The last thread was sold to a Mr Shekelstein
Korshun Edition
> What's this thread about?
As usual this thread is for the discussion and pics of tracked and wheeled AFVs of all kinds from MBTs to supertanks to self propelled AA guns. Please keep it civil and cite sources for statistics.
The origins of the Boyevaya Mashina Pekhota (BMP) lay in the understanding that the next war would be fought in the shadow of the mushroom cloud. The Soviets were pioneers in this regard, not only resulting in a new vehicle, but a radical reorganisation of the Red Army. The GBTU in the 1950s issued a design based around a new armament system in a one man turret, known as the 2A28 Grom 73 mm low pressure gun. The Grom was powerful, employing ammunition similar to the warheads found on the RPG-7 sans propelling charge, and the turret also sported a 9M14 Maltyuka ATGM providing substantial firepower. While the weaponry was preset, the automotive particulars were still in debate, with concerns that a fully tracked design would be maintenance heavy and costly. Several KBs were invited to compete for this component, and after testing of numerous prototypes at Rzhev and Kubinka, the Isakov Object 765 was selected, it having the important distinction of a front mounted engine allowing rear dismounts. 1966-67 saw trials that changed minor features, before being accepted into service by 1969. Friction arose over the prospective cost of the BMP, with a high-low compromise reached after Khrushchev’s departure, for 1 BMP to 2 BTR companies as a rule of thumb. In 1970, the definitive BMP-1 emerged, with new NBC filters, a 9M14M and a 20 cm hull extension for better amphibiousness. Experience of the Middle East wars would also lead to the BMP-1P, with improved SACLOS ATGMs and smoke launchers, a prelude to the BMP-2.
> Gun
Smoothbore 73 mm 2A28
> Dimensions (l w h)
6.74 x 2.94 x 1.92 m
> Weight
13.9 tonnes
> Engine
300hp diesel
> Speed
80 km/h
>>30153281
OP: As always, feedback, suggestions wanted and appreciated.
The experience of the BMP-1 in the Middle East was not a happy one. Employed against Israel in 1973, around 40-60 of Egypt’s BMPs were destroyed or captured, and 50-60 Syrian BMP-1s. Certainly, the consensus was that the BMP was fast, using the new pattern of T-64 tracks and a simple driving yoke steering system, yet it suffered from a litany of shortcomings. The interior was too cramped for a full complement of 8 troops, and hatches had to be left open for the passengers as it became unbearably hot in operation, doubly so in the Middle East. Furthermore, its vaunted armaments, the Grom and Maltyuka were both severely inefficient in combat, as the Syrians found that the Grom was effective only at close ranges of less than 500 m and the 9M14M was hobbled by its inaccurate MCLOS guidance compounded by the gunner’s conditions in the vehicle. Its armour, furthermore, although deemed proof against 20 mm NATO autocannons frontally, was vulnerable to Israeli .50 cal machineguns around its rear turret. The worst fears of the Soviets, the mechanical complexity of the BMP not allowing easy field repairs, came true for the Syrians, as half their IFVs had to be abandoned due to mechanical fault. Additionally, the unusual design of the BMP and its various features had demanded bold new tactics, which the Soviets had had time to develop and employ in peacetime, but not their Arab export partners. These factors all led to a decisive victory for Israel, and a reassessment by GBTU – as did the Americans, taking note of these issues as well, which would factor in the much later Bradley. As for Afghanistan, that’s a whole other story, with an even unhappier outcome…
Addendum: I do hope people found my WWI booklist last week somewhat helpful as a reader’s guide to all the references out there. Seems actually rather appropriate during the 100th anniversary of Verdun and near enough to the Somme.
>>30153290
More tank news, as per the new format.
If you have more queries regarding a news story, just point it out, and I’ll further elaborate and provide links.
Israel’s Namer CEV had passed a series of operational milestones, overcoming deep terrain and emplacing a self-deploying bridge.
Russian diplomatic action has resulted in the return of a Magach tank captured during the 1982 Lebanon War to the state of Israel, transferred from Syria to Israel. However, there has been no concrete information regarding the possible repatriation of missing IDF personnel involved in the capture of said tank.
The Argentine Army has unveiled a prototype for its TAM medium tank modernisation programme, in cooperation with Elbit, IMI and Tadiran. The TAM 2IP, a successor to the 2013 2C prototype, was shown on 29 May with new armour based on IMI’s Iron Wall.
Slovakia’s MSM has exhibited a new 8x8 IFV dubbed the Corsac, adapted from the GDELS Steyr Pandur II APC. The vehicle was built to the specifications of the Slovak Army, its hull rated for STANAG 4569 L2 ballistic protection and incorporates a Turra 30 remote-operated turret.
Turkey at its Efes-2016 Combined Joint Live Fire Exercise on May 30 and 31 in Anatolia displayed its Altay next generation MBT, courtesy of Otokar. In addition to the MBT, the Tulpar and Arma AFVs were also on exhibit.
Canada’s Armatech has revealed its new modular survivability and mobility upgrade called Black Knight at the annual Canadian Security exposition (CANSEC). An evolution of the earlier Orca upgrade, it can be fitted to Humvees all the way to heavy vehicles such as the LAV-III and the Bradley.
BAE Systems’ has delivered two of its Armoured Modular Vehicles (AMV35s) to Australia after its announcement to participate in the Land 400 modernisation tender. Built by Patria with a BAE Hagglunds E35 turret, 223 more are expected to be completed, should BAE be selected as a finalist for the contract.
And that’s all for now.
Can anyone describe what happens when a tank is penetrated by different types of shell? Artillery, ATGMs, KEP, APCBC-HE, etc.
>>30153396
Dont take me wrong but there's a literal thread on the warthunder forums that describes actual tank shell types pretty well.
>inb4 I get blown the fuck out for even talking about warthunder.
>>30153296
Rheinmetall is going to debut a new IFV at Eurosatory, it appears to have a unmanned turret with a 120mm gun and a RWS.
>>30153281
Hello based /thg/ guy!
