Re: MBT's
 

OTOH remotely controled vehicles may be handled more aggressively in combat situations, doing things a crewed vehicle might not simply because the remote crews a$$ isn't out there hanging in the breeze and sometimes aggressive action is what tips the balance....or get you killed but if your ten miles back.....c'est la guerre ..... different story than actually being there....

Now imagine these being employed with dedicated armed Drone support.......that makes finding that control vehicle a top priority

Don

Re: MBT's
 

Welcome to the world of jaming, however I would expect suspect even if jammed it would switch to a remote sentry program & fire at anything it detects.
As a recon/early warning tool makes sense it can either shoot & scoot or hang in their hopefully unobserved for longer because you dont have to worry about saving your bacon.
Leading an assault do you ignore it so as not to give the game away or take it out. If the former it might now gather valubable information on your positions in its last moments.
I would relay the info from a company of these to a second vehicle/location with a high ranking officer & links to at least ground & artillery units.
An intresting option for some terrain would be small fast vehicle, keep it light just sensors armor vs small arms & something like Trophy for bigger threats. Combined with drones or fit something like a GL that fires cameras on parachutes & it might be deemed cost effective.

Re: MBT's
 

My guys that normally and generally are the first to report many new weapons platforms got a little behind on the next however they've done some comparisons of the next versus other systems which allows for some further perspective on the topic.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/leopard_2pl.htm

But what I keyed on is this - "However despite all improvements the Polish Leopard 2PL is not as capable as the upgraded Leopard 2A7 upgraded by Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, which entered service with the German Army in 2014. The Leopard 2PL looses to Leopard 2A7 in the key areas of protection, firepower, accuracy, and onboard electronic systems."

We debated it and now I think it should be fully integrated into the game for access by the AI. The 2014 date is consistent with about the three or four refs. I found concerning whether or not the LEO 2A7 was serving in the German Army. I believe based on what I had then that it appears that they were operating around 35-50 units. The tanks are assigned to the 2nd Company, 203rd Armor Battalion in Augustdorf, Germany.

So bottomline they've updated the picture and now have filled in the "Entered Service" with 2014 which wasn't done in the past for this tank from this site.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/leopard_2a7.htm

Also...

http://tanknutdave.com/the-german-leopard-2-series/
https://warisboring.com/germany-stil...4f2#.8rz47v9m0
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/nation...al-with-canada
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...h-leo2-a7.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Some LEO 2A7 photos and more...
http://tank-masters.de/?m=201506

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Why I don't jump off things or jump aboard the equipment express...

1. Off things you could twist and or break an ankle. If high enough you might manage to kill yourself.

2. Though much safer, by jumping off and committing to soon on a piece of equipment you might embarrass yourself and and potentially cause rework literally years after the fact. Personally for me that would probably fall in with the ARJUN MK II. and to a lesser extent the ARJUN. I'm not talking about delays caused manufacturing and or technical issues, we have no control over that.

No I'm talking about aesthetics/appearance and equipment. I offer the following, these articles are one year apart and what I see in aesthetics/appearance is the tank has a subtle different different look in the newer article and I'm sure it'll change again in it's final production form, however, the newer (ref./article) indicates to me that the tank is probably slightly better protected.

As to equipment that's a little more "tricky" but I'll give it a shot. In the first ref on the turret it appears (From your perspective.) that on the Left front and rear corners and if you look closely to the right rear corner are mounted what I believe are APS mounts. Also you can see the smoke grenade launchers are extended from the back left (And I'm sure the right side also.) corner as well. Though subtle, it's really a non-starter as the tank in question will have a hunter-killer feature so the Commanders sight is most likely just lowered.

Now to the newer/or 2nd ref. the turret design looks different, no APS mounts, and if you look at the back of the recessed end of the turret that's either a recessed bank of smoke grenade launchers or an APS launcher. My guess is smoke grenade launcher. Why? Because the German Army is still accessing the need for and testing various options for their own armor now. And Rheinmetall Landsysteme GmbH is doing the design and cooperative work to make this tank a reality for the country involved. Poland is also looking into an APS option but none have selected to date even for testing yet..

