the TIS, you leave him alone and follow next designated target by your commander, but this is of course without everything else on a battlefield like Helicopters, artillery or whatever forces there might be depending on environment.

    The gun fume extractor on T-14 is either not installed because the turret is unoccupied or because they haven't finished the actual gun and this is just a mockup, if it is going to be installed on T-90AM then it will get its fume extractor no doubt about that.

    I aggree HEAT rounds are unappreciated and underrated by many. Tests of Tandem HEAT rounds have shown that precursor that is designed to destroy ERA has usually 50-100mm RHAe pen. and HEAT rounds with larger precursor can weakening the composite armors interior composition, especially when they reach to ceramics which specifically are good against CE penetrators.
    HEAT rounds have some weaknesses:

    1. HEAT rounds are largley unoccupied by explosives. The space is needed to form a penetrator.
    2. Weight and balance of rounds is ineffecient due the air gaps there needed for penetrators to shape used as a probe.
    3. Low speeds and with the problem No. 2 it reduces its accuracy.

    Tests and rounds like BK-31M has shown to reduce such problems they also used 3 charges one with an unknown alloy/material for the main HEAT charge. The concept is relative simple and if to be trusted than it is capable to design HEAT rounds that way that a rear HEAT charge can pass through a shaped charge infront of it without detonating it. This arrangement of a rear shaped charge which was not only smaller but also had therefore longer "probe" and time to shape its penetrator means that other materials that are usually disliked to be used in HEAT weapons as a cone liner like Tantal because they need longer probes to form an optimal penetrator can now be used btw which has better properties in armor depth penetration than copper liner against non homogenous armor. HEAT weapons are also usfull against all kinds of targets (Helicopters, Tanks, IFV/APC's, Infantry (even tho less effective than HE-Frag)) while Sabots are only usefull Frontal engagement against Tanks, highly uneffective to useless against Helicopters, AFV/IFV/APC, Infantry etc.

    HEAT rounds have not met their limit yet, not to mention that the West reject using ERA on their armor which makes HEAT rounds more useful with precursor opening armor and weakning some depth of armor makes it more capable for main charges to perforate more armor and with more development for more charges with different liner materials and alloys will show great potential for rounds. The heavier such rounds get the higher the velocity of such rounds can be made without losing to much of accuracy.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed May 27, 2015 4:31 am

    yes, HEAT rounds have a lot of internal space lost to air gaps. but maybe one could design a collapsible/ telescoping HEAT round.
    instead of say a a triple you could have a quadruple warhead. looking at the triple charged heat round the precursor in the front already has telescoping probe and if you think about it, the rearmost charge looks like it could "fit" inside the cone of the main charge. now obviously its not possible now since it would interfere with the 2 charges behind it, but say you make that part telescoping, such that in flight it expands to the front and frees the space in the main charge. and yes, since composites are good against HEAT but degrade a lot with repeated hits and the armor would be prepped by(i think the firing sequence is precursor - 2nd charge - rearmost charge - main charge) up to 2-3 shaped charges the main charge should have quite a bit more effect when its turn comes.

    and regarding tank duels, since the IFVs will get a major HE firepower boost from a bigger gun, I think it would be time to update the tank's ammo loadout. split the ammo 40-40-20, for the programmable HE, APFSDS and guided missile. the HEAT is gone since its already in the guided missile and to maximize the combat potential of the new gun and ammo combo by giving some of its share to APFSDS.


    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed May 27, 2015 6:43 pm

    Mike E wrote: HEAT is becoming more and more useless by the day... Composites and reactive armor, along with spacing have all put it off of the lime light. There is a reason long-rods are the item to be had right now.

    I strongly disagree, if anything HEAT has a much higher ceiling than that of Sabot rounds for these very reasons:

    1.) HEAT rounds evolved/adapted quicker to the challenge of ERA with simpler solutions, by simply adding a precursor charge to the heat round to prematurely set off ERA. Meanwhile Sabot rounds require you to go back to the drawing board redesigning many things, when it comes to the aerodynamics of the round, the material science behind developing the alloys of the round, the chemical mixture of propellant (it takes far more velocity to make Sabot rounds effective), and even looking at redesigning the gun barrel to withstand higher pressures. As Werewolf has demonstrated before, using different metal linings have increased the penetrating performance of HEAT warheads.

    2.) There's HEAT charges that are also effective anti-personnel rounds, meanwhile the only anti-personnel aspect of Sabot rounds is the hot fragments and burrs that are created when a Sabot round penetrates, but then that's largely negated by Anti-Spall lining in AFV's.

    3.) There are man portable HEAT ATGM's that are capable of annihilating any piece of armor on the market such as the Kornet-E, which only requires 2-3 man highly trained ATGM crew to carry it around, and packs a massive 152 mm HEAT warhead that can defeat armor at 4.5 km's. HEAT ATGM's can be applied to a wide variety of vehicles, the Kornet-EM system on the Tigr-M truck is capable of holding '16', 152 mm HEAT missiles, and capable of firing 8 in quick succession, with built in measures to defeat APS at an outstanding stand off range of 8.5 km's!

