Re: MBT's
 

Need to get ready for bed but, quickly I hope with ZASLON there would be at least 4 launchers with 2 rounds each so minimum 8 total rounds. Again the way they've written it as I last posted, the launchers threat axis runs from 150-180 degrees of coverage. The round when "detonated" then is supposed to provide 360 protective coverage of the platform from in between the rocket or missile inbound and the platform. I can readily accept that a round fired from either the say the front left or rear left launcher would completely protect the platforms left side to include the deck and top turret. Or better using the same example, having "1/2 dome" covering the left side. I'm just not seeing a full 360 degree protective coverage over the platform.

I hope to get an answer from the source.

So how do you get around a treaty ban on cluster munitions? You develop weapons like STRIX, BONUS which the French are using with all their artillery now and precision guided rounds such as EXCALIBUR so in the case of the U.S. and a handful of others that didn't sign the CM ban treaty, "you can have your cake and eat it too!". :p

So essentially these are very fast and effective top attack weapons if you think about it. This is the reason so much of the
"hunter killer" sensors are using ballistic glass, are mounted in "armored" housing or recessed "within" the turret itself to allow for some side and overhead protection.

Industry has/is addressing these issues already for instance the ARMATA is supposed to have an operating system to counter the above threat when fielded. It will lead to a stalemate (Think about ATGW vs. these systems now, really no difference here. Some get through and some won't.) if you think of NLOS it's a multi-channel/multi-sensor munition just like BONUS. Even STRIX which is the "grandfather" of these systems out of the box was the same as NLOS etc. to lesser degree at the time.

In short yes artillery has gotten better than CM, a 155mm EXCALIBUR round is going to make for a bad day for a tank crew as it goes through a Commanders hatch.

Good hearing from you John and hope all is well.

Anyway back to work later this afternoon.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Hi Pat all's well in my neck of the woods hope all is good with you, moving to the lakes in 6 months or so & forsaking city life completely.
Follow your posts just try not to comment in to often as mainly its an information thread.

Re: MBT's
 

The bottom line question would be ....... in an actual combat situation how many individual threats could the system deal with before running out of counter-measure ammo

Re: MBT's
 

Latest T72B3 modification:

Relikt side skirts and SLAT Armor added


http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2533332.html

It says "According to the previously published tender documents, the modification of the T-727B3 with additional protection should include:

Installation of the Sosna-U sight; The target tracking machine; Radio station R-168-25U-2 and a complex of software and hardware AVSKU; Guns of type 2А46М-5-01; Engine V-92S2F (1130 hp) with systems that ensure its operation; The display complex of the driver-mechanic and the rear-view television camera; Caterpillar belts with oblique grooves and driving wheels with improved cleanability; Onboard screens of the hull with integrated modules of dynamic protection of the "Relict" type and screened screens of the projection of the MTO hull; The recruitment of a single spare set of the kit's tank: additional dynamic protection modules in the "soft" casing, increasing the durability of the onboard projection of the hull to anti-tank cumulative means, with the possibility of their equipment and hinge under operating conditions; Dynamic protection modules and trellis screens of the tower, increasing its resistance to anti-tank cumulative means and installed instead of boxes of spare parts for the tower depending on the nature of the task; Refinement of the AZ providing use with products С-1 and С-2; Improvement of the Products in terms of providing anti-mine resistance, at which the specified activity is not performed.

Let us recall that the main designer of the NPK Uralvagonzavod Andrei Terlikov announced in June 2015 at the forum "Army-2015" about the creation of the T-72B3 variant with enhanced protection. "A new set of additional protection has been prepared for the new modification of the T-72B3," Terlikov said. - In the near future, this modification is planned to be launched into batch production. " According to Terlikov, the new modification of the T-72B3 also received a tank diesel engine with a capacity of 1130 hp. "The driver-mechanic received an automated control system that independently warns about injuries and accidents, and the commander's workplace is equipped with a panoramic sight," the representative of Uralvagonzavod added [in fact, the installation of a panoramic sight is not implemented on mass-modernized tanks. - bmpd]. "This modification proved itself from the best side," Terlikov stressed.

According to the information published in the open press, in 2015, NPK Uralvagonzavod received the first contract of the Russian Defense Ministry for major repairs with the modernization of 154 tanks of the T-72B type with reduction to the T-72BZ type with additional protection, with performance of works in 2015 -2017 years. The published documentation indicated that the contractor began to actually perform the work from October 1, 2015. According to the known information, the upgraded T-72BZ tanks with additional protection were started by surrender at the end of 2016.

On March 24, 2017, Reuters released a videotape showing the unloading in Pokrovsky (Rostov region) north of Taganrog near the Ukrainian border with the Russian Army echelon with upgraded T-72B3 tanks with additional protection."

https://twitter.com/mod_russia/statu...040512/photo/1

http://www.russiadefence.net/t963p37...n-and-variants


https://www.facebook.com/14922523243...type=3&theater

Official Russian MoD source: it says "Two dozens of T-72B3 modernized tanks have been introduced into the motorized rifle formation of the 1st tank army of the Western military district."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJdBvQhGPDs

Video near Ukrainian border.

