Re: MBT's
 

I just couldn't wait on this, I'll call it "Something Old, Something New( Again!)" ...
http://www.janes.com/article/56911/p...nks-in-service

Amazing!

Have a Happy New Year!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

"operational trainers" but still nice to see they are still in use

Re: MBT's
 

Good use for em.
Maybe the US Army should consider it. I know the US Navy used the "Yellow Peril" from 1935-1961 for basic flight training.

Re: MBT's
 

Well as I write this I'll be checking back and forth to the now separate folders I put together in FIREFOX to cover the various threads I started out here for the same reasons-trying to organized. Some of these I've been tracking for awhile like this very first status update. Just assume I'm tracking these, why would I put it anyway!?!

1) Poland: They have reached a final decision their LEO 2A4 tanks will now be upgraded to the LEOPARD PL.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-tanks-019466/
http://www.janes.com/article/56972/p...n-battle-tanks

2) U.S.: The new ABRAMS round is going into production among others. I've posted on this round for a couple of years on/off, tested to have an almost 100% kill rate at greater than 4500yds/or meters, can't remember which-sorry!
http://www.armyrecognition.com/ausa_2015_show_daily_news_coverage_report/ausa_2015_orbital_atk_awarded_$105_million_in_cont racts_for_medium_large_caliber_ammunition.html

3) Israel: The IDF will by the end of 2016 mark the end of era for the MERKAVA Mk II tanks after 33yrs. of operational/training service. As a side note as the article mentions it all MERKAVA Mk IV tanks have been equipped with the TROPHY system for about two years now, it also will will become it's training tank as well when the MERKAVA Mk II is retired.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/novem..._23011151.html

4) Turkey: Will be watching this closely not as it concerns the ALTAY but to see if they put this system on some of their older tanks as they did with the LEOPARD-1T-VOLKAN 171 tanks that were equipped with the 3rd GEN FCS intended for the ALTAY. Aselan would further improve on that FCS to a 4th Gen (Have to be careful w/ these Gen numbers, for instance in the U.S. ABRAMS is considered to have an improved 3rd Gen system. Or as I like to think of it-a headache trying to keep up with it!?!) level planned for the LEOPARD-2T and ALTAY. VOLKAN if you haven't gathered, is the name given to the FCS.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem..._20212151.html

Well can't give you all of it, what fun would there be in that?

Back to work later today, hope you all have a great week!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Concerning ref 2) above have verified, cut & pasted it several times but it keeps putting a "space" in the word "contract" very strange. Other than that you can copy to do a search for the story or go to the site in the news section by month to get it there. Sorry for any inconvenience!

Re: MBT's
 

Link 2 is broken

Re: MBT's
 

Couldn't find the article concerning the new Abrams ammo but I did find this.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem...116121510.html

General Dynamics is working closely with the Army to improve the survivability, maintainability, fuel efficiency, power generation and network capability of its fleet of Abrams Main Battle Tanks.

“Projected for full rate production within the next two years, the Abrams M1A2 SEPv3 will provide the Army with the tank they need to dominate the battlefields of the future,” said Donald Kotchman, vice president of Tracked Combat Vehicles for General Dynamics Land Systems.


The M1A2 SEPv3 production process will begin with a pilot program of six tanks before moving into full-rate production.
Work will be performed by existing employees in Anniston, Ala.; Tallahassee, Fla.; Lima, Ohio; and Scranton, Pa.

The M1A2 Abrams SEP V3 (System Enhanced Package) is a modernized version of the M1A2 SEPV V2 main battle tank which has a number of upgrades in the areas of survivability, maintainability, full efficiency and network capability. In October 2015, the M1A2 SP V3 was presented for the first time at AUSA, defense exhibition in Washington D.C.

The M1A2 SEP V3 is equipped with a new improved entire IED capability electronic warfare build on the vehicle. This tank will be fitted with (IFLIR) Improved Forward-Looking Infrared to identify target. The IFLIR uses long- and mid-wave infrared technology in both the gunner’s primary sight and the commander’s independent thermal viewer.

