Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Those things that are presumably rocket pods cut into where there should be side armour on the turret. Unless this thing has a low profile turret and those hatches are just spaced armour it would have an exceedingly poor protection arc.
+27
0nillie0
lancelot
The-thing-next-door
Regular
11E
Kiko
Werewolf
Broski
AlfaT8
marcellogo
Mir
Hole
xeno
galicije83
TMA1
Arrow
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
ALAMO
Isos
flamming_python
Azi
diabetus
Belisarius
caveat emptor
GarryB
lyle6
limb
31 posters
T-72 ΜΒΤ and variants #2
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1447
Points : 1505
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
ALAMO- Posts : 7938
Points : 8028
Join date : 2014-11-26
Russkie have a few dozen of such conceptual designs, that will go nowhere.
Not sure what are you so excited about
Not sure what are you so excited about
GarryB, flamming_python and The-thing-next-door like this post
GarryB- Posts : 41043
Points : 41545
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
During the current conflict tanks have generally been used mostly as direct fire artillery against buildings and trenches and bunkers, so a shorter barrel main gun, perhaps with reduced propellant sizes and maybe heavier HE shells makes pretty good sense.
I suspect those antennas are jammers to defeat or reduce the performance of drones and enemy communications, and I would suspect it is intended to operate with a Terminator type vehicle with air burst 30mm cannon shells better optimised to deal with drones and enemy infantry.
Of course they might use 23mm cannon with airburst shells because 30mm shells would be overkill.
I suspect those antennas are jammers to defeat or reduce the performance of drones and enemy communications, and I would suspect it is intended to operate with a Terminator type vehicle with air burst 30mm cannon shells better optimised to deal with drones and enemy infantry.
Of course they might use 23mm cannon with airburst shells because 30mm shells would be overkill.
Regular- Posts : 3937
Points : 3911
Join date : 2013-03-10
Location : There must be full de-nazification
If anyone will be serious about new tanks, and not some MIC feeds, all aspects of protection must be rethought.
Good thing for Russia is that T-14's ammo storage is future-proof, when ammo bustle in modern warfare is just an Achilles hill. Protection for engine, fuel lines, reworked unmanned turret, incorporated EW on APU and APS that would be last line against unjammable drones. But I honestly more interested to see how Russia will evolve IFVs at this point.
Good thing for Russia is that T-14's ammo storage is future-proof, when ammo bustle in modern warfare is just an Achilles hill. Protection for engine, fuel lines, reworked unmanned turret, incorporated EW on APU and APS that would be last line against unjammable drones. But I honestly more interested to see how Russia will evolve IFVs at this point.
GarryB, zardof, The-thing-next-door and jon_deluxe like this post
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1447
Points : 1505
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
German tank factory "We could save money if we do away with qualified welders and welding inspectors.".
GarryB and Big_Gazza like this post
ALAMO- Posts : 7938
Points : 8028
Join date : 2014-11-26
This tank was made in 80s. What is your point?
GarryB likes this post
Regular- Posts : 3937
Points : 3911
Join date : 2013-03-10
Location : There must be full de-nazification
ALAMO wrote:This tank was made in 80s. What is your point?
The principle of western style tank designs didn't change, didn't it?
Look at what Americans, Germans, French and Brits presents as "new" and compare to what we are seeing getting burned.
GarryB and Big_Gazza like this post
GarryB- Posts : 41043
Points : 41545
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The Soviets and Russians recognised the vulnerability of the turret bustle and stopped storing ammo there rather early on. In new vehicles with any ammo there it is separated from the crew compartment.
The west persisted to keep ammo there, though they used blow out panels and armoured doors... it is pretty clear that even a tiny drone carrying a small shaped charge warhead is an enormous threat to anything with a turret bustle ammo storage.
Will be amusing to see the T-14 clones the next generation western tanks start to look like... a cruel mimic of the 1980s when US intel predicted that the T-80 and newer Soviet tanks would look like Abrams tanks...
Adapting to drones and anti armour weapons is being taken seriously by Russia and the Ukrainians with western tanks but the western tank designers themselves don't seem to have gotten the memo...
The west persisted to keep ammo there, though they used blow out panels and armoured doors... it is pretty clear that even a tiny drone carrying a small shaped charge warhead is an enormous threat to anything with a turret bustle ammo storage.
Will be amusing to see the T-14 clones the next generation western tanks start to look like... a cruel mimic of the 1980s when US intel predicted that the T-80 and newer Soviet tanks would look like Abrams tanks...