This B3 Upgrade is real and alive..

Re: MBT's
 

What that looks like to me is what we have for unit 697 in the Russian OOB is very close with the exception of the start date exactly 2 years too soon based on when work actually started......though 10/16 seems to be a good enough date for actual service.......does that sound about right?

Re: MBT's
 

Unit 697 is very similar but without the addictional Relikt ERA and SLAT coverage..

So in Russian real life OOB there are 1st gen T72B3 ( with less protection) and 2nd gen T72B3 ( with added ERA and SLAT coverage) but without panoramic commander sight

and T72B3 with panoramic commander sight

but I suggest Deleting T72B2 Rogatka which is not in service

Re: MBT's
 

there are two kinds of ERA in the game basic using single digit numbers and advanced with double digit numbers....so 697 already has advanced ERA ratings.

panoramic commander sight isn't cover by the game

Re: MBT's
 

ZASLON Results: Well to say the very least a bit of a disappointment.

Mon July 10, 2017 8:55pm
From: Me
To: EDITED by request
Sir or Madam,
Good Morning! I just have a simple question concerning your ZASLON System. From having read your material, the following taken from your site caught my eye, "For detecting incoming threats, each round is fitted with a millimeter-wave radar sensor which continuously emits signals to 2.5m within an arc of 150o-180o in azimuth and -6o to +20o in elevation. Once a potential threat is detected, the system releases a dense cloud of fast-moving splinters in the trajectory path of the incoming threat, creating a 360o kill zone between the incoming threat and the host vehicle, while a backup munition is automatically deployed ready to fire once the first round is disposed of." It appears to me just for clarification, that if a launchers sensor picks up a inbound threat to the platform it will fire one round that will provide that platform with a full 360 degree splinter cloud to protect it. The second round in that launcher would act as a back up to any other threat basically from the same general area. So to summarize to counter an inbound threat/launcher fires one round/it disperses a 360 degree "splinter cloud"/it destroys the inbound threat. Is this correct? If it is you have I must say, a very impressive system. I'm doing a little research on APS type systems for a game/weapons online forum and I just wanted to verify I am interpreting your system information correctly. Hopefully you can answer and or clarify this for me as I wish to post accurate information concerning the ZASLON System as long as it does not violate any classified information about it.

Thank You for any assistance you can provide and I hope you have a GREAT Day!

Regards,
Pat Conklin USN/SS Ret.

No reply, maybe they think me a Russian spy? Who knows!?!

Given what we have and if we trust the manufacturers (Remember they are trying to sell this system as well.) information we simply have to say a tank would have a minimum of four launchers a tank is a "box" with four corners after-all.

Simply 4L x 2Ea = 8SC Shots. I believe the most shots any MBT has in the game is 3 in a EW rating for any defensive system onboard.

TROPHY I believe is at least an 8 shot system possibly as high as 12.

Do you see were this is heading? Some people every now and again will still complain about the artillery "routine" which has gotten much better over the years, but, can you imagine waiting on your tanks and those of your opponents going through the "tank defensive routine" on top of that? After all what's the, though much rarer, complaint? The game takes too long.

The "capper" here for me as well is that my "worthy" opponent AI has a distinct disadvantage that I enjoy especially since I believe in Logistics, it might wish it could enjoy it as well but, it can't.

I know (Or think I know.) very simply, that the supply routine will prioritize resupply my of main armament first based on a number of game conditions such as Suppression etc. etc.

Allowing for "game time" every MBT so equipped (EW) should have a minimum of 2 and no more then 4. I actually feel across the board 4 would be ideal as some of the aerosol system can get up to 12 or more shots RW. And as discussed above for a APS type system such again, as TROPHY. It would make it more of a challenge for everyone w/o sacrificing play ability.

As far as ZASLON is concerned, from what's out there, it seems like a very good system overall.

The rest is just food for thought and I'll get a little European here, or the bin for the thought.

Probably screwed that up, it's OK!

A little news I'm tracking...

VIETNAM: Think T-90S/SK (Command version.).
http://www.armyrecognition.com/july_..._10807172.html

This was confirmed by JANE'S 360, however they have drastically cut down on their archival lifespan of those articles.

As late as June however they still were considering the T-90MS. Why I try not to "jump the gun" on these things.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/june_...840606161.html

UKRAINE: Industry in the the production of armor has been ramping up for sometime now, though it's nice to see fulfill their obligations to Thailand, it's what the first para says about Ukraine's own OPLOT-M tanks that caught my eye.

Related: Pakistan and the Ukraine an "old couple looking to find some magic again" Simply beyond the current plans to upgrade the Pakistani T-84UD tanks it looks like an improved version of the OPLOT-M is on the "near term" horizon.
http://defence-blog.com/army/ukraine...-pakistan.html
http://defence-blog.com/army/ukraini...deas-2016.html


Good Night!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

New stuff about T72B3 mod. 2016

http://www.armyrecognition.com/april..._10604172.html

http://www.janes.com/article/70252/r...-moscow-parade

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.w...ry-day-parade/

http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspo...-upgrades.html

Re: MBT's
 

I've adjusted the armour ratings based on the photos showing the position of the slat armour. I will probably adjust the Icon as well

Re: MBT's
 

Remember that we are talking about a variant of T72B3, the second production batch after 2016-2017

First batch is without extra armor

Re: MBT's
 

Proceed with caution from your JANE'S ref. quote...