Re: MBT's
 

Mystery solved!! Well by accident anyway. Don I don't know if you remembered the several posts I made about an Ethiopian tank deal for 200-250 modernized T-72 tanks about 3 years ago in this Thread. At the time I was vexed because I couldn't identify the exporter though if I remember correctly, Russia was named in some of the refs. We decided to take no action on the matter. Well the exporter was the Ukraine and the tank is the "new" T-72UA1. What brought this about is I've been tracking reports that the T-72 (And now their T-80 with improvements.) have already entered the field for the Ukraine as verified now. Also the below ref. that I hope will have some minor at least use, that also in 2013 the DRC would be receiving the T-64BV1 w/o ATGW capability as pointed out in the article below and for you readers please note from whom this ref is from. PLEASE DON'T TAKE ANY ACTION ON THESE YET-THERE ARE ISSUES INVOLVED.

Which means-yes-it's time for "ONE WORLD-ONE OOB"!! :D

What are the issues?
1. The Ukrainian T-72UAI (A new tank variant.) does carry one the Ukraine's newer (Modified.) ATGW and FCS for the 9M119 SVIR which is a laser guided with a range 100m-4000m. I need to verify dates and whether Ethiopia also received the ATGW capability. Data sheet provided below as this tank received significant protection improvements as well. The Ukraine did upgrade the warheads electronics for accuracy and a "better all weather" capability.

2. Ukrainian T-80 received life cycle improvements in the performance area as well in protection, however, seeing some evidence of possible as yet unidentified weapons improvements. Whether that means an upgraded MG or FCS or both or none is unclear at this time. And I'd to get a better handle on the dates here as well.

3. The DRC T-64BV-1, I would feel better about verifying it's ATGW capabilities as well and settle on a good date.

4. Verify the status of the Ukrainian T-64BV & T-64BM BULAT are carrying ATGW's.

5. Seeing much to indicate the T-64BM BULAT in combat capability and protection it is equal to the Russian T-90 in those regards electronically to include FCS, TI/GSR, Laser warning systems and APS. Need to look into this more.

The only step I see that can be addressed now is #4.

https://issuu.com/ukrainian_defense_...udr-02-2014/19
http://www.armyrecognition.com/ukrai...aine_army.html
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/Ukrainian-Tanks.php
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3666.html

I can use a break, so good night!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Is it getting "colder" around here or, is it just me?
http://www.defence24.com/328660,pole...tank-challenge

Regards,
Pat

Re: MBT's
 

While I haven't actually looked, and I'm sure they have more, my first thoughts were ... "Do Denmark and Sweden even have a platoon of MBTs?" :)

Re: MBT's
 

Looks like UK military couldn't even afford to send anyone :(

Re: MBT's
 

Sweden has the "home" designed modified German built LEOPARDS STRV-121/122A & 122B tanks which were submitted for modification in the game 2/or 3yrs. ago. Changes were accepted and made by Don.

Denmark has actively been selling off their heavy armor however, unlike the Netherlands they didn't sell off all their armor. They started their "fire sale" mostly between roughly 2009-2012 time frame. By about that time the Dutch had pulled them out of service and sold them. This was covered extensively in this thread and in my patch inputs and was game fixed. Denmark was slower to start the sell off as noted above and saw the rise of Russia and held the line with the best they had left the result of which follows. They maintain one Armor (Heavy) Battalion (In Holstebro.) w/51 LEO 2A4/40 LEO 1A5 (Modernized.) w/60 in storage.

UK Yes I agree about the UK they would have done well I believe but, they can't make it I suspect because they are deployed in East Europe.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Well I thought something might be off about Denmark concerning the use of the LEO 1A5 so I recovered the source and missed it's date. So the best way to fix it was just to go to Denmark's MOD site who like many others of the region are very free and open to the status of their military. So the answer really is they have 57 LEO 2A5 tanks in operation. From their MOD you might find PDF pages 10-12 of some use. The others after will give you a complete list as well of the rest of their armed forces as of 2011. Note and as I've posted, Denmark is in the process of down selecting a replacement for their M-113 APC's. It'll be one of the largest deals of the type in Europe in many years.
http://www2.forsvaret.dk/eng/About/F...Figures_UK.pdf

Sorry for any inconvenience and confusion on the matter. The rest is correct in the above post. Denmark's OOB concerning these tanks is good as well.

General sites...
http://www2.forsvaret.dk/eng/Organis...anishArmy.aspx
http://www.fmn.dk/eng/Pages/Frontpage.aspx

There was a thread of talk of NATO and others. In one of my replies I indicated the recent agreements to form such an organization of the Scandinavian countries, though I couldn't remember the name of it. That name is NORDEFCO, the below
is the MOD announcement (2016-01-13 16:15) of their chairmanship of that organization in it's second year also who's in it, the rotation and who can't chair it.
http://www.fmn.dk/eng/news/Pages/dan...-nordefco.aspx

Well that was a long correction! Good Night!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Indeed the truth...