Judge for yourselves...
http://www.defence24.com/261471,rhei...l-cooperation#
http://www.armyrecognition.com/mspo_...prototype.html

Again why I don't jump off high places and onto new equipment if I can avoid it.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

http://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/e...land/index.php

Rosy_L – Rapid Obscuring System

The unique 40mm Rosy_L smoke protection system offers light military and civilian vehicles protection from unexpected attacks, e.g. during patrols or when travelling in convoys. Unlike the conventional smoke protection systems in use, Rosy_L is able to generate dynamic smoke screens as well as spontaneous, large-area and multispectral interruption of the line of sight (LOS). Moreover, its multimission capability represents a sure defence against stream and wave attacks. Due to its integrated IR jamming and decoying capabilities, Rosy_L effectively counters all TV-, EO-, IR-, IIR-, laser- and SACLOS-guided weapons. Rosy_L comprises a basic system with a control device and one to four ROSY launchers per vehicle. By means of a one-click adapter, the system can be quickly mounted to the vehicle without tools, and just as quickly removed and stowed.
The latest version of Rosy is the modular Rosy_Mod. It is designed for small weapon stations and light vehicles of the kind used by special operations forces. Rosy_Mod is integrated directly into the vehicle without a surface-mounted launcher, thus making it undetectable.


..lots of new ideas for smoke

Re: MBT's
 

The limits on these type of smoke systems, and active missile defense systems, is how many smoke and/or anti missile rounds can be carried?

Jamming has the advantage of avoiding that limitation, as would area smoke rounds from artillery, but then your own side needs to see too...

Re: MBT's
 

For the most part US vehicles use an 8-tube 40mm launcher for smoke and carry two reloads.

Re: MBT's
 

In the British Army Challanger 2 MBT's carry 2 x 5 smoke grenade launchers and Warrior IFV's, at the moment, 2 x 4 smoke grenade launchers. The new Ajax scout carries 2 x 8.

Re: MBT's
 

which in game terms is 2 smokescreens which is what they get

and the Ajax gets 2 additional VIRSS so in essence gets 4 smokescreens

Re: MBT's
 

Though I don't expect this tank to take 30yrs. to be developed, it'll still have taken almost 20yrs. to get there if you take the ARMATA back to it's roots as the BLACK EAGLE. It is important to remember that the lack of money killed the BLACK EAGLE and the T-95 but, the R&D never stopped that's why the Russians can slip into place the 152mm MG if they wanted to because they've already tested it on the BLACK EAGLE (See Post #1 this thread/It's pictured with the 152mm). You can scratch 2017 as the ARJUN Trophy winning ARMATA won't be delivered to the Russian Army until late/end of 2019. Which pushes operational fielding to about mid-2020.

So without the efforts of Andy and Don extending the end date to 2025, my much earlier predictions would've held up, that we wouldn't see it until the last year or never in the game.

That being said and why I've hoarded my articles etc. etc. was just for this reason-why? Look what's happened to the world price of oil and natural gas, now ask yourself what's Russians two main commodities exports? Oil and natural gas. Russia is losing their you know what for about a year now and the analysts think the market will be soft for another 2 years or so if not longer. Part of the reason is in Persia we have a new supplier of these products who haven't been able to export it since the early 1980's. They've got a lot of bright new shiny toys they'd like to buy.

So back to our ARJUN Trophy winner, which I'm sure will be followed by at least two more of the same, I give you as quoted from TASS the following...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/septe...9161_tass.html

Yep, filing it into my MBT folder with the rest. I invest and it's just a factor among many when I consider a piece of equipment. Someone out here has always held me to a higher standard in my work. You know where to look to see the development or you can just look in the MRAP Thread and ask yourself "doesn't this guy get it?" :doh:

Have a great day!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Maybe it is just me, but I fail to see the real advantages Armata offers the Russians, taking account of relative costs over late T90's? Given the Russians are not flush with cash, will it ever really see mass production (even if the whole screen viewing thing does work in real war)?

Re: MBT's
 

New tank unveiled by the Chinese.

DISCLAIMER: This is an export tank (hence the VT-5 designation). There's no guarantee that this tank will actually enter service with the PLA(N) as the Chinese Arms industry is very much like the British Arms industry in the 1900s-1960s; where you had Vickers and other private manufacturers developing and selling platforms on their own that were just as advanced (or more) than the ones in actual UK service.

http://www.janes.com/article/65060/n...ightweight-mbt

http://thediplomat.com/2016/11/china...ntain-warfare/

Re: MBT's
 

Things are moving along with the funding possibility for the Italian Army to acquire the new and much improved CENTAURO 2 as first posted on 03 Sep. 2016 in Post 542. If this gets approved and as discussed over the recent years, this I believe would kill any plans to further develop the ARIETE MBT which has seen little improvement over the years. It's again all about the economics and maintaining an agile land force concept.
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...ks-helicopters
http://www.armyrecognition.com/octob..._11610162.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/itali..._10607161.html

And as taken from Post 542.
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/centauro_2.htm

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I've but a few minutes...Just read "my newspapers" and found the story I've been watching for almost a year. It appears a deal is to be made for the T-90MS for a country in our game. This to me is great because this is a wonderful tank that's needed to counter what "the dragon" to the north has been doing.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/novem..._10711162.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Is it just me, or it looks a bit like a taller CV90?