1) "The new versions of the T-72B3 seen in the Moscow parade featured a number of survivability upgrades over existing B3 models. (To your main point.) A new explosive reactive armour (ERA) layout fixes some of the vulnerabilities in the existing T-72B3 design and is stated to bring the vehicle to a comparable level of protection as the export (Not the same necessarily as "home" production i.e. an Indian version of the AH-64E DOES NOT have the same capabilities as ours, for it's equipped with a slightly improved LONGBOW FCS vs. ours.) T-90MS. This claim is somewhat optimistic, however, given that the latter vehicle's turret ERA layout is far more compact, with minimal space between modules, as well as these modules being the newer Relikt ERA."

2) "Frontal coverage changes are limited to the addition of a small ERA module to the left of the gun mantlet, covering a location that is fully exposed on the T-72B3. This module appears to only contain a lower and not an upper ERA panel, probably to avoid obstructing the view of the sighting unit located above and behind it."
http://www.janes.com/article/70252/r...-moscow-parade
https://shop.ihs.com/buy/en/ihs/aero...icles-yearbook

The second ref. is the public version almost anyone can buy. I can ensure you the government sales version will add almost another $2000 USD to the above price as it contains more "stuff" in it. Point being simply, that JANE's is not will to hang their reputation on what they don't actually see as highlighted above from their ref you used. Wording is critical it can "twist" and "alter" the intent of the written and spoken true meaning of a topic.

I've been guilty of the same many times in the past especially in dealing with equipment issues in this forum-as Don will tell you along with a handful of others.

It appears Don is meeting your request but as noted the numbers are set for older versions of ERA vs. current versions.

This STILL gets "lost" out here sometimes but, Russia being one of the more notable OOB's in this category I believe it only has about 10 slots left +/-2 or 3.

2026 is a long way off yet to have very limited slots left for all the new equipment that's yet to come. And as been noted already, I already have current (Some that Don has already entered.), equipment that be operational within 3-4 years and others that should be fielded just after 2020 that I'm tracking now for Russia.

Do you know what my problem is at this very moment! Combined I have more pieces of equipment as noted above, than the Russian OOB has slots!

THAT's something to think about as we move forward.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

The following is a blown up photo meant to have accompanied Post #658, it shows a model used to illustrate the new improved OPLOT-M which Pakistan is considering buying for themselves. The Ukraine is doing likewise, as discussed in the same post along with the fact it would seem the Ukraine is starting production of the OPLOT-M again. One obvious improvement is that the grenade launchers are under a "roof" type housing.
Attachment 14827

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I'll keep this brief, I believe we had this discussion already concerning the following...
https://www.armyrecognition.com/russ..._video_1300717

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Sorry Pat - Bad link

Re: MBT's
 

Thanks! Hopefully this works...
https://www.armyrecognition.com/russ..._13007173.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Just tested it twice, seems to work-sorry for any inconvenience.

Re: MBT's
 

Yes. it's in the game as the T-80BV-U

Re: MBT's
 

Wasn't that something you just added a short time ago? Seems like within the last month as posted by luigim as I recall but, this past couple of months has been a "blur" to me.

Anyway just posted that because it's recent and they normally do a pretty good job putting those "tech sheets' together. I guess I could've just added "For FYI".

Regards
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Yes it was, I just checked the default OOB's and it's not there..........it all blurs together after awhile but the point is...it's now in the OOB's that will be released next time

Re: MBT's
 

NORINCO shows off the first VT-4 MBTs ordered by Thailand:

http://defence-blog.com/army/norinco...-thailand.html

Re: MBT's
 

NORINCO has also unveiled the new "GL-5" APS that might be installed on the latest block production of ZTZ-99s -- I wouldn't go putting it in until we see ZTZ-99 photos with APS installed.

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

Re: MBT's
 

Since Mark is on a China kick again ;), here's some other toys I'm watching as well...
There really aren't that many "tank destroyers" out there right now that are really any good a notable exception would be Italy's CENTAURO among a handful of others.
http://www.iveco-otomelara.com/wheeled/centauro8x8.php
Note: I believe Italy is about to get the above as contracts were recently signed. Still have much to verify here though before anyone does anything. I can say from what I've found out thus far concerning that 120mm HPMG, it'll be able to handle anything out there. It is wise to remember a gun no matter how good is only as good as the ammo it uses to reach max. effect on the battlefield. This is why in combination we still see that modern 105mm MG's can still kill modern MBT's. I digress-sorry! :p

China has responded to the task with the ST2.
http://www.janes.com/article/66778/n...tank-destroyer
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/st2.htm

Also we are to see major upgrades the TYPE 96/96A with the now 96B.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...xperience.html
http://csef.ru/en/oborona-i-bezopasn...vnovaniya-6946

Though Russia probably just had a "quite" laugh...
http://defence-blog.com/army/new-chi...mpetition.html

Sorry but my JANE'S links are dead, had 2 on the TYPE 96B-SORRY!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Just checked that JANE's link from the above, apparently it works. I might've caught the site during a maintenance period.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Pat,

I think it is very important to keep in mind HOW China's Military-Industrial Complex works.