Re: MBT's
 

A quick one and done, a deeper analysis of what will be accomplished in the Polish LEOPARD 2PL upgrade program...
http://www.defence24.com/312490,leop...n-battle-tanks

Have a great day! It's back to the "grind" today.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

As I stated here earlier the Swedish Army has got rid of Strv 121 and/or converted them to engineering vehicles and spare parts in 2014. Strv 122 is still used, there's about 120 of them in use.

Re: MBT's
 

First I would say please go to Page 28 Post 274 Item A1 then go to Page 30 Post 299 and look at the previous shorter posts that proceeded 299 and note the dates of each. WHY? Because of the following ref. which even with my "bad" eye I can see a repeat of that event coming. Someone will come across this ref. or similar and get all excited that the Russians are getting an upgraded T-72B3M/B4 tank. Well I hope you looked at data from those posts very closely, because, the mod I just mentioned from the below ref. is no different then the data we had for the T-72B3 when submitted two years ago. So unless Don wants to do a name change here, the "new" T-72B3M/B4/or T-72B4 is the same as the T-72B3 that incorporated all of the improvements mentioned below and a couple of more not mentioned below. However I have no faith in that I "short circuited" a repeat of the above events from Dec. 2014.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/march..._12003162.html

The simple breakdown (Before I have one.) :rolleyes: is...
1. Late 2012 data received on the upgraded T-72 to be called T-72B3.
2. Investigated, researched then submitted in Mar. 2013 to become UNIT 697 in the Russian OOB.
3. The controversy appears in Dec. 2013, all is resolved.
4. Somewhere along the line T-72B3 has become the T-72B3M.
5. Now we have the T-72B3M that's also the T-72B4 better known as the T-72B3M/B4 (PLEASE SOMEBODY SHOOT ME NOW! :doh:)
6. Maybe the name change isn't such a bad idea now!?! It was almost harder to keep it straight the second time around as the first time above!?!

But whatever we call it, IT'S THE SAME TANK WITH THE SAME CAPABILITIES AND UPGRADES.

Someone will still do it anyway. :shock:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

A rose by any other name ...

Re: MBT's
 

In case you're confused by the various Marks of Centurions...

Re: MBT's
 

And I thought the Le Clerc and Abrams was bad!?!

Regards,
Pat

Re: MBT's
 

What I'm watching for now...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/febru..._31002163.html

With the exception of what would become the Russian ARMATA starting with Post #1 on the BLACK EAGLE, the ARJUN Project might succeed it as the longest on going developmental program I've been tracking. With that being said India has been dealing with the "concept" of the ARJUN Mk1 for over 40 yrs. now. These tanks overall are very good, though I would consider the ARJUN Mk2 as excellent based on the almost 200 improvements made to it. What we have below has given me some new information concerning the both the ARJUN Mk I & ARJUN Mk II.

ARJUN Mk I...
1. They continue to seem to have issues with the LAHAT. I have seen nothing to indicate that they have abandoned the project. This has to be some kind of FCS issue. I was going to recommend taking the LAHAT firing Mk I out of game play until this issue is finally settled but life side tracked that three years ago, however, with the game extension out to at least 2025 it would seem this is still a viable option vice deleting it all together.

2. I was surprised to see it seems like the KANCHAN ceramic tiles were added on this tank though I need to verify (Verified as baseline KANCHAN during edit window. It now has the improved version as dicussed below for the Mk II.) it wasn't already accounted for when submitted. What's new also is we didn't have the information "directly" believing that KANCHAN can resist APFSDS rounds.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/india...elligence.html

ARJUN Mk II...

1. They have worked out the LAHAT issue on the Mk II and is operational though the Mk II isn't yet.

2. Taken from ref 2 below..."The all-round protection has been enhanced with improved (This is the key word and tells me again of advanced development and they upgraded the ARJUN Mk I to carry it as well above the "baseline" product it had.) KANCHAN armour, a modular composite armour developed by India. It has been described as being made by sandwiching composite panels between Rolled homogeneous armour (RHA). This armour is able to defeat APDS and HEAT rounds and is believed to withstand APFSDS." The structure is described as being very similar to what's on the ABRAMS. It can't be ruled out that they might not be using "DU" in the manufacture of the KANCHAN armor.