Re: MBT's
 

If "translated" how would something like this affect the cost calculator for these tanks. I understand this graph is an oversimplification of that process but, is a factor? No reason in particular just curious is all.
Attachment 14484

The next I guess is for you "what if" scenario folks...

The UK FV215
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/fv215-heavy-gun-tank/

The next is a little more technical that's probably already here somewhere outside the normal game. The German Schmalturm Turret. Just another of those "what ifs".
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/schmalturm-turret/

I like these guys they seem to be very through and provide links and resources for further research. Best of all they present material as posted above which generally you'd be hard pressed to find on your own.
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

From Syria, there's some information about North Korean T-55s: http://within-syria.blogspot.fi/2017...orean-fcs.html

Re: MBT's
 

Another thing from Syria, the Syrian equivalent of TUSK.

Looks like standard Slat Armor + some sort of composite armor?

Part of me wants to say "concrete", but Syria isn't like Iraq, under relentless sanctions; but probably some low order alumina/ceramic mixture that's cheap enough for Syria to buy in bulk.

Re: MBT's
 

This issue has been going on for a very long time in regards to North Korea's involvement in Syria. Those T-54/55 (And other weapons.) tanks have been in Syria since the 70's. It is thought that when the N. Koreans updated the Russian tanks above, they brought the T-55 up to the T-55MV standard which represents a marked improvement over the T-55. It's been reported before that North Korean advisors and troops have been on the ground before. This first and others even apparently has two units involved in the current fighting there of their elite commando units. That particular ref. is considered very reliable in it's reporting of Asian affairs. Others to include staff of JANE's. You'll just have to judge them for yourselves, but, I say guilty as charged by association.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/is-no...ssad-in-syria/
https://www.nknews.org/2014/12/n-kor...ian-civil-war/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b6917fda31dc
http://38north.org/2013/11/amansourov112513/
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016...-tanks/129621/
http://tass.com/world/864368

ISIS/DASH and rebels are running around with these tanks as well when a major weapons depot was seized from the Syrian army. It is estimated that fighters from around 86 countries are currently involved there. It truly is a mess over there that I hope we stay out of at least with direct combat troops on the ground-I'm talking "Big Army" involvement here. Syria would make Iraq and Afghanistan look like a "Sunday walk in the park." It is sometimes a topic of discussion with the handful of guys I work with that saw combat in one or the other and a couple in both.

It should be further noted North Korea isn't bound by any weapons trade agreements or treaties.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

More but, not much more on China's light tank.
http://www.janes.com/article/66681/c...new-light-tank
https://sputniknews.com/asia/2017010...ng-light-tank/

Note: From the picture of the ref. 2 you can see it has two turret "blow out" panels. The gun radar is covered on the top of the turret but, I've and others have posted pictures of it uncovered.

It looks like sina.com only archives their articles back around 60 days. Have tried other searches within the site with no luck so far. I'm sure the above two did get the article and "cherry picked" the most important information from it for their articles. I would say the following are settled: 1) MG is a 105mm. 2) It can fire ATGW weapons how many not sure though the TYPE 99 Series normally carry 4 of them onboard. 3) I feel they do have them fielded but I would guess no sooner then mid-2015 from the fragments of information we've gotten to this point. One of these are the fact that China was looking for a tank that could exploit the mountainous terrain should a conflict develop with India and the reports are consistent that that's where these tanks are being shipped to those bordering southern providence's. Even the Indian ref. BROADSWORD has commented on this a couple of times as posted in here.

Working it.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Well if I would've looked at one of my regular "newspapers" I could've added this to my last post. My apologies. The good news here is this does start to close the loop concerning the Chinese ZTQ LT a bit more to where it should be feasible to enter it into the game now or "twink it" if it's in already (Haven't had the time to check for it.) and I missed it. We can do this by using the generic ref 1 story that adds a piece to the puzzle when combined with the last two entered yesterday and I had forgotten about the export version that I already had an inkling about from another source :doh: well it was very early in the morning when I posted!?! OK-nobody is buying it, but, that export version is known as the VT5. So that's what ref. 2 is about.