There's a lot of prototype kit produced each year by China's MIC; like the ST2:

The PLA(N) recently retired their last gun armed Tank Destroyer, the PTZ-89 on 3 November 2015 from 39th Army Group in favor of more ATGMs; so chances of the ST2 being acquired by the PLA(N) are microscopic.

What does happen is that because labor costs in China are extremely low, it doesn't cost that much to design and build a few prototypes; and sometimes they score on the export market; thanks to China not being so picky what the purchaser is doing -- for example what human rights violations?

Also, the PLA(N) may use export markets to "piggyback" R&DT&E development through an export customer; so what may appear to be a 'dead end' can actually turn out to be productive; like the Pakistani Memorandum on Joint Development for tank development which produced the Type 85-II/Type-90-II/Al Khalid/MBT-2000/VT-1 family of vehicles.

Even though the Chinese version of that family: ZTZ-90 (Type 90) lost out to the ZTZ-96 (Type 96) family for the next generation of PLA tank acquistion, it still got sold decently overseas as MBT-2000/Al Khalid/VT-1.

Known Current Chinese Export Tanks under the current designation system (god, they keep changing their designations every few years) are:

Type 90-II/MBT-2000/Al Khalid --- EXPORT VERSION ----> VT-1

ZTZ-96G ---- EXPORT VERSION ---> VT-2

Type 59 (ZTZ-59) --- Modernized with new turret, 125mm gun, and similar add on armor that modern Chinese tanks have ---> VT-3

ZTZ-99G ---- EXPORT VERSION ---> VT-4

VT-5: Brand new light tank of completely new design. May be NORINCO attempting to recoup costs on a private (or public/private) venture to produce a Type 62 (ZTZ-62) replacement for the PLA(N).

Re: MBT's
 

A better and more current look at the VT-5 in what's probably it's final iteration.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/augu..._81808171.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/chin..._11711164.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

A little tank news from the Ukraine...
AS a further modification of the T-72B1, they have now developed the T-72AMT (And good luck trying to keep up with all these mods for the T-72 from here and their close friends to the East.). Both refs. say the Army received the first tank this month. The second ref. indicates a 130 T-72'S have already been improved to this mark and are in service. Both agree a unit is operating with them. One is saying they're still finishing testing. So here's what I think...

1) FOC OCT 2017. It "cuts to the chase" of the ambiguity of the issue from these articles. They are as I predicted over a year pressing on with tank production and I posted on this then when they hired and I forgot his name, the American that was in charge of that and more for the USA. In fact also very recently I posted an article that as a side bar mentioned how they had ramped UP production of the OPLOT-M. Ukraine is defiantly selling armor now (Memory "lighting bolt" that article dealt with Pakistan updating their T-84 and possibly looking into buying an updated version of the OPLOT-M that the Ukraine also wants to build about 3 weeks back as I recall.) sells and foreign investment is spurring on production. Anyway...

2) 3rd GEN Night Vision well that means simply the TI/GSR will be greater then 40. The OPLOT-M should be at 50 however I can't determine if this should be rated at 50 or 45.
The next should narrow that decision point down somewhat I think to the higher side.

3) At 5km this ATGW can penetrate 750mm of protected armor. Poland is looking into this ATGW as well that was developed with the help of a small Middle Eastern country. The numbers have been verified by India very recently for the ARJUN Mk II. It sounds similar to the BAR'ER or STUGNA-P weapon now used in a man portable and APC versions in the ARMY. The comparison chart was also very interesting IN REF 1.
http://spetstechnoexport.com/catalogues/494
http://www.defence24.com/361151,ukra...-tank-weaponry

4) Protected by NOZH all the way around which is a highly effective ceramic armor system. There further news here concerning the T-64 BULAT apparently they now have the same system as well. OPLOT-M was the first to receive it.
And because I type so slooow...
"The tank is also hinged with anti-cumulative gratings, reducing the impact of HEAT hits, while protecting the most vulnerable parts of the tank. The engine, transmission and other components are also protected by slat armour to reduce the impact of shaped-charge weapons." from ref 1.

5) Comms very similar to Turkeys ALTAY because it is from them. Believe ALTAY will have a level III system at FOC.

6) More durable mobility and suspension system.
http://www.army-technology.com/proje...in-battle-tank
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...-ato-zone.html

Now I know this next tank will cross someones mind out here, so, let me just quash that thought now. It is not the T-72UA1 that's been available to the export market since 2012 and rumored to be sometime after that in Ukrainian service.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t72ua1.htm

However the fact that Ethiopia has been operating them might be of some value here.