Please do a M-84 thread next time!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXCbda-0gTo
>>30153664
>>30153664
some news from mother Russia
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/3332957
BTR-82A upgrade with thermal sight
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/3332924
new BMPT, dub the Terminator 3 with T-72 and T-90 chassis
BMPT armata soon
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/3332812
Bumerang testing is about to complete, should be end of 2016
pic related is from Kazakhstan , KADEX 2016
Kazakhstan domestic design/produce 8x8 APC with Russian 57mm AU-220M turret
seen like this APC is a upgrade BTR-80, the chassis is similar
>>30153690
http://military-informant.com/army/v-kazahstane-nachnut-proizvodstvo-noveyshego-bronetransportera-baryis.html
Fresh from the oven.
>>30153698
>>30153396
shit gets fucked up
this is bad for the tank's delicate innards and the tank crewman's soft fleshy body
>>30153694
forgot it name, Barys
>>30153699
livejournal pic?
>>30153702
My phone messes up texted pics, I'll get my hands on the HD ones soon enough but I just had to share them.
>>30153702
Why so small? :(
>>30153708
>livejournal pic?
It was posted in the comments section of a blog.
>>30153704
>>30153698
best BMP-1
>>30153709
what is that, 90 degree exhaust, for what purpose
>>30153717
that poster must be an ass hole
>>30153720
>>30153722
No idea really. The Emirati version has a smaller diameter and a 45° tilt. Must be an engine thing.
>>30153396
>>30153727
BMP-1 has a soft spot in my heart. I would cry tears of joy if someone would produce similar gun on modern turret and mounted it to a vehicle. Think about possibilities if someone mounted Carl Gustav (or similar)with some nifty recoil mechanism in 2 man turret.
>>30153742
>>30153747
Cont I do know Russian love for Nonas that can pull double duty in direct fire role, but why hasn't western armies gotten into that?
>>30153749
>>30153759
>>30153762
>>30153729
snorkel adapter, maybe
T-64 snorkel have a 90 degree adapter
>>30153747
like the 2A70 on the BMP-3?
>>30153755
for some reason, NATO, especially USofA think that aerial bomb is the most effective method of deliver high explosive ordnance to enemy position
>>30153770
>>30153774
Oh right completely forgot about the snorkel. We just don't do river crossing anymore. You may very well be right.
>>30153774
>for some reason, NATO, especially USofA think that aerial bomb is the most effective method of deliver high explosive ordnance to enemy position
Your opinion does not appear to be based on how the USofA structures its military.
>>30153777
this is a BMP-2 though
>>30153788
I'm sorry, I wasn't sure.
Thank you for the correction!
>>30153774
Kinda, but BMP-3 still has the autocannon.
The reliance on air superiority is a good thing, but you really shouldn't rely on it all the time.
>>30153781
Good to see you Frenchfag. I have a question regarding training as whole. How much do you train tank related stuff? Friend of mine was CV-90 commander and he said when they weren't driving the actual thing they would either train to use some other equipment or just use the simulators. Sometimes they would just start Steel Beast LAN parties in their freetime and play missions.
Then another question, how do you operate under constant air threat. Usage of camouflage and radio procedures?
>>30153811
What is that above the turret?
>>30153858
See this:
>>30153698
>>30153869
>>30153869
Well it is a better idea then having a coaxial 12.7mm gun for the BMP-1
>>30153814
We do a lot of simulation. And a lot of time is devoted to preparing for overseas tours, the tours themselves or Sentinelle. The Leclerc isn't deployed but tankers are, using the VBLs or 10RC of our light cavalry cousins.
When it's time to do some real tanking it's usually a mix of simulation (mainly for procedures/orders and gunnery training), live gunnery and exercises.
Regarding air threats, lay low and stop moving and look the other way. Pretty much like when you spot a wasp.
What can you tell me about that turkish Altay tank project?
Thg guy, can't you see another tank thread?
Use the catalog next time.
>>30154351
There are 3 atm -
1) Thg
2) Best Fictional tank
3) T72 / T90
The best news is that the BMPT on the T14 chasis will soon be unveiled and prolly march on the next V day parade. Along with Boomerang that is supposed to complete all tests soon.
Shits gonna be good.
Hey THG guy, tell me about the development on BMP 2 - why did they make a BMP 2 after the first one - ie where did hte BMP 1 fall short, where did the BMP 2 fall short (Heard that too often) and why do we have a BMP 3 now ??
Thanks, your threads help me pass a lot of time.
>>30154378
>The best news is that the BMPT on the T14 chasis
There won't be a BMPT. Not on a T-72, T-90 or Armata chassis, never. The T-15 is more than sufficient.
>>30153709
At least the T4 sleeve isn't drown...
But the tank rests on its belly so let's wait for the DCL... ^^
>>30153814
>Sometimes they would just start Steel Beast LAN parties in their freetime and play missions.
Ah! SB is a great software! Trully a good tool to keep the skills running even at home with the PE version.
>>30153709
oh shit, engine had hydraulic lock?
>>30154499
BMP-1 have a one man turret and the 73 gun ROF is horrible
though it is a capable anti personnel weapon.
BMP-2 have two man turret and 2A42 gun. The TC got much better visibility and the 2A42 can be use as AA gun( gunner have 2 sight, one for ground use, one for aiming at aircraft)
BMP-3 fix almost every problem of BMP-1 and 2. Much more better armament, 100mm 2A42 can be use as a breech load mortar, airburst round is also available for the gun, and can shoot barrel launch ATGM. 2A72 is a new 30mm gun, much more lighter than 2A42, so the recoil is horible, but it mount coaxial with the 100mm gun, the 100mm gun act as a stabilizer for the 30mm gun. BMP-3 have a thicker frontal than BMP-2, it use pump jet instead of track to propulsion it in the water.
https://youtu.be/Ljc8M4CpNw8
How accurate is this?
>>30155302
Why no Russia?
>>30155302
>bong l28 APFSDS pens more than m829a3 and dm63
[x]
>>30154630
The DCL came and nearly dug itself in to pull it off. Obviously it succeeded, those things are freaking beasts.
>>30154693
I know not what the damages are.
>>30155118
The Emiratis are rather not happy with their BMP3 and how they fared in Yemen. They felt it ws unreliable and under-armoured.