The only issue I have at the moment concerning ref. 2 as it relates to the ZTQ is, that I've not seen pictures of it that the Chinese themselves are using the RWS shown for VT5. What I've seen is the standard 12.7mm RWS as shown in the Thai story.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._10401171.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/china..._11711164.html

Been tracking this for awhile, though the date we have for Thailand receiving the Ukrainian T-84 OPLOT-M is still good, the Russian incursion and support of the "rebels" slowed production of these tanks to the point that Thailand had to look at other options to eventually if I remember correctly, buy ~250 new tanks to finally retire it's M-41 tank fleet that they've been operating for 60 years (Since 1957.) now. I had already posted on this issue and ref. 2 of this story in particular. The Ukraine will full fill this order fully by Oct. 2017. It'll come down to these two tanks I believe if any further orders are made. They'll certainly have an opportunity to test them "head-to-head" under real conditions for awhile I should imagine. Of the I believe four or so tanks (The LEO 2A4 was given a second look again but, the cost was too high again.) they were looking at they chose the Chinese ZT4 or as it's better known as the MBT-3000.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._10501162.html

For your consideration and my tracking. I expect the delivery by JUN. 2017 based on training preps we saw concerning the OPLOT-M I would expect them (ZT4) to be fielded by Oct. 2017.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._10301176.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/china..._video_uk.html

Going into my "Friday" later today I guess 4am is better than 5am was yesterday-I'm sure the extra hour will keep me sharper on post!?! :rolleyes:

Have a great weekend everyone!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

In Russian game OOB the tank category must be deleter after One date around 2008 ( Georgia conflict), in Georgia conflict There were some t62 ( very few). T55 were scrapped in the 90's and the majority of t62 too, only some remained in service for training purposes. Even t64bv were officially scrapped ( and in game too they were retired) after 2008, but some remained mothballed for secondary purposes ( we all know what happened in Ukraine separatist tank Force). But, again, delete t55 shortly After 91 and t62 around the 2000's. If you play Quick Battle against Russia, computer choose everytime "tanks" category and only some MBT which is unrealistic, the result is a mixed t72 or t90 Force with old tanks retired from service in reality. Regards

Re: MBT's
 

Sources: direct source that says scrapping of retired tanks starts in 2011 http://economy.mil.ru/economy/news/m...1010744@egNews

If you see various years "military balance" you can see that T55 and T62 are falling year to year

CFE treaty listed around 1000 t55 and t62 but in storage! Pratically waiting 2011 scrapping ( there are some photos too)

Unfortunately a lot of sources about old russian tanks disappeared from the internet, specially russian sources like warfare.be

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/ar...begins-6208-6/

Defencetalk well documented (:doh: from disappeared internet sites) post says that t55 were retired in 1994 - > historically correct because in '94 the old soviet equipment from ex WP countries was totally retired

So two options: retire both tanks in 2011

retire t55 in '94 and retire t62 in 2011 but only because it was in service with MVD ( interior ministry) forces, and only in some cases, for sure t62 saw combat in both chechen wars and 2008 Georgia war, t55 not

The only sure thing we all can see is that fighting in QB's and generated campaigns, Abrams against old russian tanks, in modern times, is unrealistic

Re: MBT's
 

OK I've put that on the list to investigate.... This has been a back burner " to investigate " item for awhile for me...thanks for the links and info

Re: MBT's
 

Maybe the game Can simulate t55 and t62 MVD troops in their counter infantry role with CS tanks, which Can be left in service until the end of the game.

In the First chechen wars in 94-95 There were some mvd t55 but an entire siberian mobilization army division equipped with t62. In the second chechen war There were apparently no army t55 but only some MVD;There were some army t62.

In 2008 georgia There were army and MVD t62 ( choosed over other tanks by the tankers because they were light and Faster in Mountain terra in) but no army t55.

From 2011 army started scrapping of both but There are some t62 left in MVD caucasus garrisons. No t55 MVD info.

This is the most complete synthesis i can do.