[b]3a)/B] I believe I got it looks like it's possibly the KOMBAT ATGW or improved version which I suspect based on the articles I've read concerning India's testing of them for ARJUN. But it does fit the refs. from the beginning of the post.
https://en.uos.ua/produktsiya/vooruz...kombat-i-konus

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

WHICH one ?? there are three listed I can see

Corsar ATGM -- 550 mm pen-- range of the missile is defined as 2.5 kilometers

Stugna-P ATGM == up to 800 mm pen -- range up to 4 kilometres

Bar’er -- 800 mm pen tandem hollow-charge -- range 100-5000 m


none show 750mm....... we added "Korsar ATGM" which is the Corsar above last release and I'm not sure why they need the Stugna if they have the Bar’er ( sounds Isreali....... )

Re: MBT's
 

You might've missed my para 3a) at bottom of my last Post (Emboldening didn't take.)(2hr. edit thing) with the extra search time I came across the KOMBAT it states...

Chart at top shows the 750mm penetration at 5000m/5km. Min. range should be 100m still.

"The KOMBAT laser-beam riding precision-guided missile can launch from the 125-mm smoothbore guns mounted on the T-72, T-80UD and OPLOT main battle tanks equipped with fire control systems compatible with it."

"The KOMBAT has four fold-out fins at its extreme rear, and offers an effective range of 5,000 m which it covers in 17 seconds."

"The laser beam is only brought into coincidence with the target (tank or helicopter) for 0.3 seconds prior to impact, effectively leaving the enemy with no time to activate a laser-warning system. At a range of 5.0 km, miss distance does not exceed 0.5 m. The missile has been accepted as standard issue for the Ukrainian Armed Forces."

KOMBAT it is from what I can see from the State run UKROBORONSERVICE and as developed by State Design Bureau Luch in Kyiv, are series produced by the Artem State Joint Stock Holding Company, also based in Kyiv. So this matches the ref. as well. This is their current tank fired ATGW.

ALSO the T-72AMT has the same MG as the OPLOT-M a 125mm A246, this combined with the KOMBAT would strongly support the fact that the T-72AMT has to have an improved FCS to handle that ATGW. The below ref even states that at the start of para. 2.

Again from the bottom of my last Post...
https://en.uos.ua/produktsiya/vooruz...kombat-i-konus

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

From LUCH Min Rng. 500m Max Rng 5000m. They also show the T-64 BULAT must be equipped with this as well. The Russian missiles must be no longer on these specific tanks T-64 BULAT/T-72 as noted (Such as AMT)/T-80UD/OPLOT and OPLOT-M.
http://www.luch.kiev.ua/en/productio...guided-missile
http://www.luch.kiev.ua/images/data/Kombat_Eng.pdf

luigim posted on these in Feb. this year, found it on the web.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=51489

Gotta Gooo!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

http://soha.vn/ukraine-tung-goi-nang...0154048992.htm

you'll need to run the translator

so really its the AG we had in the last update with some tweaks

Re: MBT's
 

Don yes I think that would be a good comparison. The difference between the two is in the timing and circumstances of their availability. The AG was more in response to an urgent need to get a better protected T-72 in the field as quick as possible with some other minor improvements.

With the both the slower op tempo then truce holding to some degree over the last few months, you have to look at the AMT as a much better planned/designed out tank with specific goals in mind as already noted. My general feeling is it should just about/or be on par with Russia's T-72B3/4 It certainly has the edge when it comes to the ATGW issue.

Ukraine is no "slouch" when it comes to tank development, munitions, power plants and most importantly protection. We would do well to remember they are a player in the selling of and modification of weapons systems. Also and especially since Russia's incursion into the Crimea, how much foreign technical and investment in the defense industry they've received from many countries.

Also as a side note I think the reason now why the OPLOT-M isn't at the front is because the Ukraine doesn't want to be seen as escalating the situation in Eastern Ukraine. I believe this is why Russia pulled out the few T-72B3 tanks they suppositely had in the region. A little over a year ago the Ukraine only had about 10 OPLOT-M tanks. Today that number appears to be about 40-60 tanks with an improved version ready to be built and to modernize the existing tanks further.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Well I got excited when I saw the title on the website hoping as they just posted this yesterday (now) it would be one of their "tech sheets" however it's not. Same as we already have with the exception they're reporting that the Ukraine already has 130 of these in the field in the ATO. I think I still like Oct. though, it sounds safer.

So why bother? I thought the pictures in the article would be useful. As you look at the top picture on the left of the MG you can see what appears to be ATGW detector/jammer similar to SHORTORA. Now look center line on the turret top next to the 12.7mm NVS and you'll see the same but smaller. If it is as I suspect, it has to be there to detect top attack ATGW's.