>>30153702
Flooding much my fellow frenchfag?
>>30155318
Because it's Russian information.
>>30155324
Could be from the L44 120mm
>>30155361
Well with soaked grounds, better use "moufflage". The pulley help to reduce the amount of constraints on the ARV.
>The Emiratis are rather not happy with their BMP3 and how they fared in Yemen. They felt it ws unreliable and under-armoured.
Yet they love the versatility of the turrets weaponry. But they actually expressed some interests into the VBCI at the end of last year before buying polish stuff.
>>30155369
>>30155324
The L30 numbers are greatly inflated.
>>30153281
I´ve been looking forward to a BMP thread for a while now, cheers for doing one.
>>30153694
>BMPT
Why do they keep on making this? As much as it looks and could be really useful in urban areas, its done pretty bad when it comes to exports, and not even the Russian army are using it.
>>30154630
Darklabor, do you work with Leclercs too or are you a leclerc enthusiast? You know quite a bit about them like frenchfag.
>>30155570
Nah, just a real enthusiast.
I actually made a first time on a Leclerc two years ago at FrenchFags' regiment.
My knowledge is theorical but I have good friends that are PL, PS and maintenance team.
>>30155570
This render will give you an idea of the level of addiction
>>30155611
Whats that, 1000 hours in MS paint or did you make a program to try and model the interior of a leclerc?
>>30155619
Just X000 hours of work with sketchup. It's still WIP but the interior is quite detailed even if it's not complete yet. I started to model since 2008.
>>30155634
Whats the end goal when it comes to modelling the leclerc? Do you just want to know more or are you going to 3d print it as a scale model or something?
>>30153281
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RodrZ2we_hQ
Had to post this
>>30155634
It's for Steel Beasts I bet!
>>30155643
Well, there are some goals in my head.
The first one is to bring the Leclerc to Steel Beasts Pro PE. (If Nexter forbid me to do so)
The second one would be make a USB yoke to use with SB Pro PE
The third would be to make an aluminum scale model.
>>30155611
>>30155634
So nice!!
I'm a big fan of the Leclerc. Got anymore interiors?
>>30155683
Is that the revell leclerc?
>>30155683
Did a render of the gunner station but not the driver...
I aim to bring all three stations to SB even if I have to deteriorate the overall quality.
>>30155683
Not a render but well...
>>30155696
No, it's a diecast from amercom.
>>30155683
I remember that. Damn.
And nice work DarkLabor
>>30155719
Thank you!
Shit I can't wait for a SteelBeastWiki page on the Leclerc!
Godspeed Anon!
>>30155721
;)
I also did work with a friend of mine on an ArmA 2 mod but the project died out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hB-LzS4ufyM
>>30155735
Hmmm Thermal! Me gusta!
P4 and VBL! :3
>>30153722
Is that a 23mm aircraft gun pod?
Me like, but there has to be insane amounts of recoil from that, iirc they are rather light and fire at an insane RoF.
>>30155721
Senpai has noticed me! Merci beaucoup!
>>30154351
>scolding the /thg/ institution
>meanwhile 5 threads of ROLL WICH ANIMU WAIFU WILL YOU TAKE TO SHTF are created every hour
sure. the problem is that we have too many tank threads
>>30155753
And that's how baby tanks are made
>>30155662
Leclerc will be added to SB in June
dunno if it will have fully-modeled interior/sim controls
other vehicles like chieftain, merkava III, M1 TTB, new T-72B variants, TAM family and a fuckload of ACPs also spotted
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4YBxGDSg5o
>>30155872
Nope.
I failed to deliver anything on time, so it won't be fully playable. I got issues with UVs when importing into 3DS Max... (leading me into burnout)
The model in the video is the SXXI model I made for ArmA modified by Dejawolf. This explains why the tanks got a S1 armor instead of the extended armor of the S2/S1OP.
But hey! At least it's made by a professionnal!
>>30155895
Just take your time.
If we waited so long we can wait a little longer ;)
>>30154351
Bait or massive newfag.
>>30155953
Well it's been since 2007 that I'm waiting.
A friend of mine got hooked to SB since the beginning. I can tell the waiting for the both of us is excruciating. SB is such a good tactical simulator.
>>30155753
Is that porridge ?
>>30156104
Just good old Champagne-Ardennes mud. Time-tested, battle-proven mud.
>>30155735
Is that a thermal screenshot from a game or is it a photo of the leclercs thermal imaging?
>>30156151
*Contains traces of white Europeans males dead for nothing
>>30156151
In geology we call that "emmarnement" just like "emmerdement"
But the one in MML and MLY are quite soft I ve seen more sticky marl. The king of marl that make you wedge heel.
>>30156160
Nope, RL imagery.
>>30155753
This pic makes you understand clearly how much trench warfare sucked
>>30156160
The latter. I blame my phone, but there's a blatant loss of quality and a change of hue/tint over how it really is.
>>30156248
Do you have any other pictures of stuff like the screens in your tank or would that be breaking some secrecy rules?
>>30156248
That's because cathode-ray tube suck when you have to film it or photography it.
From the angle of the photo, looks like the MONIC.
>>30156284
I don't. There's a youtube channel with a few videos from a Leclerc gunner, if you want to see more of it. Search for "tir leclerc".
>>30156289
Indeed, though there's a much quicker way to identify it. It's about something the Emiratis have that we don't.
>>30156334
Oh! Havn't seen the letter!
That means it's a SXXI! :D
>>30156367
Nevermind I'm retarded it's a XLT...
>>30156367
Ahah god yes, that's the most obvious thing and I had forgotten about it actually. This isn't the cue I was talking about.
>>30156386
Yup forgot about the ATO. With Scorpion it's gonna be the end of this difference.
>>30156284
There you go. Not OPSEC. The ammo/fuel loadout screen.
0=empty
C=HEAT/HEAT-TP
F=APFSDS
This screen is kinda overtaken by the BMS screen on the latest versions.
>>30156284
>>30156334
Here it is :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cqxUpfEKrc
>>30156493
>>30156496
Really neat. Ive been looking at that kamaz301061 frenchfag linked, really cool stuff.
Do french people pronounce the "c" at the end of Leclerc? I dropped french after year 9 in school...