    Meanwhile there has not been any successful attempts to create man portable anti-MBT APFSDS launcher/rounds, and true anti-MBT rounds could only be utilized by a high-pressure, smoothbore MBT cannons, and Sabot rounds can't defeat anything beyond 3 km's, less than the range of 4.5 km's from a Kornet-E ATGM, let alone the massive stand off range of 8.5 km's from a Kornet-EM system. And while Sabot rounds have the advantage of higher travelling speed, that's an negligible advantage considering how AFV's are rarely traveling above 70 km's an hour.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Wed May 27, 2015 10:56 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote: HEAT is becoming more and more useless by the day... Composites and reactive armor, along with spacing have all put it off of the lime light. There is a reason long-rods are the item to be had right now.

    I strongly disagree, if anything HEAT has a much higher ceiling than that of Sabot rounds for these very reasons:

    1.) HEAT rounds evolved/adapted quicker to the challenge of ERA with simpler solutions, by simply adding a precursor charge to the heat round to prematurely set off ERA. Meanwhile Sabot rounds require you to go back to the drawing board redesigning many things, when it comes to the aerodynamics of the round, the material science behind developing the alloys of the round, the chemical mixture of propellant (it takes far more velocity to make Sabot rounds effective), and even looking at redesigning the gun barrel to withstand higher pressures. As Werewolf has demonstrated before, using different metal linings have increased the penetrating performance of HEAT warheads.

    2.) There's HEAT charges that are also effective anti-personnel rounds, meanwhile the only anti-personnel aspect of Sabot rounds is the hot fragments and burrs that are created when a Sabot round penetrates, but then that's largely negated by Anti-Spall lining in AFV's.

    3.) There are man portable HEAT ATGM's that are capable of annihilating any piece of armor on the market such as the Kornet-E, which only requires 2-3 man highly trained ATGM crew to carry it around, and packs a massive 152 mm HEAT warhead that can defeat armor at 4.5 km's. HEAT ATGM's can be applied to a wide variety of vehicles, the Kornet-EM system on the Tigr-M truck is capable of holding '16', 152 mm HEAT missiles, and capable of firing 8 in quick succession, with built in measures to defeat APS at an outstanding stand off range of 8.5 km's!

    Meanwhile there has not been any successful attempts to create man portable anti-MBT APFSDS launcher/rounds, and true anti-MBT rounds could only be utilized by a high-pressure, smoothbore MBT cannons, and Sabot rounds can't defeat anything beyond 3 km's, less than the range of 4.5 km's from a Kornet-E ATGM, let alone the massive stand off range of 8.5 km's from a Kornet-EM system. And while Sabot rounds have the advantage of higher travelling speed, that's an negligible advantage considering how AFV's are rarely traveling above 70 km's an hour.
    Composites will still eat HEAT shells all day...modern age MBT's are built to defeat HEAT more so than long-rods. 

    I never said they are not useful, just that they should NOT be a substitute for the long-rods.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Wed May 27, 2015 11:05 pm

    Mike E wrote:
    Composites will still eat HEAT shells all day...modern age MBT's are built to defeat HEAT more so than long-rods. 

    I never said they are not useful, just that they should NOT be a substitute for the long-rods.

    That is not true. That is just a thing that is speculated and floats around on forums while there were several tests of Burlington aswell as Chobham armor which is composite non the less, getting weakened by precursor HEAT charges and since all russian HEAT weapons have precursors not to mention next generation of HEAT warheads with triple charges and new alloys it would not surprise me that the entire thing and speculation that tanks are better protected against CE penetrators vaporizes really quick. So far almost no modern armor has been even hit of any Tandem HEAT weapons and all those who have been hit by such modern weapons have been destroyed or penetrated, Merkawa vs Kornet, Abrams vs Kornet and RPG-29 and Chally2 aswell, just because some 260mm RHAe and selfmade Yasin warheads are the big majority of HEAT weapons that are constantly fired in bananarepublics against invaders does not mean they can eat all HEAT weapons like candy. HEAT weapons have far greater potential then Sabots ever will and they are not just usefull against one single type of target but against various targets.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed May 27, 2015 11:46 pm

    Mike E wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote: HEAT is becoming more and more useless by the day... Composites and reactive armor, along with spacing have all put it off of the lime light. There is a reason long-rods are the item to be had right now.

    I strongly disagree, if anything HEAT has a much higher ceiling than that of Sabot rounds for these very reasons:

    1.) HEAT rounds evolved/adapted quicker to the challenge of ERA with simpler solutions, by simply adding a precursor charge to the heat round to prematurely set off ERA. Meanwhile Sabot rounds require you to go back to the drawing board redesigning many things, when it comes to the aerodynamics of the round, the material science behind developing the alloys of the round, the chemical mixture of propellant (it takes far more velocity to make Sabot rounds effective), and even looking at redesigning the gun barrel to withstand higher pressures. As Werewolf has demonstrated before, using different metal linings have increased the penetrating performance of HEAT warheads.