The second picture below clearly shows the slat armor. A bit of a mystery as you look at the same picture is what's the purpose of that housing unit the grenade launchers appear to be riding on, turret aft.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/weap..._12908175.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Well I have a catalog of websites I use for equipment only data or the former plus defense news. Well this is one of my equipment only sites I've had for years now and would you BELIEVE they have the audacity to talk about KOMBAT. This should pretty much close the books on that topic to some degree...the nerve of these people :D!!
https://en.uos.ua/produktsiya/bronet...ank-t-84-oplot

Is the T-64BM BULAT better then we think? Maybe after reading this, maybe. What interesting here is that it comes with two separate MG's, both the KBA3 (Same as OPLOT-M.) with a similar FCS as found on the OPLOT-M, T-80U, T-80UD and T-90. With exception of the T-90, all others can fire the KOMBAT. This would again support KOMBAT for this tank as well. The other MG is the 2A46M-1 which is a much improved version of the 2A46 standard MG of many earlier T-72 mods.
It would seem based on earlier refs. the T-64BM BULAT tanks that have this MG (KBA3) can support the KOMBAT as well because the primary driver is the FCS which this tank has.
https://en.uos.ua/produktsiya/bronet...k-t-64bm-bulat

There might be some news here concerning the T-72AG in what was improved including night vision out to 1200m, protection etc. but again the MG is the issue, it does carry the standard 2A46 but also the KBA1. (Plus a NATO 120mm as well though for export mods only.)
https://en.uos.ua/produktsiya/bronet...y-tank-t-72-ag

So what's left is can the tanks with the T-72AG/KBA1 and T-64BM BULAT/2A46M-1 armed tanks support KOMBAT?

Further I've had to deal with this next topic I don't know how many times over the years. It's a minor issue but they seem to "grate' on me the most at times (SORRY.) but for the last time I hope :rolleyes: from the source itself...
"The T-72 upgrade is powered by newly-designed 6TD-series engine which was developed specifically for the T-80UD MBT application otherwise known as OPLOT, replacing a standard 780/840 hp engine equipping the baseline T-72."

So a word about the source ref. here I hope most understand that UKROBORONSERVICE is the marketing side of the Defense Industry in the Ukraine. It would be a very, very bad thing to mislead potential customers of your equipment's capabilities. And I'll leave it at that for any legitimate company in any country.

I'll have to look into this further with those MG's.

Lastly for now anyway below are their weapons offerings except for what I need right now of course!!
https://en.uos.ua/produktsiya/vooruzhenie-i-boepripasi

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

T-72AG can fire KOMBAT now with the KBA1/KBM1 (Same MG) from the tank manufacturer. Those upgrades were made as recommended in the ref below, but not originally, those upgrades appeared to have happened within the last couple of years (Mid+ 2015) or so. I don't believe they came "out of the gate" with the newer gun or FCS.
"It is possible that the T-72AG retains the original 125mm 2A46 smoothbore gun when being upgraded. However, as the original weapon system errors are considerable when the gun is fired, this leading to a lower tank gun accuracy and to degradation of the performance of the whole weapon system, it would be expedient to replace the current gun with a Ukrainian-made updated 125mm gun designated KBM1 in order to achieve the highest hit probability from the tank weapon system not only in static engagements, but also in moving target or moving-own-vehicle engagements."
Done now.

"The new tank fire-control system can include a missile guidance system, with the 125mm guided missile being able to achieve effective penetration of the armour of all in-service tanks at all reasonable battle ranges. The guided missile equipment is similar to that installed in the Oplot MBT and enables the T-72AG to fire a laser beam-riding missile out to a maximum range of 5,000 m."
That's KOMBAT the Russian missiles (REFLEX series(?) they had and manufactured also just don't have that range.
http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/t72m3.php
http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/kbm1m.php

A comparison between the T-72 and T-72AG with a reminder of where and who built the T-72 during the Cold War...
http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/t72ag.php

T-64BM BULAT it appears with the 2A46M-1 it cannot fire the KOMBAT ATGW but primarily it's equipped to fire the 9K119 (NATO designation AT-11 Sniper) but these have been phased out by now as far as I can tell. And that ATGW isn't listed on any of their manufacturing sites that I can see.

Lastly for real...came across this site which seems very interesting. The site is Ukrainian but I found the following paras from it very interesting and it does seem to substantiate the "rumors" of German help concerning the in the development of the KBA3 MG and possibly the OPLOT-M itself as posted several years back. That particular section starts at paras 15 - 20
http://bintel.com.ua/en/article/opk3/.

Re: MBT's
 

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t80bvm.htm here is the beast

Re: MBT's
 

luigim check Post #666 :eek: in this thread, I posted army recognition's tech sheet on the T-80BV there. You might find it useful.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I'm talking about the new modernized T80BVM version, on par with T90M ( relikt and new fcs)

Re: MBT's
 

Which is what the T-80BV-U (upgrade) was supposed to be ( I think ........) it's seems there are upgrades to upgrades reported every month

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.w...t-russian-mbt/

no reactive armour showing on the hull front for the T-90m and most interesting..or perhaps it's that the joins between the reactive are much closer than before


Gee......HEAT range of 3km......that's a bit ( sarcasm ..:re:) shy of what we credit it for now

IF ( if....really BIG "if" ) that is correct that is considerably LESS than we credit the guns performance ...and it's derivatives now

Sabot range of 3 km is 60 in game.....right now the 125mm Gun 05 and the Armatas 125mm Gun 16 is 130......that is a HUGE difference that will need further investigation......IF that info above is indeed correct it has " game changer " written all over it. The ONLY value listed there that matches what we use in the game now is the range of the Refleks

wonderful.......just :censor:ing wonderful......