3. It has an highly advanced self protection system which is better then what I believe was initially intended but, this program was delayed and certain sectors of the ARMY have been against the ARJUN tank program in general from the start. The delay just offered extra time for the technology to improve and I believe that's what we're seeing here.
As taken from ref. 2... "To increase the self-protection of the Arjun Mk-II, a laser warning and countermeasure system (ALWACS) developed in collaboration with the Israeli Company Elbit Systems is mounted on each side of the turret. The four ALWACS elements are mounted at each corner of the turret to provide 360-degree coverage."
http://www.armyrecognition.com/defex..._13003161.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/india...elligence.html

Finally on the APC and MRAP side we finally get to see what the KESTREL APC looks like from ref. 1 (MkII section.) above ...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/india...res_video.html

Also from ref. 1 the TATA Motors 4x4 MRAP already in the field.

There was a lot posted on this from the start some might find the process interesting and informative.

Alright my Tornado watch duties are over while the family sleeps and I'm off to bed-one more watch to go. Hope you all have a great weekend!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I was looking in to see what was going on, looked at my account, explored the site and then decided to look in on the stats section that I literally haven't done in many years and was deeply affected by what I saw. When I started this thread (And the others.) it was my intention at the time it would start my deeper involvement in these wonderful games (Especially WinSPMBT) by at first just "reporting" on equipment developments etc. Of course they all have gone beyond that now. I never thought it would generate the various discussions of all kinds that have been had on here or the others.

I took a few minutes to let what I saw soak in, and what it meant at it's core to me.

I wear my emotions on "my sleeve" (Something CINCLANTHOME has always "appreciated" these almost 30yrs.) and am proud of that. So please with no replies, thanks or similes (Don really dislikes them!?!).

Know that to everyone out here I feel honored, grateful, gratified but mostly deeply humbled by you allowing me to do what I do and by the support given to carry on out here whether we agree or disagree with each other.

Thank You All.

And good night.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

I figured I better put a tank "something" out here so I don't get in too much trouble for the above. Post #1 dealt with the Russian BLACK EAGLE so now I leave you with a legendary and newly revived Russian Tank Army...
http://www.janes.com/article/57828/r...ards-tank-army

And you can bet the West was excited by that!?!

Re: MBT's
 

What I find interesting is that we get a little better picture of what tanks the Russians have in storage and that the T-80 tanks are in service (There was a lot of discussion whether they were or not in the field or in storage.) which has been verified. It should be noted that the Ukrainians took their T-80BW tanks out of storage last Spring and they to are in the field now as well with their ERA upgraded to the KONTAKT 5 which is what the OPLOT has, and much better than what it had before. Also there upgrades made to the power-plants and possibility the FCS however that has not been confirmed. And as an adjunct to my last post, the Russians are in the process of standing up a new infantry and heavy mechanized division in the Southern Military District.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/april...s_3010416.html
http://www.defence24.com/238175,t-80...krainian-army#

Note: The immediate above ref. refers to "rumors" concerning the T-72 return to service, that has since been long confirmed and has been posted on already. However if you missed it below are one of my refs. on it.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/ukrai...aine_army.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Hi Pat keep it up your our "deep miner" find stuff many of us wouldn't, I follow this religiously but don't post often. Its an information thread and in most cases we just need to let you run with it to get to the bottom of things so no need for "filler" from me.

Re: MBT's
 

John,
Thank you! You, my Marine buddy and that Canadian guy have been there from the very start supporting and challenging me along with the original "MRAP gang". There have been others (Thank You as well.) the ones I really liked digging into were the requested ones in that period 3-5 years ago I found those to be most rewarding. Speaking of which that Canadian guy can find some answers to his question I missed in the SPA/SPAA Thread in the APC Thread.

Better put a tank something in again there was some discussion on these "somewhere" and I don't believe I posted this there. Point is these were a "little more" wide spread then was discussed in where ever "somewhere" was. So this was my quick search result...
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww...ngaroo-series/

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Since when is a Kangaroo classified as a "tank"?

One would think after all the research you've done you'd know what a "tank" is by now.

Squids ...

This should be moved to the APC thread!

Re: MBT's
 

Well let's see how nimble I can be of foot...
A. It has tracks and armor, doesn't it!?!

B. The already modified KANGAROO could be modified into a tank-right?

C. Aaahhh Yyuupp you might have a point there. :doh:

D. Both A and B.

Well as we used to say "When in doubt, Charlie out!". Well that doesn't help me here either now does it?

So much for being nimble but then I do wear a size thirteen boot. :D

Thank You Suhiir!