Apparently Russian Army is semplifying its tank line, modernizing t72 to b3-b4, returning in service t80um for the arctic, and producing no more t90 waiting for armata

Re: MBT's
 

While looking into the T-55/T-62 issue I came across this from the ref. below concerning the T-80...
"But Moscow continued to experiment with its T-80s, adding active protection systems–which use millimeter-wave radar to track incoming missiles before launching explosive countermeasures. The resulting T-80UM-1 Bars was revealed in 1997 but did not enter production, probably again because of budget cuts."

If the above is true, this would free up 9 slots in the Russian OOB with the deletion of the following...UNITS 045-048, 562, 624/625 & 688/689. Normally I hate "rabbit holes" but, if we can legitimately double the current available slots in the Russian OOB then I'll give this my full attention.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...r-13550?page=2
(Covers it all nicely plus addresses some things we remarked on concerning those Turkish tanks if you read the whole thing.)
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/T-80U.htm
(T-80UM1 "Bars" (Snow Leopard) listed as a prototype along w/T-80UM2 "Chiorny Oriol" (Black Eagle) my first MBT post.)
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/USSR/T-80.php
(Lists T-80UM1 as a perspective tank for export only, none exported.)
http://weaponsystems.net/weaponsyste...0-%20T-80.html
(Only lists up to the T-80UM which puts it line with the rest above.)
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t80um1_bars.htm
(Same shows it was meant only for export and that it never entered Russian service due to the high cost of maintenance and operational costs-it was a true "gas guzzler" as was the whole series in general.)
https://books.google.com/books?id=9F...20tank&f=false
(Well known tank analyst who works for guess who? If it starts with a "J" you guessed right!)
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/MBT/t-80.html
(I think the "Bars" is dead by now.)
https://www.forecastinternational.co...DACH_RECNO=422
(From above..."Sep 1997 Contractor displays T-80UM1 BARS at Omsk" with no further status.)

I'm thinking free up 9 slots unless you need me to find more.

I'm starting to get that feeling of the "hunt" ever so slowly coming back. ;)

I'll see what I can dig up on the T-55/T-62 but, luigim is on track I believe.

On the quick note...

1) T-54/55 - 20 Still on active service through 2000. Current estimate runs @ 100 T-55 tanks held in active reserve (This meaning maintained.) with another 500 in "cold storage".

2) T-62 - From the same author above there were 268 T-62 of all types still in Russian service in 2003/2004.

OMG!, I can get to bed sooner this morning life is indeed good!! :D

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

About t80.. One division is actually equipped with t80um and another with t80bv, but for arctic newformed units more t80bv Will be upgraded to UM standard, because gas turbine is better cor cold climates

http://defence-blog.com/army/russia-...tle-tanks.html

So t80um in game must remain, but bars models are not in service

Correct FASTBOAT, but in reality they are in service in MVD troops ( Border troops and COIN troops, Caucasus)!

No Rossjskya armya troops Will be equipped with ancient tank relics i believe! In fact I suggest mantain CS tanks but retire tank models to stop AI t62 spamming :smirk::smirk:

And i posted 2011 official Russian MoD document.

Regards

Re: MBT's
 

"So t80um in game must remain, but bars models are not in service" That is correct from what I'm finding on both counts.

Further on T-55 which I wanted to add as "3)" to my last post...

"T-55M6 (Low confidence for now. Still think T-55MV was it for the Russians.)

The latest upgrade, both for the Russian army and export, includes a longer chassis with six roadwheels per side, a completely overhauled turret with the 2A46M 125 mm (4.92 in) main gun and autoloader from the T-72B, V-46-5M engine and protection upgraded to the T-80U level. As an option it could receive the 1A40-1 fire control system and ATGM system 9K120 “Svir” (from the T-72B), or A42 and 9K119 “Refleks” (from the T-80U)."

Don't know if we have this or not but, if we do, this information might be valuable as a quick verification of our version if entered. Seeing the same in a couple of other places as well to the above capabilities.

I REALLY gotta call it a night it's my weekend after all!?!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I think It never entered in service. T55 with 6 wheels is pure fantasy.. maybe only a prototype. There are some photos in Google images but 2 options: 1.fake/mockup 2.single prototype.

Re: MBT's
 

NOT according to this link Pat provided
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/MBT/t-80.html

"Bars did not enter serial production" and if they did not enter production how are they in service with MVD troops ?

Re: MBT's
 

I'm talking about t55 and t62 not t80 um1 bars. My omission!