Re: MBT's
 

Can someone get me a definitive ammo loadout for the T-80 series please

This...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-80
has data that conflicts with numbers we've used for years

Main
armament
125 mm 2A46-2 smoothbore gun,[10] 36 rounds T-80B, 2A46M-1 with 45 rounds T-80U
9M112 Kobra ATGM, 4 missiles T-80B, 9M119 Refleks ATGM, 6 missiles T-80U[7]

Our load for the 80B is 34 rounds and 6 missiles according to that is should be 36 rounds with 4 missiles so it's at least close but our T-80U is WAY short by 12 rounds 125mm ammo if this info is correct........it currently carries only 33 125mm rounds and 6 ( the correct number ) of ATGM

Now ,I know for certain that none of those numbers we have there were just tossed in but that's what it looks like and I want to get this corrected

.....this is shaping up to be a PITA release already and we haven't really started yet

THIS----http://www.janes.com/article/73927/russian-mod-unveils-t-90m-t-80bvm-mbts

says the BVM carries "an ammunition load of 45 rounds" but many sources roll in the Refkeks into ammo count so is that 45 WITH Refleks or 45 total sabot/HE/Heat with room for 6 extra Refleks.......:confused::eek::mad:

Re: MBT's
 

http://www.russiadefence.net/t1791p1...e-russian-army

Seems that they have improved front armor for both T80BVM and T90M

Re: MBT's
 

The U.S. Army is preparing to receive its first six newly-upgraded M1A2 SEP v3 Abrams MBT pilot vehicles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=Fq7wYIvU0ig

Re: MBT's
 

I'll give this a shot...
Russia:

T-80 up to T-80UK 40Rds.

T-80B first to carry ATGW AT-8 SONGSTER had very poor accuracy due to MG and FCS.

T-80UK and it seems other command tanks of the series only carried 30Rds which makes absolute sense because of all the additional radio equipment carried onboard.

T-80U and later First to have AT-11 and later AT-11M (Laser Beam rider.) and improved AT-11M-1 currently. 45Rds APFSDS/HEAT/HEF & ATGW. Also these tanks carried both the 125mm 2A46M-1/2A46M-4 (In later models.) MG's.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t80.htm
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/T-80U.htm

Ukraine: They designed and built some these tanks (Not as primary.) You will note they've modified their tanks from Russian standards and use a different ammo type as well. This includes the Pakistani T-80 tanks as well.

T-80UD designed in Ukraine by KMDB carries 45Rds. APFSDS (3VBM17 "MANGO")/HEAT/HE-FRAG & ATGW (AT-11 SNIPER-B)
http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/t80ud.php

T-84 OPLOT/T-84 OPLOT-M 46Rds. carried. Ammo load-out at very bottom of ref.
http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/oplot_mbt.php

NOTES: Already switching to KOMBAT ATGW due to better range and accuracy.

Also in regards to the Ukraine in lieu of ref. 2 above for Russia, I will always go with the manufacturer when I can get because as already pointed out recently, they're trying to sell and or upgrade these tanks for export and current users. Pakistan again as noted, has already contracted the Ukraine to do a major upgrade to their T-80UD tanks. It wouldn't surprise me to see the same or similar happen with the Ukrainian tanks in the next couple of years as well.

More then tired right now hope this helps in my current "mindset"-good night!!


Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

OK there will be corrections made

Re: MBT's
 

If you find anything on the range of the Russian Sabot and HEAT rounds that would be very helpful.... I want to say that source in post 687 is wrong but maybe its not..and if it's not wrong.....well.......there is much work to do

Re: MBT's
 

From fprado again and I've seen his site ref'd many times by other defense sites (DID, armyrec. ETC.) to the point I have to give some credence to the data, points to the following...
REFLEKS 9M119/9M119M - 100m - 4000m.

REFLEKS-M 9M119M - 5000m

AMMO - 3000m - 4000m Max. effective depending on type. I would think, but could be wrong, with my very basic understanding of the ammo from the lower end up that'll be HEF > HEAT > APFSDS >/= ATGW.
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/T-80U.htm

Might be useful or not.
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/apfsds/ammo.html

That's all I have time for now.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Is this the same as a HEF round...
125-mm HE-Shrapnel Focused-fragmentation, Ainet
Maximum Aimed Range (m): 5,000
Max Effective Range (m): Day: 4,000
Night: 800-1,300
Tactical AA Range: 4,000-5,000
Armor Penetration (mm): INA

The above is taken for the T-80U from the USA WEG (Worldwide Equipment Guide) starting on page 4-21 you will also note they provide ammo load/typical combat load information. Also Day and Night ranges for the ammo and notes delineate restrictive factors such as imposed by sights etc.

I've posted these in here, probably in this thread(?), this the 1999 version (Mentions the T-80UD as just coming on line for the Ukraine.

Maybe this might prevent some hair pulling!?!
https://www.isu.edu/media/libraries/army-rotc/weg.pdf

I'll bet anything there's some JANE's in this data, the format is almost the same as well w/o the pictures.