Regards,
Pat
There will be no "Captain" here tonight just another...:cool: :doh:!

Re: MBT's
 

Movie in Russian.
But a lot of interesting and detailed about T-14 "Armata"! :up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCGd...&nohtml5=False

Re: MBT's
 

This is something a little different that I came across while looking in on the site, enjoy!
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/mo...co/Narco_Tanks

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I rather expect that sort of thing from a civilian, according to most of them the M16A1 is a machine-gun since it's capable of full-auto.

Re: MBT's
 

It's that time of the year again!

http://vitalykuzmin.net/?q=node%2F650

Victory Day Parade first open rehearsal 11th April 2016 in Alabino - first photos.
------------------

No top down photos, but the 3/4 perspective stuff is useful, in that it can show what's normally concealed by turrets, etc on the hull.

Re: MBT's
 

Didn't see this one here mentioned:
Janes: Swedish armour set for USD300 million upgrade

FO, AA and recovery CV90 venhicles will also receive thermal image cameras to CV9040C IFV standard as well as fire control system updates.

On Swedish army site (in Swedish) there's not much additional information: https://www.fmv.se/sv/Nyheter-och-pr...-stridsfordon/

Edit: Found a more detailed link even though it's just a blog post: http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspo...-upgrades.html

Re: MBT's
 

Well I so I saw something about the OPLOT/OPLOT-M on the patch release thread. Sometimes people can't seem to get behind the idea that a "lesser" country can develop or if you will, build upon and improve an existing tank. The numbers I'll post later from a well respected tank site we maybe put some of that in context dealing with Rha values against certain types of ammo. Remember for us we'll "never really know the truth" we can only deal with the data we can get, which for the MERKAVA is really nothing. My comparison numbers will be OPLOT to ABRAMS. I can promise you, those numbers will surprise some out here.

For now this is all the time I have...
http://www.army-technology.com/featu...-battle-tanks/
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/...ttle_tanks.htm

Best I can do for now-work calls!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I doubt that any military in the world tells more of the truth about kit and what it can do than they have to. Of course some will under, and others over, state.

Estimates are often the best one can do with in service stuff. FASTBOAT TOUGH, and the game seems to do a pretty good job on the whole.

Re: MBT's
 

T90MS Tagil is less protected than T90A now. I think you added some protection to T90A in the new patch and forgot to add to T90MS tagil :)))

FASTBOAT, I'm not saying that a less developed country (technologically in MBT area Ukraine is not less developed than Russia) can't develop a modern tank, I'm saying that the data of the frontal arc is not correct.

T84 first version was basically a T80UD with some adds (same chassis and turret base armor)

T84 Oplot M Is a "new" tank but the added protection is basically some added "composite" armor ( rubber between steel and alloy) and Duplet ERA (we can guess it's on par with T90MS and Armata, so A10 in game value) and is very very way behind Leopard and Abrams modern armor.

So I think that in T84 Oplot armor value must go down and ERA must go up.

Here some photos that justify what I'm saying ( ERA and T80 same chassis and base armor)

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/in...lat-and-other/

Re: MBT's
 

I'm not totally disagreeing with you on the OPLOT/OPLOT-M however, it's just in my nature to get specifics. To suggest just the term MERKAVA is a very "broad stroke" and generality given how many variants of the MERKAVA tank were still in service at the time the OPLOT was being developed. I will grant you that unless given further new information to the contrary that I really don't expect to happen, compared to the MERKAVA 4/4b if the OPLOT/OPLOT-M are on par or better we do have an issue to address and your conclusion to reduction of steel armor and increase in ERA I believe would be very valid. I did post in here a couple+ years ago that Russia openly accused the Ukraine of industrial spying in stealing "very sensitive" secrets linked to a new ERA it was developing. Well folks I don't know about you but the only new tank the Russians have developed that would require new ERA in the above time frame was the ARMATA.

I'll still post the data I have as I feel it won't be a wasted exercise and some might find it interesting. But I find it curious that on the same token I can find data on the OPLOT family turret protection levels "all day long" but none on the rest, very much like the MERKAVA where so far I can't find anything on their armor protection levels. No surprise there but, maybe I'm just looking for it in all the wrong places.

You can see the initial input of the OPLOT-M and OPLOT improvements in both this thread and the PATCH Thread (It'd be easier to find there I believe.) if interested to see where our heads were at during that time.

Have to get ready for work-have a great day/or evening!