Re: MBT's
 

I have adjusted the OOB and picklists

Re: MBT's
 

Thank you Don, based on your last I'll consider the T-80UM1 Bars deleted now. I can confirm the following from various sites that still have T-55 data:

1)T-55M5 - This is an “upgrade kit” aimed for export to all previous T-55/T-55A customers. This package includes “Kontakt-5” ERA panels, longer chassis, stabilized TVK-3 and TKN-1SM sights, upgraded main gun stabilization system for the 100 mm (3.94 in) D-10T2S, and the new V-55U engine or V-46-5M as an option for more mobility. The combat weight was less than 40 tons.

2)T-55M6 - This was the last Russian upgrade to the type. I'll post the ref. below but to this next point, I've seen the same mentioned on many other sites. That being said, those that track these things will hopefully see what I saw right off. The turret is NOT a T-55 one but is without a doubt one from a T-72 tank. I only found one site that "hung it out there" to say it's a T-72B turret. I think that to be correct, the time frame would be right and I'm pretty sure the 125mm on the T-55M6 matches the T-72B 125mm. The rest following is not in dispute among the sites and I've already posted this as well.

"The latest upgrade, both for the Russian army and export, includes a longer chassis with six roadwheels per side, a completely overhauled turret with the 2A46M 125 mm (4.92 in) main gun and autoloader from the T-72B, V-46-5M engine and protection upgraded to the T-80U level. As an option it could receive the 1A40-1 fire control system and ATGM system 9K120 “Svir” (from the T-72B), or A42 and 9K119 “Refleks” (from the T-80U)."

The T-55M6 will need to be added to the Russian OOB probably from 1992+/- 2yrs. (Sorry Don I just can't get it much tighter then this, except to say earlier vs later for those dates.) time frame after the T-55MV/T-55AMV and T-80U tanks were fielded.

I would finally add we should only need one unit type, we all know the Russian propensity for having their tanks being able to fire tank launched ATGM. I would just give it the best one from above and call it a day assuming you'll add this tank. In this way we can still maximize the net gain in slots from the T-80UM1 Bars deletion.
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/co...oviet_T-55.php
http://www.russiadefence.net/t2820p9...r-t-your-views

Attachment 14516 Attachment 14517

Attachment 14518 Attachment 14519

Attachment 14515

These should be the correct pictures. The key here is 6 road wheels. Also the static displays are from 2012 no doubt. So are those the "ready stored" ones or something else? Could be reserve component or to attract foreign sales opportunities. Those were taken at a Russian weapons show.

Anyway I'm done for now and CINCLANTHOME is giving me that "Are you going to take a shower" look. ;) :p

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Pictures are correct!!

Re: MBT's
 

Thank you FASTBOAT for the research but I cannot find sources that assess this tank in service or in reserve. To my knowledge, I Can say this t55m6 has the same value as BTR-T upgrade. Only a technology demostrator..

Some years ago they decided to upgrade only t-72 to a modern standard (T72B3 actually), with t90-derived technologies, for spare parts availability and commonality, with the parallel advanced tank program that resulted in Armata Tank.

However I'm asking in Russiadefence forum ( best russian equipment experts)

Re: MBT's
 

A spin-off benefit from all that is there will be a new T-80UM icon in the next patch.....

Re: MBT's
 

Well I don't know how many times I mentioned this site as being my first 1 or 2 I check in dealing with any fighting equipment because quite frankly over the years except for on one occasion when I first used it, it has it never let me down. On I don't how many times again over the years it's been the first to report on and provide data on new or improved equipment. My submissions also over the years are littered with refs from this site. Concerning the T-55M6 it just was the last place I checked so, Don if you'll excuse me, it's time for a little simile beat down...:confused: :tough: :sorry: :soap: :pc: :deadhorse: :puke: :yield: :fire: :censor: I feel better :D but I forgot one :doh:. I won't say that'll never happen again (The smilies.) but in regards to the following it won't.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t55.htm

Though much smaller then it was 1.5 yrs. ago, I should've listened to my "gut" and "stuck by my guns" when I already at the beginning of this conversation posted that the T-55MV was the latest upgrade made by the Russians and made operation in 1985.

Lesson learned slow down and scroll down as it refers to the above ref. You just have to stay humble and be willing to eat some pie once in awhile. :p (Sorry Don don't know how that just got in!?!)

I'm totally satisfied now we can enjoy all those newly opened up slots now, my time wasn't totally wasted now knowing that.