Starting to feel the reason why I got up, time to read a book (On Brain Boru most interesting person.) and back in the rack!?! :p

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

WEG 2011 Guide...
http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/r...coll11/id/2089

Just released March THIS YEAR update to 2015 guide.
https://publicintelligence.net/us-ar...uipment-guide/

Amazon for download offers Land/Air/Sea 2015 (Complete Set)
https://www.amazon.com/Volumes-1-3-W.../dp/B0737FVCRG

WEG 2014:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/304960189...Ground-Systems
MIGHT NEED TO SETUP AN ACCOUNT TO DOWNLOAD. I've had one for years just for this kind of information.

WEG 2001: And I'm done now with this...;)
https://archive.org/details/OPFOR_Wo...quipment_Guide

DONE!! Sometimes we forget what's so obvious when compared civilian sources we normally deal with out here. This doesn't include the FM equipment guides myself and others have posted out here. Certainly better for our purposes when they can be used versus the conjecture of BLOGS and especially anything WIKI where any of us can be "experts" and change data on a whim.

Re: MBT's
 

I'll take a good look at this in a week or so but a quick look indicated for the 125mm guns both the sabot and HEAT have a max effective range of 3000m....that's 60 in game hexes and FWIW....HALF what we have allowed. My first task will be to figure out why that tiny detail has been overlooked by everyone for nearly 20 years but this is not just an issue with Russian guns......the info for the Chieftain Mk 5 is no different 120-mm APFSDS-T, L23A1Max Effective Range Day: 3,000m.....German Main Battle Tank Leopard 2

120-mm APFSDS-T, DM43--- Maximum Aimed Range(m): 3,500 Max Effective Range Day: INA

120-mm APFSDS-T, US Olin GD120 Maximum Aimed Range: 3,500 Max Effective Range Day: 3,000
Night: INA

120-mm HEAT-MP-T, DM-12A1/US Olin M830 Max Effective Range Day: 2,500

That last one is the US M830 and in game terms that 2500m = 50 hexes

So it would appear, and it truly baffles me how this developed, but every tank gun range is high......so the " good news" is it's not just one type or nation that is out....they ALL are and the other " good news" is the stated Maximum Aimed Range is well within the Maximum Aimed Range that most maps in the game allow anyway so for most games what you get is not any different than RL. That said, it still surprises me that after all these years NOBODY has taken issue with the tank gun ranges...more surprising than that we didn't catch it either...the simple fact is we are allowing, on average, sabot ranges that are double what they are capable of in RL for all nations

Re: MBT's
 

There was an exercise made by the Greek army this August in which a Leo-2A6 hit a target at 5800 meters. Granted, the conditions it achieved that were ideal and I do not know if it was a first round hit (it most probably wasn't) but the point is that tank hits at extreme ranges are possible. Wasn't there a Challenger that made an actual combat kill in 1991 at around the same range?

The best solution is to keep the current combat ranges, but make accuracy beyond 3000 meters very low, so a hit in those distances a matter of luck.

Re: MBT's
 

Well, that is certainly a solution that preserves what is left of my hair.....:re:

I'm going canoeing for a week starting Saturday and that will give me time to "refect" on this issue

There are some basic " game facts" that put why this has been overlooked for so long into focus......

..... you NEVER get to take a shot at maximum gun LOS range in the game....for one thing, the max visibility is only 90 in scenarios and 99 in generated battles and the chances of getting a dead flat map for 99 + hexes is slim to none so it's really a moot point that the ranges are longer than they should be. Your 5800m Greek example is 116 hexes. An impressive shot to be sure but you'll never make it in the game because 99 ( two digits ) is THE maximum...there CANNOT be more without screwing up every save game and scenario ever made so that is NOT going to change ever.

That said I'm not sure why we ended up with the OOB version of "mission creep" when we all should have known 99 was the LOS limit

Another issue is the penetration data changes based on the max range and last time I checked what we have now was giving pen data at normal combat ranges that fit RL but that will need re-checking

RECHECKED a couple at random and the pen values at published ranges are very close with the current set up

Re: MBT's
 

The ranges are "high" only because they have to be high in order to get the desired effects at the intermediate ranges due to the high effect of the draw-down in AP values in the code if you used say "3KM" as the max range like it was some sort of atgm.

3km is an effective range, the max sabot range is theoretical. The rounds can go further as in real life, but effect will drop off.

If you took some gun that had say 30cm penetration at the muzzle, and then plonked in 60 hexes max sabot (or AP) range, then looked at the values in APcalc then you would see that your round dives in effect very steeply, and the effect at 20, 40 etc range gates would fall well below the desired effect. Effectively your APDS round would then behave as an APCR/HVAP arrow munition as in ww2 with a rapid fall-off in velocity.

Due to the draw-down effect of the formula baked into the code you must use a max range well beyond the theoretical max effective range so the line goes through the correct data points.

Guns dont stop dead at some theoretical "max effective range" - missiles though will due to wire length, or other fire-control issues.

Re: MBT's
 

Thanks for reminding me

I was not having a "good day" and this dropped in my lap like flaming pine pitch......:eek: