WinSPMBTver3.0 Info

[DRG]

Djuice said:
From post 2007 onwards does the Russian receive T-72BM (2006) and T-80BM (2006)? In regards to Orbat..

Oh yeah, do they also have BMPT?

Here some pictures of the T-72BM (2006)

http://img218.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vid5xe4.jpg
http://img95.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bort4bu6.jpg
http://img81.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shtora1or5.jpg

It's a T-72B upgraded with 3rd generation Relikt Hvy ERA, some 80-90% superior then K-5 Hvy ERA against APFSDS accord to Nii Stali (manufacturer). Nakidka camoflage kit, SLAT/Grill armour over the rear-sides, 2A46M-5 125mm Gun major improvement over the 2A46M-1 with 20% increase in accuracy, comes with muzzle references, new FCS + TI, shtora Anti-missile defence, and new engine 1000hp.

And how does this T-72MB differ from the T-72BM1 that is already in the game in a number of different versions ? Units 621 and 622 for instance ? and how does the T-80"MB" differ from the T-80UM ? I've found references to the T-72bm but asside from chat rooms nothing on the T-80BM

As for the BMPT, It's already in the OOB's you have now ( unit 879 ) I didn't have a pic for it but I do now.

Don

[Djuice]

And how does this T-72MB differ from the T-72BM1 that is already in the game in a number of different versions ? Units 621 and 622 for instance ?

The new T-72BM has superior armour compared against the T-72B(M) 1989 model, its gun is also more superior, and the FCS is comparable to the T-90A/M variant. It has superiors mobility and with the new comoflage kit, it reduces the rdr/ir signiture of the vehicle greatly therefore reducing its ability to be detected via radar/TI systems. Also Russian only upgrade, not for export.

The T-80BM is inferior in comparison to the T-80UM, only thing is known about it is that its updated the older stock of T-80B in Russian inventory with upgraded armour. Don't think it has updated FCS nor TI. Its fitted with modular Relikt Hvy ERA, which is superior then the older Kontakt-V ERA on the older tanks. Also only a Russian upgrade.

[DRG]

Djuice said:
The new T-72BM has superior armour compared against the T-72B(M) 1989 model, its gun is also more superior, and the FCS is comparable to the T-90A/M variant. It has superiors mobility and with the new comoflage kit, it reduces the rdr/ir signiture of the vehicle greatly therefore reducing its ability to be detected via radar/TI systems. Also Russian only upgrade, not for export.

OK....."The new T-72BM has superior armour compared against the T-72B(M) 1989 model"..... How much more superior ?? Equal to a t-80UM ??.... a T-90 ?? Is this in fact the "T-72BM1" we have in the game but without the upgraded armour or is the T-72BM1 a different vehicle ?

Djuice said:
The T-80BM is inferior in comparison to the T-80UM, only thing is known about it is that its updated the older stock of T-80B in Russian inventory with upgraded armour. Don't think it has updated FCS nor TI. Its fitted with modular Relikt Hvy ERA, which is superior then the older Kontakt-V ERA on the older tanks. Also only a Russian upgrade.

"inferior in comparison to the T-80UM" would be what we have as the T-80BV (unit 787 )but that doesn't have the more advanced ERA. I'm thinking that becasue there is a gap between the one BV we have ( unit 40 ) and the one in unit 787 that perhaps this one was supposed to be the BM but at the time it was put into the OOB's details were sketchy

Don

[Djuice]

Don't even think there is even such a tank called T-72BM1. There is the T-72B(M) which is a T-72B equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA.

Here is a pic of a T-72B(M) 1989 model, you cans see the differences. Tanks in the background are T-72B fitted with Kontakt-1 ERA.

http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?im...2bmby031sn.jpg

I regards to armour, Relikt is 80-90% superiors against LRP then the Kontakt-5, and just about the same against HEAT type warheads. So takes a T-72B without ERA and add the values up. Heard that Kontakt-5 adds around 150-180mm against LRP and about 350-400mm against HEAT. Relikt would be like 250-300mm against LRP, or somewhere along thoses lines. It's also features an anti-tandem warhead capability unlike the integrated Kontakt-5 ERA fitted on the T-72B, T-80U and T-90. It is also of modular design, allowing for quick removal and installation by field personnel, or crew.

The T-80BM seems to retain the current FCS as the older T-80B, only noticable difference is that it fitted with Relikt ERA, giving it more or less the same amount of armour as a T-80U with Kontakt-5 ERA. So it should have about 700-750mm of frontal armour against LRP or around that. Greatly increasing its survival in a modern battlefield.

Here's a pic. http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/8...drelict1hx.jpg

Edit: Also coverage of the frontal turret has improved from 50% on the T-72B with Kontakt-5 ERA to around 60-65% with Relikt.