Next!! I'm waiting.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Re: MBT's
 

Remember that Durango Valley Russian versin has T80 UM1 Bars in it

Re: MBT's
 

Already fixed along with the others

Re: MBT's
 

further refinement of the Syrian "tusk" and I'm introducing my version of "Sinai Grey" to select Isreali vehicles
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1484250263
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1484250307

Re: MBT's
 

T-80BV upgrading to T80UM standard? Relikt ERA? Has been confirmed?

Russia is taking seriously the idea of land army modernization

Maybe postpone T80UM retirement date from 2020 to end game 2025

The beauty of your work and of this game is that we already have this upgraded model in game

http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapo..._11507162.html

http://www.janes.com/article/65580/r...nks-to-service

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2251644.html

http://defense-watch.com/2016/11/15/...-back-service/

Re: MBT's
 

All in all I'm rather pleased with the results of this experiment. The range of colours I'm able to extract from this game palette continues to surprise me still after 18 years. Everything below is game palette......now, that said this ISN'T SP2's original game palette. There have been modifications for winspww2 and winspmbt....and there will be again next patch

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1484334730

Re: MBT's
 

Where are we with the Iranian Karrar MBT? Is it something new or a souped up T-72 under Russian license?

=====

Re: MBT's
 

As reported almost a year ago, Iran's Defense Minister declared this tank to be a new design built from the ground up. The KARRAR was the reason Iran backed out of a deal with Russia to buy the T-90S which I'd been tracking for months before the above announcement was made. So to keep the timeline intact by date from my files I give you the following...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/febru..._50302162.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/febru..._31002163.html

All that only one week apart.

Some hints about the KARRAR I've been watching...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2..._51205163.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/octob..._72510162.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem..._52612162.html

More in depth look...
http://defence-blog.com/army/in-iran...ttle-tank.html
https://southfront.org/new-domestica...otted-in-iran/
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspo...aded-t-72.html

Another new tank the TIAM...
http://www.janes.com/article/59551/i...eils-tiam-tank
https://tankandafvnews.com/2016/04/1...m-battle-tank/
http://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/co...ombat-vehicles
http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/iran-...n-battle-tank/
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspo...totype_14.html
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/sabalan.htm

Iran claims both are in service now, however my feeling is somewhere mid-summer this year unless something comes up showing sooner.

Why they didn't buy the T-90S (Or better.) has me baffled as Iran can now with the sanctions removed, afford to buy them in numbers and significantly boost their own armor technological base significantly in the process. I just have to give it a :doh:! Unless we're all missing something here, but, I'm not "feeling that" with this situation.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Just something I came across in my readings. I thought the "Chunnel" design was always required to meet this specification in the first place? Maybe I was wrong, but, I guess for the UK (And allies.) better safe than sorry. Story from NBC News originally.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...L&ocid=U270DHP

Syria: Gets more "modern" (Well maybe not so much!?!) armor from Russia. But what they got is probably good enough for the job at hand providing ISIS/DASH and the other militia groups don't steal or take more of them again as had fairly recently occurred.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._11801177.html

Turkey: And didn't I just "tap" these guys for the ALTAY last week? Well here we go again. I estimate this should delay the program 6 months to a year, any takers? They should've just stuck with the S. Korean or German engines when they had the chance. Regardless, I'm watching this.
http://www.janes.com/article/67104/t...ransfer-issues

Russia: Just unveiled a new version of the Russia T-90 for export to supplement both the T-90S and T-90MS. Welcome the T-90M. As far as I know Russia and India are still in talks for the latter to be the first customer of the T-90MS. It would appear the claims that Kazakhstan having them "might" not be true. I'll be waiting to see if their are any takers.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._11501175.html

Nicaragua: This should be a "softball" so I'll present this in a manner not seen since the 2013/2014 Patch inputs were done, if you'll allow me to do so.

A1. NICARAGUA/ADD/OCT 2016/T-72B1 w/WHITE EAGLE FCS Pkg. NOW HAS HUNTER KILLER MODE/USE RUSSIAN UNIT 035 (IF THE ERA REPRESENTS KONTAKT-1 IF NOT USE UNIT 036) AS MODIFIED/IMPROVED 125mm 2A45 w/NEW STABILIZER. APPARENTLY STILL CAN'T LAUNCH ATGW. NORMAL FOR THIS VERSION/RWS 12.7mm NSVT UTES MG AS USED ON THE T-72MS RDS UKN/TI/GSR 45 w/ WHITE EAGLE Pkg./IMPROVE OTHER FCS AREAS AS NEEDED. THIS SYSTEM IS MORE ADVANCED THEN WHAT IS CARRIED ON THE T-72B3./New engine 1000HP this was first seen with the introduction of the T-72B2 ROGATKA in 2006//
http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/in...ngines/page-85
http://www.armyrecognition.com/april..._52604162.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2..._50605161.html
https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/de..._uk_071005.pdf (2nd GEN)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ernization.htm
https://warisboring.com/nicaragua-bi...ac3#.cpj6o3wib
http://survincity.com/2013/04/modern...le-one-of-the/
http://www.russiadefence.net/t2598-r...military-deals
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t72b3.htm