Regards,
Pat

Re: MBT's
 

Actually, we have quite a lot of information on MERKAVA.

Photos attached were taken in 1993.

Re: MBT's
 

Final half of 1993 MERKAVA Pictures.

Re: MBT's
 

It's because UKR was/is/ trying to sell OPLOT internationally for the last decade or two; so they had to reveal broad performance specifications in order to make the sales.

Israel, on the other hand, has no interest in exporting the Merkava; so estimates of armor have not been publicized widely.

So essentially, if you want to make Merkava estimates; you need to actually do a lot of number crunching and analysis of known items about it; and drawings/photographs of it.

Re: MBT's
 

Case in point: I can get detailed specifications, including cutaway drawings of the armor layout showing what types of armor material and where along with estimates of HEAT resistance for a 1980s M-60 Patton upgrade that was proposed by a defense contractor in a JANES' affiliated book published about 1983; since they were hoping to sell the tank (or advertise their experience in armor design).

Re: MBT's
 

Look to POST #282 under the "NEWS" section and then see Israel that's from 2014. I did also post the news from 2012 when the deal was first considered for Columbia. Everything will eventually be for sale, Israel faced a financial crunch and was/is looking for a way to finance the development of the MERKAVA replacement. A stop gap and further development of the MERKAVA 4, of course was the MERKAVA 4b.

Don has mentioned this himself, but, when the data is "shaking" or incomplete there remains only one really good and tangible source for us to consider, battlefield performance. In most cases we can get very good data on items like AT weapons because everyone is selling them including Israel with the LAHAT for example. We generally can start putting the jigsaw puzzle together at that point using what we have to include the pictures etc. etc. it's not an exact science but, I'll put our time, effort and work that we put into these things against ANYONE else out there (Though on the whole I feel Paul Macaulay does a pretty good job as well in this area.) in equipment game "construction" if you will. This includes the many times I've contacted certain MOD's and museums to get answers we needed. The only real failure there was in dealing with the French over a certain piece of artillery I'd prefer no one bring up (As I sorely remember it well.) that we spent over three years trying to find. Finally Don and I took what we had and I feel came up with a very good conclusion to the matter.

For me these truisms remain the same no WIKI anything, no Blogs with the exception of a rare couple i.e. Arm Chair General however they are taken by me with a "huge grain of salt" that though have at times lead to more traditional sources I've missed in my own searches for the "truth" (Couldn't resist the line from one of my favorite shows! ;)) and the most important I feel has helped me enjoy a very high % of successful equipment submissions into the game, multi-sourced corroborated references which each submission.

I mentioned years ago in the Patch Thread, that basically I prepare myself as the Defense Attorney for each item I've submitted while, Don is the Prosecutor, Jury and Judge. I wouldn't have that relationship any other way and hope it doesn't change. The day I'm not challenged in some way in that arena is the day I promise I'll stop submitting equipment, for the challenge represents a "checks and balances" to the work, value added for the game and players and when insistent a wonderful "check the ego at the door" to see the light. All of this is in the Patch Thread so people can have a window into the process (Another reason why I ask no one else submits any comments during the submission phase until I repost the equipment into it's "home thread".) that quite frankly I didn't see or understand when I and Don started on "our journey" out here.

Oh yeah this is the MBT Thread so I leave you with a "One World One OOB" tank something plus a bonus for you inventive Campaign/Scenario types...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2...e_2705151.html
http://www.janes.com/article/59701/u...itionary-force

And Mark I don't know how this stuff stays in my head once I've "touched" a topic except to say it just does like at the beginning of this again the topic not the Page/Post#'s-I wouldn't even want to be that good!?! :rolleyes: Just be glad your not CINCLANTHOME because she has to deal with it almost everyday!?! :eek:

I little tired, starting to ramble and have to get some sleep for tomorrow is my TGIF. :p

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

http://www.janes.com/article/59701/u...itionary-force

Let us hope UK votes to leave the anti-democratic EU in the June referendum, and then such excersises will not be the slippery slope to a Euro Army for a Euro Super State.

Re: MBT's
 

Political rants are completely off-topic for these forums.

There are other websites where you can express any such opinions.

Re: MBT's
 

I am sorry you think this is a mere political rant, but actually it is something a lot of British soldiers could actually end up fighting against, if it continues in something close to the way it has been going, the EU needs to, vastly, scale down its ambitions or it may well face something more than just political opposition.