    2.) There's HEAT charges that are also effective anti-personnel rounds, meanwhile the only anti-personnel aspect of Sabot rounds is the hot fragments and burrs that are created when a Sabot round penetrates, but then that's largely negated by Anti-Spall lining in AFV's.

    3.) There are man portable HEAT ATGM's that are capable of annihilating any piece of armor on the market such as the Kornet-E, which only requires 2-3 man highly trained ATGM crew to carry it around, and packs a massive 152 mm HEAT warhead that can defeat armor at 4.5 km's. HEAT ATGM's can be applied to a wide variety of vehicles, the Kornet-EM system on the Tigr-M truck is capable of holding '16', 152 mm HEAT missiles, and capable of firing 8 in quick succession, with built in measures to defeat APS at an outstanding stand off range of 8.5 km's!

    Meanwhile there has not been any successful attempts to create man portable anti-MBT APFSDS launcher/rounds, and true anti-MBT rounds could only be utilized by a high-pressure, smoothbore MBT cannons, and Sabot rounds can't defeat anything beyond 3 km's, less than the range of 4.5 km's from a Kornet-E ATGM, let alone the massive stand off range of 8.5 km's from a Kornet-EM system. And while Sabot rounds have the advantage of higher travelling speed, that's an negligible advantage considering how AFV's are rarely traveling above 70 km's an hour.
    Composites will still eat HEAT shells all day...modern age MBT's are built to defeat HEAT more so than long-rods. 

    I never said they are not useful, just that they should NOT be a substitute for the long-rods.

    ...Meanwhile Kornet-E's have been known to kill Merkeva's, M1 Abrams, T-72's.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Thu May 28, 2015 12:12 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Composites will still eat HEAT shells all day...modern age MBT's are built to defeat HEAT more so than long-rods. 

    I never said they are not useful, just that they should NOT be a substitute for the long-rods.

    ...Meanwhile Kornet-E's have been known to kill Merkeva's, M1 Abrams, T-72's.
    Yes...but not frontally. Western MBT's never mind the Armata could take HEAT to their frontal glacis, long-rods would be much more...interesting. 

    Never once did I say they are not effective...not once...but in the modern battlefield a long-rod will have a higher chance of penetrating unless from above.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Thu May 28, 2015 12:46 am

    Mike E wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Composites will still eat HEAT shells all day...modern age MBT's are built to defeat HEAT more so than long-rods. 

    I never said they are not useful, just that they should NOT be a substitute for the long-rods.

    ...Meanwhile Kornet-E's have been known to kill Merkeva's, M1 Abrams, T-72's.
    Yes...but not frontally. Western MBT's never mind the Armata could take HEAT to their frontal glacis, long-rods would be much more...interesting. 

    Never once did I say they are not effective...not once...but in the modern battlefield a long-rod will have a higher chance of penetrating unless from above.

    Iraqi M1A1M have been penetrated with Kornet-E from front and exist the rear the ammunition detonated crew in turret could not survive.



    calripson
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 129
    Points : 150
    Join date : 2013-10-26

    Iraqi Monkey Model M1

    Post  calripson on Thu May 28, 2015 2:46 am

    Iraqi M1 tanks have downgraded armor. America is not stupid enough to export the same spec tanks they use to a country like Iraq.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Zivo on Thu May 28, 2015 2:56 am

    calripson wrote:Iraqi M1 tanks have downgraded armor. America is not stupid enough to export the same spec tanks they use to a country like Iraq.

    And Kornet-E has downgraded performance... So, we have downgraded Kornets punching clean through downgraded M1's.


    I'd bet domestic Kornets can punch through domestic M1's all the same.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu May 28, 2015 3:27 am

    calripson wrote:Iraqi M1 tanks have downgraded armor. America is not stupid enough to export the same spec tanks they use to a country like Iraq.

    Depleted Uranium slabs in the turret wouldn't save the crew from a massive 152 mm HEAT charge from a Kornet-E. In fact there can be a case made that domestic armor in M1's are more dangerous towards the crew than export models, because when the turret does get penetrated, the surviving crew members are forced to breath air in the crew space that's full of super-heated depleted uranium particulate/dust that acts even worse on the respiratory system than asbestos. Depleted Uranium in it's solid form isn't that bad to be around, but when turned in to fine dust than it's a totally different story.

    In the case of a HEAT warhead powerful enough to penetrate the turret armor, the fine DU dust becomes a triple-whammy anti-personnel hazard, where the fine dust acts like a heavy metal in the circulatory system, and while in the blood stream aggressively emits alpha and beta radiation which outside the body it's harmless, but while inside the body it has extremely carcinogenic effect, and the icing on the cake is that the fine dust is highly flammable, as DU has been known to catch on fire when exposed to extreme air-pressure and air resistance.

    Sponsored content

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:38 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 5:38 pm