I reckon its pronounced something like "leclerrrr"
>>30156572
The c is silent.
it's pronounced like "leclèr" kinda difficult to explain to english speaking persons.
There is a slight difference between the "é" and "è" sound.
There you have the project manager prononcing the name : https://youtu.be/hSYJQugV8dk?t=18m18s
>>30157289
#Datsacompany #MML
xD
>>30156151
Thanks m8 !
>>30155564
who know
no body want to by T-72B because they throw turret
so they make BMPT "Tank protecting vehicle"
it is not specific for urban warfare though
>>30157644
Dont know mang, ATGM, so fair enough, it can be used against armour.
But Id definetly say the two 30mm cannons, the two grenade launchers and the machine guns are better suited to urban fighting thatn fighting against armoured vehicles in the open.
Those Ataka missiles look like they are there to give the BMPT a small, fighting chance against tanks more than anything.
In my very very humble opinion, ofcourse.
I just found out that FV510 Warriors don't have power elevation. I knew the Scimitar didn't (or power traverse for that matter), but I had assumed the Warrior did. Anyone know if they're changing this when they're getting the new gun?
>>30157936
Ataka have anti aircraft warhead version
technically
BMPT can be use as Self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon
>>30158099
>Ataka have anti aircraft warhead version
Technically. It likely isn't very effective, just like most such weapons.
>>30158051
What does that mean, the crew have to use a hand crank or something to turn the turret?
>>30158253
To lift the gun only, but yes. Whereas the Scimitar is hand cranks for both elevation AND traverse.
>>30158051
CT40 definitely will, yes. The new turret basically has all that could be requested in terms of internal tech. Will also be connected to the new open network infrastructure with Watchkeeper, Foxhound, Ajax and the Challenger 2 for complete information and GEOINT sharing. Thats a very subtle, almost never talked about, but absolutely massive advantage.
Frenchfag, does anyone in real life know how 4chan-famous you are?
>>30158302
>Will also be connected to the new open network infrastructure with Watchkeeper, Foxhound, Ajax and the Challenger 2 for complete information and GEOINT sharing.
Something similar to FBCB2? The Brits never jumped on that before now?
>>30158358
That's... that's the kind of trick question which makes me look like a giant attention whore whatever the answer, isn't it ?
>>30158373
Oh no, they've had that. Open Network is something much newer. It's basically a combined network of each vehicle's information and gathered intelligence. A Warrior commander can stream video or images from an Ajax a long distance away, which could send targeting data to an Exactor platform from 26km away, which is at the same time viewing the same area on a map from a Watchkeeper that is also marking hidden tanks for a Challenger 2 commander's own info. They can send photographs, updated theatre wide maps, recorded video and audio, targeting data.
The basic gist is they can share virtually EVERYTHING. Think of it more akin to the F-35's data sharing or the US' designs on the whole "Future Soldier" thing where it was all linked for information streaming. It's more like that.
The next step will be getting it onto each new platform (Protector, Infantry, MICV etc) while it will also be compatible with the F-35.
>>30158502
Makes sense. It's the natural progression of things. I'm just somewhat worried of its viability in a heavy EW environment.
>>30158487
Nah it's ok! +10 in charisma, you're in the good path to become PL.
>>30158502
If used on tanks it's the best way to perform hit and go manoeuvers.
Inf. sends coordinate of the target. The tank commander grabs the info and the turret is slaved onto the spatial point.
If used properly you can perform very agressive actions with minimal exposure.
>>30158544
inf?
more like drones, have you not seen the footage out of these commercial drones in syria/ukraine?
Got a Gods eye real time view of the battlefield
Really the tank should have some ability to fire indirectly against targets spotted like that
>>30158557
Inf. == Infantry
It all depends on the context.
In urban combat the infantry will most likely encounter directly or indirectly (with drones) a threat/high value target.
I'm giving this example because French Army uses this technic with Félin and the Leclerc.
>>30158593
Ah well, if its the infantry operating these drones then sure
Definately the presence of drones all over will revolutionize how war/combined arms is fought.
>>30158487
>>30158358
Oops sorry I guess I worded that very unfortunately. I mean do any of your fellow french tankers, friends, etc know /k/, /thg/ etc? Or do you just hide your power level like the rest of us?
>>30158635
Drones are not mandatory as long as you got an Infantry BMS in the loop to provide info. Beyond that is just a matter of doctrine.
Apparently French Army will not go into tank indirect fire support Even if the constructor developped a dedicated ammunition.
>>30158544
As in Platoon Leader ? Yeh I'm starting in three days.
Regarding BMS and their uses, it's pretty nice, but it's very easy to get overwhelmed by it and forget a bit about what's right in front of you. This is especially true for the lower echelons. At first contact it goes right through the window.
>>30158699
>As in Platoon Leader ? Yeh I'm starting in three days
Noice!
>Regarding BMS and their uses, it's pretty nice, but it's very easy to get overwhelmed by it and forget a bit about what's right in front of you. This is especially true for the lower echelons. At first contact it goes right through the window.
I would agree. But at the same time a constant training ease the use. Drill, drill, drill.
That reminds me "biffin" said to a friend of mine that is was useless geeky stuff... Not a long time after that I heard that his Infantry regiment was badly noted on the C4I. LMAOed all day long.
>>30158647
Mostly hiding. The amount of explanation beyond "oh you know, this forum on the internet" I'd need to give would cause spaghetti spilling issues under the weight of their judging stares.
>>30158699
Forgot : if some other tankers could share their experience with their own BMS and actual use under fire etc I'd be glad to hear it.
>>30158775
I hear yah. The forum thing is my go-to if I ever get cornered.
>>30158099
Didn't the US/Canadian ADATs system do the same thing?
>>30158839
Most of my normie friends know what 4chins is but not what /k/ is.
>>30158278
Are you joking? I thought the British Army was fairly modernised, I know its not as large as it could be but I was always under the impression than the tech was top notch.
Thats a pretty glaring flaw.
>>30160024
His info's a bit out of date. The very VERY old ones were that. The Mk2's these days are very different.
And of course, the Ajax is only months from service.
