T-72M1 question
 

I thought T-72M1s are roughly the same with T-72A(1)s without the missile launcher gadget.

But on many OOBs (in SPMBT) protection level of T-72M1 is better by some margin even compared to T-72B1 and T-80B of Soviet/Russia OOB.

And although protection value of units named "T-72M1" are identical in most OOBs, in some OOBs, (Iran, Czech, Finland) values differ.

Is this something neglected or does the CAMO team have a good reason to be convinced of current values?


Another question:

I am trying to apply this information in my SPMBT OOBs
(a new T-72M1 damage model for SB Pro. values are non-LOS values):

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/...43&postcount=8

What would be the reasonable value to assign? (For the T-72M1 turret frontal protection)

Re: T-72M1 question
 

See for examplae:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t72tank.htm

In other words, which variant of the T-72M1, and probably which particular nation's T-72M1 variation is likely to be significant since there is a plurality of them. Or at least the same designation is used for different builds of the thing.

You could look through the postings on this Tanknet topic as well, it may have the info you need http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=14200

Or if not, then perhaps the original designer of the OOB(s) in question may happen by and be able to answer your particular question.

Cheers
Andy

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Quick primer to T-72 variants:
T-72 (Ural) (steel front turret armor, 2A26 gun)
T-72A (composite front turret, laser RF, 2A46, no missiles yet!)
T-72M (export variant of T-72A, plain steel turret)
T-72M1 (ditto but with composites)
T-72AV )T-72A with ERA)
T-72B model 1986 (new armor, ATGM's, better FCS, Kontakt-1 ERA)
T-72B model 1989 (Kontakt-5)
T-72B1 (no ATGM)
T-90 (upgraded T-72B 1989)
T-90A/M/S (T-90 with welded turret)
T-72S (export, a bit of mystery what exactly is that).
Then there are various T-72M1M and so on.

Then there are differences. First series of T-72M carried 39 rounds as T-72, later carried 44 rounds etc. And with various manufacturers, detail stats varied - from what I've gathered, for example Russian tanks were being considered as having best optics and armour, Czechoslovakian as having better IR kit etc.
Re armor, T-72M1 got from the very beginning an additional 17mm HHS glacis plate (after fears of new 105m ammo) whereas with T-72M and T-72A, only late series got it from the beginning and earlier machines were fitted with it later.

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Ok, here is what I understand:

The "Original" T-72A is represented in game as T-72A in Russian OOB and has, vs KE, 40 for the turret front and 38 for the hull front.

After the M111 "Hetz" problem, T-72As got applique armor on their hull fronts and this version is represented in game as T-72A1 with 40 vs KE protection for both turret and hull

T-72M1 model has the applique armor as default and also has "sandbar" type turret armor inserts making protection of this model comparable to T-72A (T-72A1 in the game).
So mirroring reality, and taking into account the possible regional production difference, T-72M1s in game should have vs KE protection of late 30 ~ early 40 level.

However, T-72M1s in game, in terms of protection, are not comparable to T-72A; actually, they surpass T-72B (without ERA) by a fair margin in both KE and CE protection.
In conclusion, I believe current armor value for T-72M1 is vastly overrated and request further investigation and correction on developers' part.

I somehow am quite confident that tanknetters would not agree with T-72M1 having about 500mm RHA armor equivalency vs KE rounds. (and 550~650mm vs CE)

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Another good link to add in to the discussion...

http://www.armyrecognition.com/forum...pic.php?t=1318

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Ok, here is what I understand:

You have NO idea what it should be exactly from nation to nation but you are certain what we have is wrong even though there may have been modifications made to the basic tank by the different nations that have bought and used it in all the years it's been in service.

Don

Re: T-72M1 question
 

At least the Finnish military has done a number of modifications/updates to the T72 tanks since their initial purchase, and this would differentiate them (one direction or another) from their original Soviet equivalents.

Griefbringer

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Geez, I didn't expect to receive sarcasm like this.

Yes, it is difficult to trace each and every modification made to that particular tank - maybe that's why most T-72M1s in the game have virtually identical stats.

However, there are information and implications in the very tanknet thread (and in other threads) you recommended me that the magnitude of modifications and variations of T-72M1s are not large enough to guarantee the protection level it has in the game.

If you are confident of what you have right now, (about the particular unit T-72M1) then please explain the reasons rather than throwing in some sarcasms; please try to convince me you are right as I am trying to convinve you that there is something wrong.

I am not your enemy to knock off and crush.
Well, you certainly would have real life stresses and pressures, but can't you just add under the SPMBT To-do list a single entry: "reevaluate T-72M1 data" ?

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Did Finnish army apply any up-armor kit to its T-72s?

Re: T-72M1 question
 

What I AM confident of is no matter what we do somebody will find some info somewhere , maybe now, maybe a year from now, that disagrees with the values we have put into the OOB and someone else will eventually disagree with them. I've been doing this too long NOT to be cynical about things like this.

Certainly I could add "reevaluate T-72M1 data" into the already 46 page long "to-do" list, In fact, I already have. Given the time I have available to work on this anymore there may even be a slight chance I'll be able to.

