I shall endeavor to post my response to Suhiir's last two posts in the following manner.
On the first post...
Sometime ago my posts concerning the
T-80 where picked up online. I was contacted by a group about 6-8 months ago via a PM in our forum. I was asked if they could use the information I posted and if I had any additional information concerning the
T-80 that would help in the development of the video as posted. I always can provide further information concerning a particular topic and did so in this case.
As Suhiir
astutely pointed out in her post with the video, there is
no probably, as I'm fully aware of my
extensive knowledge of Russian tanks and in particular the more high tech versions which the
T-80 represented at the time.
I'm sure
EVERYONE found that information useful and helpful. My apologies to everyone for the fact that, try as I am, I couldn't get them to change that
stupid video for one more focused on the
T-80.
Yes it was that frustrating.
Concerning the second post...
Yes I was outed here, I had come across some information concerning the further development of the
ABRAMS beyond the SEP V4. I wanted to post it, however, I needed to verify the data. After some further research, I notified the parties involved that unfortunately the data was incorrect. The first concern I picked up on was the fact that everyone knows or should know, that an increase of 1mm to the main gun is
insufficient to increase armor penetration by 1000mm. Using the math formula for
Thermal Dynamic Mass Expansion Coefficient Theorem (TDMECT), that to achieve 1
000mm extra armor penetration you need to increase the shells performance by a
minimum of 27% and increase the bore from
120mm to 123mm (124mm would be better by my calculations.
)
The narrator for that video was just pissed off after spending 3 days in the production of it until I notified the group of my extensive research and results from my calculations using
TDMECT.
So there you have it, with , again, my apologies. I was lead to believe these videos, especially the second, wouldn't see the "
light of day" but instead it saw the "
moonlight of night".
A most embarrassing situation.
Regards,
Pat
Re: MBT's
Re: MBT's
Re: MBT's
Linear Mode