The tech is definitely top notch. (Exactor, M270, huge combat engineering fleet, Watchkeeper, Black Hornet, Desert Hawk, AI Rifles, Firestorm Targeters, NLAW, Javelin, Starstreak, ASM, Westland Apache, Wildcat, Ajax, CT40, Vario-Ray, Land-Ceptor, Giraffe Radar...could go on and on)
Just a few of the older fleets (CVRT, FV432) are in the middle of being replaced at the moment.
>>30160133
>The Mk2's these days are very different.
There were hardly any of them made, so no, my information isn't out of date at all. Further, I have never seen any documentation stating that the Mk 2 got a power traverse.
This puts aside the fact that the Warrior STILL doesn't have power elevation.
>>30153533
Link that shit you fag
>>30158699
Hey frenchfag, do you use just a standard hose pipe to clean the tanks at the motor pool? Got any sweet sweet pics of you lot hosing down a tank?
Ever used those high pressure karcher hoses?
>>30160315
>This puts aside the fact that the Warrior STILL doesn't have power elevation.
Still performed perfectly well in four conflicts. Warrior hasn't been found wanting yet. And it gets a beast of an upgrade before any next one anyway, starting next year.
> Further, I have never seen any documentation stating that the Mk 2 got a power travers
The concept has existed for decades, just never had anything of the sort placed in it until more recently.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03071847709421320
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/scimitar-mark-2-light-armoured-reconnaissance-vehicle/
"The Scimitar Mk2 light armoured reconnaissance vehicle is installed with a remote weapon station and optional powered turret solutions for improved lethality."
http://www.armyrecognition.com/united_kingdom_british_army_light_armoured_vehicle/scimitar_mk_2_mk2_mark_ii_cvrt_technical_data_sheet_description_information_specifications_pictures.html
" Targets of all types can be more swiftly engaged thanks to a turret powered solution. "
The current fleet are Mk2's. The older ones were retired.
>>30160718
>B-but the Warrior has done decently
The fact that it hasn't had power elevation is frankly inexcusable for a design which came out in 1980. Yes, it's going to get it soon, but it didn't have one for nearly 40 years. Like it or not, this is a huge negative, and the only reason you aren't hearing more about it is because Warriors haven't done much conventional fighting, and when it did, it occurred in a place where terrain deviation wasn't much of a thing.
>The concept has existed for decades
This does not matter in the slightest. What matters is actual implementation. It was not implemented for fifty years.
>The current fleet are Mk2's. The older ones were retired.
Considering that everywhere I see mentions that only 50 were upgraded, including the sources you just posted, and far more than 50 Scimitars are in service at the moment, I'm going to call bullshit on that one. Unless you can provide a source otherwise, of course.
>>30160979
>The fact that it hasn't had power elevation is frankly inexcusable for a design which came out in 1980.
And yet it performed well in every single conflict it went to. That is the metric that matters in the end. It did the job it was asked to do. It doesn't have to hit some specific checklist that you define for an online discussion. It has to do the job. It did the job. Now as the job's requirements require change, it is changing. To attempt to slam on a vehicle that has performed admirally all this time is nothing short of trying to 'find' complaints to harp on about for pointless reasons on an internet forum as though military vehicles are just some great unseen game of debate about specifics instead of actual vehicles with actual requirements and experiences in reality.
>is because Warriors haven't done much conventional fighting
You and I both know this is utter nonsense.
>This does not matter in the slightest. What matters is actual implementation. It was not implemented for fifty years.
Congratulations on ignoring the rest of the sentence after it, where I explain that in the post itself. /thg/ is about providing information, not shitpost dickwaving about top trumps points and arbitrary checklists like you're angling at. While I was grabbing links that one came up, which may have interested people.
>Considering that everywhere I see mentions that only 50 were upgraded
Having checked myself, that one is fair. 100 Mk2 platforms according to BAEs own newsletter, around 50 odd were Scimitars.
Either way. Again, they performed well in numerous wars, and their replacement arrives next year anyway.
>>30161229
>And yet it performed well in every single conflict it went to.
And I will again repeat the statement that those conflicts which it was used in are hardly the measure of a true conventional war on varied pieces of terrain. Yes, it worked against poorly trained conscripts in the flat parts of Iraq. Yes, it worked in the policing work afterwards in both Iraq and the admittedly far more rugged Afghanistan, albeit against foes with nothing heavier than handheld antitank weapons. That doesn't erase the fact that it lacked power elevation.
>Congratulations on ignoring the rest of the sentence after it, where I explain that in the post itself.
>... and their replacement arrives next year anyway.
Let me put this bluntly. You are attempting to defend a horribly deficient design decision by saying that they thought about changing it. The Soviets thought about getting rid of the T-34's Christie suspension, but that didn't happen, so no one cares about it. Sure, they fixed it on 50 vehicles after 50 years, but that's too little, too late. Stop sucking the MoD's cock and call a goose a goose.
>>30153694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfnPd-Y1ygo
>>30161473
>You are attempting to defend a horribly deficient design decision by saying that they thought about changing it.
Are you genuinely just coming here to try and antagonise people? I said very clearly that I included that link for if anyone found the knowledge that such a thing was proposed long ago interesting. There's plenty of enthusiasts on here, from all countries.
> Stop sucking the MoD's cock and call a goose a goose.
Oh grow up.
>That doesn't erase the fact that it lacked power elevation.
Nor does your arbitrary and overly confrontational internet checklist erase decades of solid service. Yeah, the gun had some weak points that are being addressed. At no point has anyone tried to say it was a world beater, but you're blowing things way out of proportion and getting yourself into a big kerfuffle over an imaginary strawman, mate. Chill the fuck out.
The vehicle's proven itself well, put the rounds down and kept its crew/troops safe from a lot of harm thus far and has a bright future. Thats all that really matters in the end to the men involved in the vehicle at the moment.