Note some sources seem to indicate that it carries the same gun as the Russian upgraded version without again ATGW (Russians can launch them.) launch capabilities. I feel this makes more sense because the same repair facility given above in the ref. section did the Russian modernization that carried the same gun as indicated in the ADD section.

As a note Russia still operates these tanks and they have seen combat in the Ukraine but are not in the game. They first appeared in the Russian Army in 1985. They are like UNITS 035/or 036 as noted above w/o ATGW capabilities. Must have been a cost cutting measure. The trick here will be to find out other then the below refs, when the Russians first started modernizing these tanks if at all before it would appear around 2012. It would make sense that this is what Nicaragua received based on the below.
http://defense-update.com/20131106_t...eployment.html
http://tank.lviv.ua/en/productions/details/t72b1

Wasn't as easy as I hoped because of the Russian "Rabbit Hole" wasn't the first time and it won't be the last time. So much for the "softball"!?!

Tomorrow I am taking off, finally getting to see "ROGUE" with seats already reserved. Wish I had a piece of that pie!?!

Have a great day!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Any news on the Ukrainian T-Rex tank? I just don't recall seeing anything posted.

=====

Re: MBT's
 

Thinking that is what we have in the game as unit 697 but w/o ATGM

Re: MBT's
 

Don't know about claims it'll be better than the ARMATA however it could be better than the OPLOT-M which usually makes the lists of someone's "TOP 10" for tanks. They do have a very long history of designing and building tanks and have made huge strides over the last few years in producing world class FCS's and other supporting electronics. The Ukraine has more recently also stepped up their game in areas of ordnance for their tanks and artillery. It's a time of transition for them pushed as it always is by conflict and military border pressures from "you know where". I still feel this area of conflict has to a degree "overshadowed" for now and the foreseeable future the Middle East. Here's what we have with the first reports coming out about a year ago...
https://sputniknews.com/europe/20160...army-new-tank/
http://euromaidanpress.com/2017/01/18/101786/
http://technics.pro/published-a-pate...an-tank-t-rex/
http://azov.co/en/special-use/59-tan...yam-t-rex.html
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-pol...ttle-tank.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._12301171.html

Where the idea came from...
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/a-t...x-tank-factory

Selfie anyone?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ge-patrol.html

Time to lay back down, *&%#$~?! sinuses!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Note: Didn't pursue it that deep (T-72B1) as nothing came up in the search. As you know that's why I like to "type" my equipment (As I just did above) submissions to avoid rework and quickly identify those pieces of equipment when any changes are made to the "base" unit. Not blaming anyone here, just I'm sure that's how it, like many others got into the game a long time ago.

-PJC

Re: MBT's
 

In Ukraine Oob There are some tank variants that never entered service like base T84 (only ten units), perhaps with excessive armor values, 110 frontal arc, better than Abrams SEPv3 for a t80b variant! When this unit has only a Kontakt5 comparable armor effectiveness (maybe t80um comparable).

So I propose end date for T84 when Oplot-M enter service and decrease base non oplot T84 armor values to a more realistic value...

only Oplot-M is in active, in small number, service in Ukrainian Tank Forces.

Another error is T80B: it should be moved in reserve tanks.

Since the nineties Ukraine put in reserve all t72 and t80 variants for spare part delivery issues ( majority produced in Russia) and choose instead T64 that composes the core of Ukrainian Tank Forces, because it's entirely Ukrainian made. They have partially modernized It to Bulat standard, then produced very small quantities of T84 then modernized the same chassis to Oplot-M.

Ukrainian tank production is suffering: ageing of designers, tooling and workers. No mass capability production. They are even incapable of substituting their BMP2s, all destroyed in Donbass conflict.

For now TRex tank is only propaganda and a dreamy picture. They are concentrating in Oplot production, with a lot of difficulties due to an inadequate MIC, proof is the cancellation of Thailand order.