Re: MBT's
 

Well this will require a look to see if the next is still in service within the game. Done... they have the ASU-57 but my search for the ASU-85 reveals that it'll need to be an ADD. The article sourced from JANE's, indicates they received them in 1970 (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute SIPRI data.) but, also by the title that at some point they must have been taken out and reactivated back into service again-not unusual-but needs to be verified. The 15km speed increase will allow it to get to the front earlier if required to do so, due to their roughly 2,000yr. history of friendship with China, OK not true. They were subjugated to the Chinese for centuries. Anyway background on both...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/april..._12404161.html
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallel...na-not-the-u-s

For the uninitiated NPR is well respected in this country. Learned much from FRONTLINE whether you want to or not. It's good to have my "head out of the sand" and sand just seems to get everywhere on you especially with your head in it. Absolute PITA to get it out of your ears!?! :D

Before I forget, yes, this is a "One World One OOB (OWOO-Somehow I like that-you can even say it three times fast!!!)" post.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Anyone have any info if they replaced those with something else ?

No the Janes article says

Re: MBT's
 

About the ASU-85 for Vietnam JANE's had a "little" clearer picture and analysis.
http://www.janes.com/article/59688/d...et-era-asu-85s

Well history has it's place here on sites where that makes a difference. It was thought these tanks showed up after the 1979 war with China. Well the flaw in in looking for the deal between Russia and Vietnam would be technically unfeasible. Russia wasn't 'Russia' in 1979 but...come on now...the Soviet Union. It would turn out Vietnam got the ASU-85 in 1960. Remember this site relies heavily on UN mandatory arms transfers reports by member nations. This from SIPRI...

Recipient/ Year Year(s) No.
supplier (S) No. Weapon Weapon of order/ of delivered/
or licenser (L) ordered designation description licence deliveries produced Comments


Viet Nam
S: Soviet Union (300) T-34/85 Tank (1954) 1955-1960 (300) Second-hand
(50) SU-85 Self-propelled gun (1960) 1960-1961 (50) Probably Second-hand

Sorry system wouldn't transfer word saved rft. file onto here.

I was going to post more but it's family dinner day. I'll post a tank issue later tonight that touches on the topic of what us "equipment" folks out here like to consider when submitting our submissions to Don.

Gotta Go!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Alright, REGARD the JANE's ref. at the top of my last post.
DISREGARD the rest, the data is good, however, there's a difference (Name.) between a SU-85 they received as noted above and the ASU-85 of which SIPRI has no record of. I searched against all the WARSAW PACT countries and their post Cold War country names and to cover my xxx I limited my to Viet-Min *France/Vietnam (Yes it gets that detailed.) as Recipient country/Left Supplier country blank/Searched for Armoured Vehicles and the database pulled up all the transactions that might've occurred from ALL countries in the database. No ASU-85 is shown. ASU-57 is as second hand with deliveries between 1970-71 as we have it in the game and recent refs have indicated. This leaves only two viable options because the numbers match perfectly to the SU-85 shipment from 1960.

1. Did SIPRI not get the numbers? And as JANE's indicates that they were shipped when Vietnam received their T-62/T-55/T-54 tanks. Why hide those tanks when you reported the other shipments? JANE's quote from below ref.
"The Soviet ASU-85s were part of larger shipments of T-62/55/54 tanks, BMP-1 armored personnel carriers and artillery that allowed the VPA to convert its 304th, 308th and 320th Infantry Divisions into Mechanized Infantry Divisions, or Motorized Rifle Divisions in Soviet terminology."
http://www.janes.com/article/59688/d...et-era-asu-85s

or...

2. Did the SU-85 get modernized at some point. I bring this up as SIPRI and the UN don't require such reporting. Do note though that SIPRI does/will report any upgrades to equipment that the seller makes or the buyer requests, Turkey is an example of this with their LEOPARD tanks they got from Germany.

The below is the last recorded armor deal the Vietnamese made.

Israel
R: Viet Nam (150) RAM APV (2006) 2006-2009 (150) For police; RAM-2000 version

So if we look at the SIPRI data on Armored Vehicle transfers based on the JANE's information we would get the following...

A1) (200) T-62 Tank (1978) 1978-1979 (200) Probably from Czechoslovakian production line or Second-hand

A2) (150) BMP-1 IFV (1979) 1979-1981 (150) My note: From the Soviet Union.

To allow for the Post China Conflict A2 would be the better fit.

The below reflect the rest of the transactions as noted above from JANE's from newest back. All will be from the Soviet Union.