>>30161563
Mate, you are trying to excuse the Warrior of not having a power elevation and the Scimitar of not having that or power traverse. I'm absolutely livid about that. The lack of power elevation (and traverse) are incredibly huge liabilities. Firing on the move is not possible with any sort of accuracy. When trying to do long range gunnery, you have to manually readjust for recoil after nearly every shot (that one's straight out of the mouth of a Warrior crewman). This of course completely ignoring the simple fact that it takes longer to lay the gun onto the target. Those are legitimately huge issues with the vehicle design, and you're trying to handwave that away because it was never truly put to the test, and thus did good enough. Why? Out of some patriotic fervour?
>>30161563
>Nor does your arbitrary and overly confrontational internet checklist erase decades of solid service.
What's your point? Solid service doesn't mean it isn't a deficiency.
Plenty of shitty, barely-adequate pieces of equipment have given "decades of solid service" purely because they were operated by people more skilled than their opponents, or were never truly tested.
Why even make these statements, why not just admit that the fire control on the Warrior is archaic?
>>30161639
Again, stop trying to strawman persistently and chill out.
It's not the greatest weapon, but if was as completely vehicle ruining and completely useless as you keep implying, then it would not have had the service it has. It's never had major problems in any front. Could it have been better? Of course. Is it being made better? Yes. Was it enough to get the job done? Sure seems so.
If it were as useless and incapable of combat as you keep implying, there would have much louder voices before now. Its gun laying and lack of stabilisation are now issues in an era where that's no longer acceptable against the perceived threats (as opposed to just trying to top trump allies) that are being corrected with a much MUCH better weapon system. But the whole time it still put out powerful rounds and was a very reliable gun system that had the little bonus of not being too impactful on the turret either. Elsewise, it's proven to be a tough, reliable and mobile vehicle. You can't take one drawback and try to assume the entire vehicle is useless because of it, especially when it has distinctly proven itself in Eastern Europe, Iraq (twice) and Afghanistan every time in its role.
And from now on, all those remaining drawbacks will soon be gone.
>>30161673
>It turns out to be yet another Marder but with audi headlights this time
>>30161763
You'll notice that at no point have I ever said that it wasn't a drawback of the design? Don't put words in my mouth.
I'm saying that it's patently not the world ending ruination of an entire vehicle like people are trying to imply, especially when it's still proven it can get the job done and that it has a much better turret just around the corner too.
>>30161782
Ive been reading through the thread and thinking about it for a while now and I think the other poster is right on this one. There just isnt any excuse for having an IFV without a stabilised gun or power elevation, especially considering most other IFVs in the world had these features (M2 Bradley, Marder, BMP-2 etc).
It was down to pure luck, not a good design that the significant numbers of Warrios have not been lost to enemy fire- the Iraqi´s being ridiculously incompetent and coalition air support and the M1 Abrams mainly dealing with Iraqi armour.
Yeah the 40mm CTA turret makes the Warrior better than other IFVs today in terms of main armament, but its 40 years too late and like I said before, only down to pure luck that nobody has died because of the turret.
>>30161782
>Again, stop trying to strawman persistently and chill out.
Let me ask you what you're doing right now? You're trying to excuse shitty vehicle design decisions. There's no two ways about it. You're saying "Oh, it wasn't really that bad" and "Oh, there was never any real need to do that," or "Oh, it'll all be fixed soon." It was bad vehicle design. Call the goose a goose.
These things, had they been thrust into a major war against competent foes, would have been problematic, to put it mildly. They would have had the disadvantage, something which you should strive to avoid at all costs, lest you get your crews killed. Compared to even the BMP-2, it had a disadvantage in that area. How many men would have died from that? And yet you try and excuse its absence. "Oh, it was just fine without it." Fuck you and your unwillingness to admit that it's a major issue. Yes, it's going to be fixed at some point in the near future, but that doesn't mean it wasn't an issue.
>>30161827
>world ending ruination of an entire vehicle like people are trying to imply
Nobody is implying that. You've tried defending the vehicle, stating information is erroneous, with no evidence of your own claim existing beyond a handful of modernized vehicles.
It's just always been a mediocre vehicle that lacks capabilities that armored vehicles built 20 years prior had. It isn't top notch and never was.
>especially when it's still proven it can get the job done
Only by the grace of god that it never found itself in conflict with people armed with more than RPG-7s and AKs. I mean you realise that similar vehicles have been equipped to defend themselves from helicopters for almost 40 years now, right?
>>30153296
Wait Australia actually has an opportunity to get tracked IFVs? Neat.
>>30162523
No dude it's a wheeled vehicle still. The tracked vehicle replacement component will begin later this year
>>30162565
Cool. I honestly think Australia needs another group of tracked vehicles to operate alongside the Abrams.
>>30153290
>Seems actually rather appropriate during the 100th anniversary of Verdun and near enough to the Somme.
Could you do a thread on Verdun/Somme?
There's so much autism on /k/ about WWI ever since BF1 was announced.
>>30162702
Well our m113as4's are rated against 14.5 but they're still heavily outdated
>>30163366
Seconding, I want those
>lol why couldn't they not charge machineguns
memes to die
>>30153722
>what is that, 90 degree exhaust, for what purpose
the exhaust can be swiveled around, but was designed to point upwards because of the danger of fires of the hot exhaust gases exit downwards or to the side. the leclerc uses a hyperbar engine, a diesel combined with a gas turbine that feeds the engine and acts as an aux gen for the electrics
>>30161823
>still no mass produced Puma
feels bad
new T-72B3 variant Kadex-2016
fitted with 840 hp engine and a remote control machine gun
>>30159499
idk, i am not a US army expert
>>30161531
nice
>>30164068
so it is a diesel engine that have the same hot danerous exhaust as the Abrams, not cool
>>30164387
Wikipedia says vehicles should have started to been delivered in 2014 and there will be 350 in total. Have they cut this firgure again or has the project been delayed?
>>30164484
All diesel engines have hot exhaust.
>>30164775
http://www.janes.com/article/52476/german-army-receives-first-production-standard-puma-aifv
>Germany's Bundeswehr formally took delivery of its first production Puma armoured infantry fighting vehicle (AIFV) from Projekt System & Management GmbH (PSM) on 23 June during a ceremony held at the Unterlüss Proving Ground.
>Under the original plan it was expected that 405 Pumas would be procured, but this has now been reduced to 350, all of which are scheduled to be delivered by 2020. Included in the 350-vehicle fleet are eight driver training vehicles.