Adapting to drones and anti armour weapons is being taken seriously by Russia and the Ukrainians with western tanks but the western tank designers themselves don't seem to have gotten the memo...
Big_Gazza and jon_deluxe like this post
higurashihougi- Posts : 3573
Points : 3660
Join date : 2014-08-13
Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.
I am not aware whether people still dig underground tunnel for tanks to run into and become temporary immobile turrets, but in that case, we do see that Russian design of hiding the ammo in the hull is much more beneficial than putting it on the turret bustle.
GarryB and jon_deluxe like this post
ALAMO- Posts : 7938
Points : 8028
Join date : 2014-11-26
The principle of western style tank designs didn't change, didn't it?
Look at what Americans, Germans, French and Brits presents as "new" and compare to what we are seeing getting burned.
It is hard to talk about "principle" when the west has not designed anything new since the 80s.
But this particular tank was made in the 80s, by a German industrial base. The very same that made the Mercedes W124. Yaping about substandard welding and quality checks is childish.
Look at what Americans, Germans, French and Brits presents as "new" and compare to what we are seeing getting burned.
It is hard to talk about "principle" when the west has not designed anything new since the 80s.
But this particular tank was made in the 80s, by a German industrial base. The very same that made the Mercedes W124. Yaping about substandard welding and quality checks is childish.
GarryB likes this post
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1447
Points : 1505
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
But this particular tank was made in the 80s, by a German industrial base. The very same that made the Mercedes W124. Yaping about substandard welding and quality checks is childish.
Any welding inspector will tell you that if the welds fail before the metal they join then there is something wrong. That the welds on western tanks consistently fail is an indication of substandard manufacture across the board. I have seen it on western tanks from as far back as the late 1940's and no The issues the Soviets had with welding is not a counter argument as they were quickly ironed out.
Regular and jon_deluxe like this post
ALAMO- Posts : 7938
Points : 8028
Join date : 2014-11-26
As long as you wish to believe in your fairy tails - be my guest.
Regular- Posts : 3937
Points : 3911
Join date : 2013-03-10
Location : There must be full de-nazification
ALAMO wrote:
It is hard to talk about "principle" when the west has not designed anything new since the 80s.
But this particular tank was made in the 80s, by a German industrial base. The very same that made the Mercedes W124. Yaping about substandard welding and quality checks is childish.
Why it's hard to talk, if there are Future MBT projects presented now? Even on paper, West is stuck.
Now not sure how MIC compares to German car industry, but I can also mention abominations like Opel Kadet, hell, even MB W140 was completely trash. I am not 20, I remember very well that "German quality" is a myth
Less presumptions and yapping, more facts. What do we see here?
The-thing-next-door and jon_deluxe like this post
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1447
Points : 1505
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
As long as you wish to believe in your fairy tails - be my guest.
Why is it so important for you to believe that German welders are so great?
I will start a separate topic for this in the nato militaries section.
GarryB and Regular like this post
GarryB- Posts : 41043
Points : 41545
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I am not aware whether people still dig underground tunnel for tanks to run into and become temporary immobile turrets, but in that case, we do see that Russian design of hiding the ammo in the hull is much more beneficial than putting it on the turret bustle.
During exercises the Russians often built firing positions from a hull down position where the tank could reverse back 3-4 metres and drop down out of sight. The idea being that the tank would remain to the rear hidden from enemy view and when it was time to engage the enemy the tank would drive forward up onto a ramp revealing its turret only so it could look and fire and then fire smoke and reverse down below ground level safe from enemy fire, while another tank in another position will drive up and look and fire and roll back into cover.
Regular and jon_deluxe like this post
Regular- Posts : 3937
Points : 3911
Join date : 2013-03-10
Location : There must be full de-nazification
I believe Russians still use T-62M and BMP-3 in similar hulldown fashion. Mostly in some not so active moving fronts. Kremena forrest belts and near Kherson, overlooking river. During Ukr counter, when there more vegetation, it was used quite well. Pretty much why Ukr uses starlink equiped agrodrones with 82mm shells for drops if in reach.
flamming_python likes this post
PhSt- Posts : 1563
Points : 1569
Join date : 2019-04-02
Location : Canada
The T-72B3 and the T-90M Proryv are advanced Russian main battle tanks that represent different stages of development in armored warfare. Each incorporates modern technologies to enhance battlefield effectiveness, yet they reflect distinct design philosophies and operational roles.
zardof and jon_deluxe like this post