B1) (600) T-55 Tank (1973) 1973-1975 (600) Aid

B2) (25) ASU-57 Self-propelled gun (1970) 1970 (25) Probably second-hand
My Note: Added for context.

B3) (500) T-54 Tank (1969) 1970-1972 (500) Aid (incl for use in war in South Vietnam)

B4) (50) SU-85 Self-propelled gun (1960) 1960-1961 (50) Probably Second-hand

These simply represent the earliest possible transfer dates, unless again you allow for modernization of the SU-85. The issue would have to be to determine any obvious difference in size and weight of the regular Army SU-85 against the Airborne version ASU-85. And from there guns and road wheels (Though as we saw from North Korea a few years back these can be modified and hulls lengthened. Look in the North Korean thread that MARCELLO has done such great work in a very tough OOB to manage and maintain.)

I'll look into the modernization issue to see if it's possible you would have to initially assume that an airborne tank is lighter then it's Army counter part, but, I did say assume. This I hope will not be the French 105mm artillery issue all over again. Since it's not in the OOB yet I'd rather cover all the bases and get it right.

One issue that seems to be consistent concerning the ASU-85 is they probably did see limited use and where put into storage as noted. The pictures in the refs. are consistent with the ASU-85 so I don't really that, they don't have them.

Why all this effort for one unit, first you all expect it, it'll (HOPEFULLY!) avoid issues down the road and finally as my closest "friends" (Even the MARINE one. :p) know - It's how I roll. ;)

The other stuff can wait until I can find out more.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

There are advantages to being an anal retentive nit picker if one works in intelligence.

Re: MBT's
 

Alright remember me talking about the weight issue? The WWII SU-85 tank Vietnam received in 1960 weighs in at 29.8 tons vs. the SU-85/ASU-85 weighing in at 15.4+ tons. There's more of course but the following points can be cleared up.

1) Not the to be confused with the WWII SU-85 SPA (Yes the Russians designated them BOTH SU-85 if you didn't note that above.) though from the below ref. you can see it looks very much like the SU-85M produced in 1945 as shown near bottom right. So this rules out modernization again back to weight etc.
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww...viet_SU-85.php

2) So I can't find anything to suggest they fought in the Chinese Conflict of 1979, however, there's plenty to suggest they were bought to secure their borders after the conflict. At this point I wouldn't have any problem allowing for training that JUNE 1980 to be a reasonable time for these tanks to have been fielded. I've used this site (1st. one.) before and I believe it might be Russian. Last used when I submitted the BTR-82A.
http://weaponsystems.net/weapon.php?...2%20-%20ASU-85
https://www.onwar.com/weapons/afv/data/rusothasu85.htm

3) The issue will be when were they taken out of service and stored? When did they reenter service?

A) The first would be more difficult but could possibly be aligned when the Russians took them out of service+ so something around 1995 if we "cobble" everything together. Not unprecedented in the game, if you look at the South African OOB I was able to convince Don to do this with the ROOKIVALK AH for a variety of reasons you'll find in the HELO Thread. The below ref. does support it being out of service with the first post shown from this Russian site (Yes I know it's a "Blog" some are however better than others and are a last resort for me but, information is "light" concerning Vietnam with these tanks.) and near the bottom you'll see it discussed in SEPTEMBER 2015.
http://www.russiadefence.net/t3581-v...-ground-forces

A1) In service date earliest I suspect would be JUNE 2014 however, JANUARY 2015 would be better and would cover that 6 month "SWAG" we have used many times in the past for equipment items of this nature and challenges.

B) Leave it alone once entered, also not unprecedented in the game where we know equipment has been warehoused/stored. The STRIX issue falls into this category. There were other issues in the "decision tree" but a key one was the "argument" that with your potential enemy is armor heavy, are you going to let one of your best anti-tank weapons sit in a warehouse if they attack? There's enough military types out here that I think would agree that you get them into the field ASAP. Given Vietnam's limited resources (And some of those other posts are correct on the economics involved.) that the ASU-85 could be considered for "exception" as well.

So that's it for me.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

https://tankandafvnews.com/wo-194-13...ton-chieftain/

This is a study on adding BURLINGTON (aka Chobham) Armor to the Chieftain dated May 1969, and gives you a crude idea of what to expect from 1970s composite armors, and an idea of what Generation I Abrams and Challenger I armor may have been like (give or take about 15 more years of development).

Link to photo showing maximum protection retrofit for Chieftain

Basically, it looks like Panzer IVH rides again.