>>30153281
woo
tankthread!
is picrelated correct, tan/k/ies? is it really a souped-up T-64 autoloader?
>>30164868
The T-64/T-80 autoloader stores the 2 part ammunition in an L shape.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSzh2Ot2niY
>>30164833
not as bad as gas turbine
pic related is Abrams
>>30155747
it's an aircraft gun. recoil mitigation is present for sure.
>>30164868
that is just a fan made 3d model
nobody outside Uralvagonzavod know what is it look like
>>30164902
Actually they do rival a gas turbines temperature.
>>30164943
Actually it is not just a about the temperature
gas turbine exhaust fume got more velocity to it
>>30164990
it is also mostly hot air by volume
>>30165000
sure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc5CRAF-kNs
>>30165021
You are making the basic mistake of confusing a gas turbine with a turbojet.
>>30164925
>T-64/T-80
>UVZ
Nigger, are you high?
>>30165078
anon ask about the T-14 autoloader and it similarity with T-64 autoloader
T-14 is make by UVZ, anon
>>30160644
There are some automatic hoses at the cleaning station. For initial cleaning fireman-type hoses are available depending on where you are. Even at full-force and at point-blank some freaking clumps of mud just won't go away.
Otherwise, yes we use karcher hoses, and nope, I don't have any pics of me doing that.
>>30164902
How hot are the Abrams exhaust fumes ? It's upward to 400°C in the Leclerc.
>>30165078
Just anther anon, but you must have in mind, that Omsktransmash is a part of UVZ now, so yes:
>T-80
>UVZ
>>30165102
There is no point in using inferior Ukrainian MZ instead of superior Uralian AZ.
>>30165176
Omsk didn't produce new tanks since 91. So again Uralian designs prove their superiority over western siberian junkie town.
Currently at the Parola Tank museum in Finland. Anyone want a picture of something specific
>>30165209
T-64/80 autoloader is obviously faster than T-72
>>30165351
Dunno why thats sideways, posting from a phone so quality is what it is
>>30165351
Just take pictures of everything and image dumb them to their own thread later.
>>30165382
Sure
>>30165367
Wait, before you post any more, crop a little bit of your photos in mspaint, it'll correct the horizontal orientation.
I only know this because /thg/ guy was dumping pics and had the exact same issue.
>>30165367
Holy what happened there ? Meltagun ? Kamehameha ??
>>30165367
any context on this huge hole? look like old 80s T-72 APDSFS
>>30165412
i think it is 3BM-26 projectile from a T-72M
>>30165412
>>30165417
penetration tests
i'll dump and fix these images after i get home
>>30165437
Aaaand i posted the wrong image
fuck
>>30153290
Considering how much the BMP-2 got shit on in Afghanistan, I can't imagine how badly the BMP-1 got shellacked.
>>30164925
>that is just a fan made 3d model
>nobody outside Uralvagonzavod know what is it look like
We have seen patents of the Obj. 195's AL, a modification of which is used by the T-14.
>>30165772
what patent?
the T-90A that was captured by FSA
>>30165849
>the T-90A that was captured by FSA
Someone had blunder'd
>>30165888
wut
same tank, older pic
>>30165900
still an old pic
>>30165901
I didnt even know the FSA had captured a T90A, but I think they were the guys who hit that T90A with a TOW, right?
The first TOW vid, not the most recent one btw.
>>30165922
Russian media first said it was IS
then some FSA claimed that they captured the tank
and there are like shit tons of TOW in Syria so i don't really know which one is which
>>30165772
La sauce ?
This one ?
Right, my friend sent me the pics of the mud incident, small dump on its way.
>>30167274
>>30167289
>>30167327
>>30167342
>>30167356
>>30167274
what is this
laser sensor?
>>30167380
>>30167399
And the aftermath. That's it folks.
>>30167388
MILES gear
>>30167429
>MILES gear
>for tank
that is so cool
even though it is not a real laser warning system
pic related is T-90 laser sensor
part of the Shtora
>>30167429
It looks like it turned out alright then but was there any damage done to the tank?
>>30167637
I don't know. The exterior looks ok. From the look of it I suppose they had to remove the and scrub the hell out of everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUbB7E229HQ
>>30168103
Why can't the modernization ever be complete?
The panoramic sight is great but why use Kontakt 1?!
>>30165172
You forgot the spatulas to remove the tougher chunks.
In Mourmelon, I think it is called SIMPLEX 10
In Canjuers it's another device. Dunno the name though...
>>30165172
>How hot are the Abrams exhaust fumes ? It's upward to 400°C in the Leclerc.
499°C thanks to the recuperator (heat exchanger)
I've read that the Leclerc engine doesn't emit smoke.
>>30169020
It does emit a white-grayish puff if you slam your foot on the accelerator. It's a fairly visible "I'm here come and love me tenderly in the ass" sign, but it's nowhere near the Mordor weather-tier black fog the Emirati version and its German engine bleches.
>>30169020
Quite wrong.
The flow of the exhaust doesn't let smoke cloud to build up.
But on some engines, when you start it you got a smoke puff coming out of the exhaust.
>>30169075
>but it's nowhere near the Mordor weather-tier black fog the Emirati version and its German engine bleches.
Very interesting.
>>30153396
>Can anyone describe what happens when a tank is penetrated by different types of shell? Artillery, ATGMs, KEP, APCBC-HE, etc.
Assuming penetration actually happens? Bad things. Very bad things. The penetrator itself along with sheared-off bits of the armor fly around at hypersonic velocities and high temperatures, and the whole process also involves a sharp spike in internal pressure. Men get grievously wounded and ammo burns and/or explodes. Pic related got lucky.
He's Dorzhi Batomkunuev, a soldier in the 5th Guards Tank *(Brigade? I don't know what they are these days but they descend from 5th Guards Tank Army of WW2 fame) who was in a T-72B when it got hit in Ukraine.
Curious about what it takes to keep a tank running.
If it throws a track, how the hell do you get it back on?
>>30169075
im gonna need some footage/pictures now
>>30169234
In a safe area, the crew gets out and fixes it themselves. In a dangerous area, they sit in place, possibly employ their weapons and/or defensive systems, and wait for a CEV to drag them away.
