MBT's

[DRG]

https://www.army-technology.com/news/news130202-html/

The TSS system can provide direct fire capability to artillery platforms such as 155mm Howitzers and consists of the STAWS integrated with assisted-aiming fire control software, a commander’s display and a gunner’s display.

The assisted aiming software uses the laser-sighting capability of the STAWS to provide the Scorpion tank with advanced direct fire capability under all battlefield conditions.

I gave it

Ti/GSR 40
FC 20
RF 22

Start date 6/111

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
Thanks, seems those numbers are more than reasonable.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

It is what I expect a " major upgrade" in 2011 that improved FCS to include the TI/GSR would be

I can see why the Thais like them and want to keep them.
One-- they are paid for.
Two-- they are small and have adequate firepower and because they are small ( 8 tons with low ground pressure) they can go places heavier vehicles cannot plus the Average Thai Male is under 5 and a half foot tall and weights 150 pounds...... good fit for a Scorpion

[MarkSheppard]

That weird new North Korean MBT seems to have possibly entered limited service:

https://forum.warthunder.com/t/ch-on...n-better/98052

However, in 2020, an entirely new vehicle was unveiled as North Korea’s new best MBT. It was dubbed M2020 by Western analysts, but in May 2024, its name was revealed during an arms exhibition as Ch’ŏnma-2 / Cheonma-2 / (천마-2호).

In 2023, the Ch’ŏnma-2 was revealed with a new ERA kit, and in March 2024, the vehicle was shown during training exercises, with all 9 vehicles having entered service with the 105th Tank Division.

The name can be discerned from the background in the rough time frame of around 24:58 in this video:

https://youtu.be/x2uIsZsmCNE?si=LqBrOHsI3mEuYuON

where Kim visits a military institute.

[DRG]

If you see any more info on this...a top view would be great...... post it please

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

These might help first breaks it down equipment wise from their analysis and second bottom picture I think will be about as close to a "top down" as we'll get. Can't recall ever seeing a true "top down" on any of the newer NK tanks.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/news...-the-cheonma-2
https://armyrecognition.com/news/arm...an-t-14-armata

Got places to be.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

If anyone finds a reliable source that gives the length and width of the hull that would be helpful

Based on what little we have seen and various descriptions this is a very, VERY WIP first attempt



v3

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Hardly anything out there but, this is the best I can find.
Overall Length: Approximately 12.4 feet (3.78 meters) 1.
Overall Width: Approximately 7.4 feet (2.25 meters) 1.
Overall Height: Not explicitly mentioned in the available sources.
Specifications:
Mass: Greater than 50 tons (estimated to be around 55 tons) 23.

That being said I think that's crap. We know they are building T-62/64 hulls and have "added" on to them to get some of the recent tanks they've come up with. It is thought they can now produce a limited number of T-72 hulls.

And if you account for only the weight issues the T-72 makes the most sense here as they averaged around 45 tons to the NK M2024 is thought to be more than 50 tons with most "pointing" it at 55 tons.

You could get there with the T-64 at 38 long tonnes/42 short tonnes but looking at the pictures from one of the refs I'm looking at of the engine compartment; I'm now thinking "Hmmm" I'll post it so you can take a look and it sits better in that lower profile that the M2024 seems to also have.

See what you think and remember the Ukrainians had gotten a 1200 HP engine into their newest versions.
https://tank-afv.com/coldwar/ussr/T-64.php

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Hardly anything out there but, this is the best I can find.
Overall Length: Approximately 12.4 feet (3.78 meters) 1.
Overall Width: Approximately 7.4 feet (2.25 meters) 1.
Overall Height: Not explicitly mentioned in the available sources.
Specifications:
Mass: Greater than 50 tons (estimated to be around 55 tons) 23.

That being said I think that's crap.

I will agree with you on that

A T-55a hull was 6.2m so 3.78 is way off unless the NK's are CONSIDERABLY smaller than I thought they were

I suppose one way to measure would be to estimate the size of "Dear Leaders" head and then scale it from that but it's not really reliable

What this appears to be is something of a hybrid design like they took the Abrams ( and there was some chatter that they had one courtesy of ISIS ) and the T-14 . The raised engine compartment is reminiscent of the Abrams and it is a way to shoehorn a larger engine in

Eventually we will get better numbers and the T-72 theory is sound. That "society" will never invent anything new but they will adapt other peoples designs to their needs

My guesstimate hull is the same width as a T-72/T-90 but a bit longer and has 7 road wheels as does the Armata.... T72/90 have 6 so it's kinda a T-14/ Abrams mash up for the hull and something closer to a western style turret

[DRG]

HOW could I resist??



Thats 11 with room on each side with 1/2 each so 12 kimheads wide
Google "How wide is the average male adult head"
Get "Average human head measures 6-7 inches in width"

Lets say 11" with the padded helmet 11" x 12 = 132" = 11 foot = 22 pixels wide which is right in the ballpark when using a kimhead scale

T-72 3.89 m (12 ft 9 in)
T-14 Armata is 3.5m wide which is 11.4829 ft