T-72M1 question

[Companion]

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)

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Companion

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)

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

[Marek_Tucan]

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.

[Companion]

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)

[Companion]

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

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

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Companion

In conclusion, I believe current armor value for T-72M1 is vastly overrated and request further investigation and correction on developers' part.

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

[Companion]

Originally Posted by DRG

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

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" ?

[Griefbringer]

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

[Companion]

Originally Posted by Griefbringer

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

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

[DRG]

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