What determines barrel life of the main gun on a tank? Im assuming its something to do with a mixture of the quality of the metal used in the construction and the ammunition used but I could be wrong.
Also, do rifled guns have a shorter barrel life than smoothbore or is this once again down to quality of the construction and the ammunition used?
>>30153296
>Turkey at its Efes-2016 Combined Joint Live Fire Exercise on May 30 and 31 in Anatolia displayed its Altay next generation MBT, courtesy of Otokar. In addition to the MBT, the Tulpar and Arma AFVs were also on exhibit.
Tulpar looks interesting. Does anyone know anything more than the wiki page?
>>30169284
Quality aside,the barrel life highly depends on the type of ammunition you fire.
The more stressfull the munition is (cf. APFSDS) the less the barrel will last. On the opposite side, an ammunition with lower pressure and lower muzzle velocity will damage less the gun.
Usually militaries talk about the potential left on a barrel. Can't remember the ratios but APFSDS has a multiplier of at least 2-3.
>>30169284
>What determines barrel life of the main gun on a tank? Im assuming its something to do with a mixture of the quality of the metal used in the construction and the ammunition used but I could be wrong.
Chrome-lined barrel or not.
>Also, do rifled guns have a shorter barrel life than smoothbore or is this once again down to quality of the construction and the ammunition used?
Larger contact surface with the bore due to the grooves, way more friction between the rifling and the projectile driving band.
>>30169234
Depends on the damage done and the situation. Pic related, there's nothing you can do but wait for an ARV.
If one of the track element is broken and you have spares, you can replace it, albeit with much sweating and grunting. If the drive sprocket took a nasty blow, ARV once again.
>>30169284
You assume well. A shitty chrome liner could for example flake and then your barrel would be pitted as if it was rusted. I'm not sure of the exact consequences on the round ballistics, but I assume they are not good.
>>30169249
>>30169120
I don't have any unfortunately. Check videos or pictures of a Leopard 2 running, its engine and the Emirati version's are very, very, very close first cousins.
>>30169387
That's a nice T-90A you've got here.
>>30169370
>>30169380
>>30169394
cheers for the responses lads
What happened to the tracks there, did they just snap under stress or did the mud get between the road wheels, idlers and return rollers?
>>30153396
I'm not sure how nice penetration you can get from an artillery shell, it has to be really accurate. But even if there's no penetration shock would be enough to shake everyone causing injuries. Or cause stored rounds to explode.
In case of ATGM hit watch Syrian war videos, if done properly T-72s cook its personnel with turret acting as a pan. Main objective of ATGM is usually causing an internal explosion, that's why they target turret. Even if there is no explosion there will be pieces of copper liner used in HEAT, shredded armor hitting everywhere. Likely to cause fatal wounds.
Kinetic energy penetrators again cause shrapnel to fly inside the tank, killing of crew or disabling specific instruments.
In short, you either get burned, get shrapnel wounds or shrug off and ditch the tank. To be honest I find tank videos the most hardcore of all war footage. Because they walk around like beasts but when they do get shot people coming out from them look really bad. This effect is more important than straight up gore to shock the viewer (demoralize the opponent) in my opinion.
>>30169470
Either 122mm or 152mm hit in Donbass. Doesn't really need to penetrate the armor.
>>30169432
How does that armor work? Empty spaces and all?
>>30169460
The track seems to be intact.
There are two possible causes.
The most likely : mud wasn't evacuated well from the sproket and the mud derailled the track.
Another possibility : Lack of track tension.
>>30169460
There is usually some amount of excess track to leave some margin. If you suddenly apply too much torque it is possible to force some of the teeth out of the track. It looks like they got stuck with track not moving at all and applied too much power too fast. At least that's what I think.
>>30169533
Are you talking about the leo pic I posted or the leclerc one frenchfag posted?I was referring to the one frenchfag posted.
>>30169460
Track tension gets loose more easily in mud or sand. That shit then accumulates wherever it can and then you track is less and less "guided". A mere sharp turn or something like that can end it all.
For my picture, it was a combination of this and stress which made one of the element snap.
>>30169526
>How does that armor work? Empty spaces and all?
KE penetrator or HEAT round hit it.
The explosive plate inside explodes.
Sends the outer heavy metal plate into the KE penetrator or HEAT jet.
>>30169526
>Either 122mm or 152mm hit in Donbass. Doesn't really need to penetrate the armor.
Thanks, I don't think I had seen one hit by a shell before. But he was asking what would happen if there was penetration.
>>30169575
I was refering to the Leo2 picture.
The photo posted by FrenchFag, I heard that the track was not properly tensed.
>>30169526
>How does that armor work? Empty spaces and all?
Multi-stack of bulging plates array and explosive reactive armor with a thick flying plate.
>>30169590
>Sends the outer heavy metal plate
>Sends the outer lightweight metal plate
Fixed that for you. In ERA, the heavier plate is the backing plate.
>>30169249
>>30169120
Took me some time to get my hands on the link but did it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbupGw9VSuU
Enjoy!
>>30169618
>and explosive reactive armor with a thick flying plate.
Thin.
>>30169625
>>30169625
>>30169645
Not necessarily, the Brenus reactive armor made out of BSG1 bricks.
Anyway, thin or thick both plates are supposed to move in order to induce a shearing action on the projectile.
>>30169645
Still thicker than Kontakt-1
What exactly is the advantage of an oscillating turret?
>>30169682
>Anyway, thin or thick both plates are supposed to move
Incorrect because there's more armor underneath that tends to work better when it's not punched by the equivalent of an EFP. The flying plate is always the lighter one, the heavier/thicker plate is always the backing plate.
>>30169726
You have the armament placed very close to the turret roof, you don't have lost space for the depression and recoil.
That means the turret down position leave less silouhette to the ennemy.
The oscillating turret allows to have a reloading mecanism that doesn't require the gun to rally a certain elevation wich simplifies a lot of things.
>>30169736
Just look at BSG1 bricks, dude. That's not a rule.
>>30169612
You heard right. Rookie TC mistake + driver who wasn't paying attention.