Given the number of nations that use the tank and,as "Griefbringer" already noted, the Finn versions will be different than stock T72's use by other nations and that could/ would apply to most of the other nations that use these tanks so what may apply to the Finns many not apply to the other nations that use it and I can GUARANTEE if I blanket change all of them to one standard someone else will complain and with 11 nations using the T-72M1 in the game there is next to no chance of getting reliable info on each and every one

Don

Re: T-72M1 question
 

First of all, I apologize for mistaking you with Mobhack. (time to get new eyeglasses)

Will it help you if I hunt for some (seemingly) useful posts regarding the issue from the tanknet?
Or is it better to drop out and just let the CAMO team have its own way?

Regarding the researching armor values, ammunitions, and whatnot, maybe you can partially "out-source" the task?
Say, about the T-72M1 that I've been talking about, I think you can throw in the question in some enthusiastic communities, look at what they come up with, and use them as auxiliary sources if the logic behind the claim is plausible and sources backing the claim are reliable.

BTW, regarding the Finnish T-72:
http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.p...dpost&p=613526

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Real information is always welcome. Telling me you think something is wrong without concrete info on what should be changed to isn't

--
Czech unit 18 may be closer to "reality" for the M1 series armour in general but it has a low side hull armour. All the Czech T-72's units have low hull side armour in comparision to other T-72's. Why ? IDK. 13 is standard .

Something else to look into.......

Don

Re: T-72M1 question
 

The cold war export T-72s are interesting beasts. Since they were built under license in several nations and were aquired by several others with the skills to fiddle with them there is scope for a considerable variation, though probably not massive in terms of actual performance.
From what I have understood there were three basic model
1) An initial version made available since 1979. It had a cast steel turret and a composite glacis.

2) T-72M, introduced during the80's. Same armor scheme as the above but with improved systems (laser instead of optical rangefinder, more accurate gun etc).

3) Finally the T-72M1 also introduced in the 80's. Composite turret and strenghtened glacis.

Several subvariants probably have existed. T-72M may have received additional steel glacis plate (done inEast Germany IIRC)
to be at least partially brought up to T-72M1 protection standards. Basic T-72 may have been upgraded with laser rangefinders
and improved systems. Some manufacturers may have fiddled with T-72M1 front turret cavities composite fillers etc. Some locally assembled iraqi
T-72M1 Assad babylon appear to have appliquè armor on the turret front. This of course before the end of the cold war. All the sort of upgrades
may have been carried out since then (typically along the lines of ERA being fitted, better FCS etc.)


Some food for thought in the following links


http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/1...striderpz7.jpg

http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/armania...t72/T72M1.html

http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.p...cavities&st=20

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Marcello, judging from Czechoslovakia:
At first came T-72 "Ural", directly from the USSR. Stereo RF etc. Never upgraded to LRF (or smoke dischargers etc) , but OTOH there were just 30 pieces delivered.
T-72M-E2 - T-72A glacis, "gill" sideskirts, plain steel turret, 39 rounds (as in T-72), LRF. Smoke dischargers may be added to some pieces later, ditto for HHS.
T-72M-E4 - glacis with HHS plate (17mm), full-length skirts, plain steel turret, 44 rounds, LRF, smoke dischargers.
T-72M1 - glacis with HHS plate, full-length skirts, composite turret (sandbars), 44 rounds, LRF, dischargers.
To make matters worse, army often calls all T-72 (except the old ones) "T-72M". Funny, innit? :)

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Comment of mr. Rick Griest about the link:

http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.p...dpost&p=282618

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Looks pretty typical.

Agree that it should be taken with a big pinch of salt (I for one I don't buy the armor estimate provided) but I thought that something useful could be extracted.

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Being interested in this, in time I've collected what information I could gather about the T-72 seemingly-endless variants. Most of this come from a Tank_net thread of some time ago, and from this one as well (Marek you'll recognize much of this as yours ;)).
I hope it can be of some help, and in (very likely) case of some needed corrections/addenda please let me know.

Re: T-72M1 question
 

I would like to ask a question about T-72s since there are so many knowledgeable people in this thread. Could someone identify this type for me?

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/8449/t72wl0.jpg

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Based on the apparently Finnish national markings on the side, I'd have to say that it's a T-72M1. Bought from either the USSR or alternatively ex-DDR surplus stocks.

- Koh

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Thanks for your reply. The photo is from a Vietnamese guy’s personal blog. He posted a bunch of pictures of armoured vehicles with the Vietnamese People’s Army. The other pictures were labelled and clearly Vietnamese. This one wasn’t. Vietnam purchased 150 T-72s from Poland in 2005. Could it be a Polish T-72M1 with the VPA?

It could of course be a Finnish T-72. The blogger may have posted a picture of a Finnish T-72 to represent a Vietnamese T-72!

Re: T-72M1 question
 

You’re right Koh. I’ve found exactly the same picture elsewhere. It’s source was given as the Finnish Tank Museum. It isn’t Vietnamese as I had hoped.

Re: T-72M1 question
 

Definitely Finland. Sign is right, box on turret side as well (seems to be kinda their specialty, box on left turret side is not usual).