[DRG]

Djuice said:
Don't even think there is even such a tank called T-72BM1. There is the T-72B(M) which is a T-72B equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA.

Here is a pic of a T-72B(M) 1989 model, you cans see the differences. Tanks in the background are T-72B fitted with Kontakt-1 ERA.

Djuice said:
The new T-72BM has superior armour compared against the T-72B(M) 1989 model,

Djuice said:
It's a T-72B upgraded with 3rd generation Relikt Hvy ERA, some 80-90% superior then K-5 Hvy ERA

OK lets clarify a few things one of the real problems with sorting out Russian equipment is the nomenclature

Is this the progession you are talking about

T-72B basic model no ERA
T-72B(M) first upgrade around 1989 equipped with Kontakt-1 ERA ( or is it Kontakt-5 ERA?? )
T-72BM 3rd generation Relikt Hvy ERA in abouts 2006

??

Answer quick, the patch is built tomorrow......

One last thing. In the game the "T-72BM1" version has VRRSS and the "T-72BM" does not. Which of these models carries a VRRSS type defense

Don

[Djuice]

T-72B basic model no ERA
T-72B(M) first upgrade around 1989 equipped with Kontakt-1 ERA ( or is it Kontakt-5 ERA?? )
T-72BM 3rd generation Relikt Hvy ERA in abouts 2006

??

Answer quick, the patch is built tomorrow......

One last thing. In the game the "T-72BM1" version has VRRSS and the "T-72BM" does not. Which of these models carries a VRRSS type defense

Russian T-72B all have Kontakt-1 ERA. NATO classification is T-72BV for some strange reason, but internal Soviet/Russian classifications is just T-72B.
T-72B(M) is T-72B with Kontakt-5 Heavy ERA.
T-72BM is the newest upgrade in 2006 fitted with Relikt ERA.

There isnt actually a T-72BM1 at all. Smoke grenades changes don't actually classify as a major change therefore there is no need to have it's own designation. For all we know all tanks could use them.

[wulfir]

DRG said:
OK lets clarify a few things one of the real problems with sorting out Russian equipment is the nomenclature

It was probably meant to be confusing, part of the Russians' obsession with maskirovka and all that...

[DRG]

Part of the problem comes from blended Russian and "NATO" designations and some "domestic" models have different designations than the "export" versions and yes, this has been discussed before, it does seem the nominclature was designed to confuse.

Don

[DRG]

Djuice said:
Don't even think there is even such a tank called T-72BM1. There is the T-72B(M) which is a T-72B equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA.

OK I have this sorted out now . FYI the only difference in the OOB's you have now between the tanks marked T-72BM and T-72BM1 is that the BM1's have "VIRSS" and the "BM's" don't. I have left those but remamed them ( and the "BM"s ) so that players have a choice. If they want the "VIRSS" they can have it if not, they don't. They may all have it....or not. This is a compromise. Removing units causes problems with scenarios if that unit is used and I think in this case it's an acceptable compromise. For those tanks there is now a T-72B(M) and a T-72B(M)* the * in this one case indicates it carries defensive measures.

The T-72BM has been added. We do not model "third" generation ERA. a single digit number is simple era and 11-19 is all "advanced" ERA The compromise to this improved ERA is to increase the number. In this case it now has an "18" for ERA.

I assume the Missles stay the same or have they been upgraded as well?


Don

[BaronvonBeer]

Another piece of equipment that IMO deserves a second look, is the TOW-2B. (understand that this patch is nearly out the door, so certainly not expecting anything to happen this time around, if at all. Then again, never "Expect" anything, as we are owed nothing )

As is, the TOW-2B's 100 "pen" is, I assume, from many sources lumping it and the TOW-2A together, and then listing a penetration value (typically 800 or 1000-1025mm RHA)

This is correct for the TOW-2A, and it's HEAT warhead. However, the TOW-2B does not have a HEAT warhead, but uses dual (E)xplosive (F)ormed (P)enetrators. (In essence KEPs produced from the initial explosion)

Now, in 2 like sized warheads (warhead diameter and thus cone liner diameter for HEAT, dish for EFPs) the EFP is going to have a significantly lesser penetration, but can achieve it at a variable standoff distance, whereas a given HEAT warhead has an ideal standoff detonation distance, anything more or less will reduce capability.

The TOW-2B's warheads (2 offset to increase hit/kill chance) are ~1" smaller, @ 5".

Now finding an exact penetration value is like finding unicorn teeth. However, the physics involved are pretty straightforward (Comparing the principal factors of HEAT penetration to those of Kinetic penetration.) and tell the overall tale.

One set of guesstimates (The SB Pro PE developers and their sources) have it at 350mm RHA. Now as to how accurate that figure is, impossible to say. It is no doubt closer than 1,000mm.