The last thread dug in
101 Dalmatias 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 most important precept in keep in mind regarding the role of the tank arm in the Great War, is that it was by no means, a war winning weapon. As stupendous of an achievement as it was in terms of technological progress, the tank was but in its infancy, as were the tactics to use them. The end of the First World War, came not as the result of a single panacea employed by the Entente - be it the naval blockade, the overwhelming success of the Hundred Days Offensive, the effects of Allied attrition on multiple fronts against the Central Powers, the tank, the plane or victory against Bulgaria and the Ottomans - but with a strangled gasp by both sides over the finish line. Unlike the Cabinet Wars of Enlightenment fame, there were no clearly identifiable diplo-military aims, and in any case, the wherewithal to establish and put them into place. Germany was effectively fighting, by 1918, not for a disputed claim or imperial war goal, but to secure its status as a great power; its allies Austria-Hungary and Turkey were fighting for the means of their very own survival in the post-war order. To lose the conflict, would mean the disintegration of their restive, sprawling empires, being unable to rely on nationalistic interests to secure the stability of the state, and in the worst, but increasingly likely scenario, outright partition. The Ottomans, were the most acutely aware of this, having faced the predations of European imperial ambitions in the past, and Enver, Cemal and Talat Pasha knew that to suffer further partition would finally kill the sick man of Europe. Therefore, it appears quaint, but appropriate to accord the humble telegram more strategic impact in the war’s end than a weapon.
>>29316929
>The Birth of the Land Ship (1/3)
The idea of a mechanised land vehicle on tracks predate the war projects of the First World War, stretching back to even the 19th century, as inventors of all stripes built upon their expertise regarding steam propulsion and locomotive technology to envision vehicles of a more versatile sort. However, the most concrete start to the evolution of the tank in the shape that it would see the battlefield is undoubtedly the formation of the Landships Committee by First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill in February 1915. Soon after an initial phase of organisation and experimentation with various existing frames of wheeled and tracked reference, its operations were soon taken over by the general authority of the War Office in July, leading soon after to its renaming as the “Tank Supply Committee”, a codename for the vehicles in development. In August 1915, crawler tracks manufactured by the Bullock Creeping Grip Tractor Company of Chicago along with full sets of rollers, frames and sprockets, stretched versions of the company’s agricultural products, arrived in Liverpool for assembly. William Tritton and director of the William Foster & Company of Lincoln and his colleague Walter Wilson, a naval liaison with engineering expertise were put in charge of the construction effort of what would become known as the prototype Number One Lincoln Machine. Said machine would finally finish construction in September and achieve mobility at Wellington Foundry. It was not exceptional looking; a riveted steel body with a drum-shaped turret ran on a conventional series of tracks. It incorporated a British Daimler engine and transmission, also derived from agricultural machines. However, performance was subpar, with the roughly 16 tonne weight and shoddy track quality being severe detriments, especially in trench crossing trials.
>The Birth of the Landship (2/3)
It was here while development was stuck in a rut that an enterprising Army officer, Colonel Ernest Swinton, came on behalf of the War Office to observe the proceedings. Tritton and Wilson confided in Swinton of hitherto unrevealed plans for an even more ambitious design, one where tracks appeared to run all around the tank’s body. The advantages would be enormous, especially where mobility was concerned, yet the biggest hurdle was the lack of an adequate British crawler track design, where the Americans led the world in design quality, yet only for agricultural purposes. With the tacit approval of Swinton, the pair furiously worked on a British military grade crawler track design, completed and announced by the 22nd of September 1915. Freed from the constraints of commercial tracks, they were ready to embark on the next phase of design, spearheaded by the curious prototype, now nicknamed Little Willie. Little more than a box on tracks its primary purpose seems to only have been to be able to achieve mobility – there was very little consideration for space in the crew compartment, although understandably so. Even so, performance was meagre, with the mighty Daimler engine producing only 105hp at 1000rpm. In terms of combat applications, it was slated to mount a Vickers 2pdr and a Vickers-Maxim machinegun located at the front of the hull, but plans for weapons did not advance much further than hypotheticals. While its wheel-based steering offered substantially improved control, there was little to no springing in place, which meant a lot of potential shearing along where its components scraped along where its tracks contacted the ground. A “perfected” Little Willie in the form of a wooden prototype was sent to London for inspection, although it is unclear what the proposal looked like at that stage. Nevertheless, it was approved and arrived in Hertfordshire, 1916 for trials.
>The Birth of the Landship (3/3)
From this point on, the biggest debate and point of contention was on what kind of armament to put on the tank. In the end, the Admiralty settled upon existing stocks of weapons, namely the Six Pounder, Single Tube, a 1915 modification of the Hotchkiss 57 mm. It was characterised by a long 2280 mm barrel and a maximum range of 7500 yards at a muzzle velocity of 554 m/s. Two problems confronted the designers regarding the placement of the weapon: the conundrum of how to add a turret to house the gun without affecting the tank’s centre of gravity adversely and the fact that any gun would have to be placed directly above the engine, without room (or even suitable conditions, being next to a white hot engine) for the crew. Upon directive from Eustace d’Eynecourt (a familiar name to those aware of The Old Gang), the designers adopted side sponsons, fitted to a pedestal base offering 100 degrees of fire. To prevent the crewmen (a loader and a gunner for each sponson) being crushed against each other, there were slight differences in the layout of each sponson station, consequently with the port one off by 5 degrees ahead, while the starboard gun could fire straight ahead. The tank in question had many names; the Admiralty still called it Little Willie; it was officially known as HMLS Centipede, but it has also been known by Mother. On 29 January 1916, it gave a live demonstration in front of Hatfield House, conquering marshes, trenches and barriers, to the delight of everyone present, and the peculiar indifference of War Lord Kitchener. 100 machines were immediately ordered, and the Ministry of Munitions now took on the responsibility, along with personnel and advice from the Admiralty.
>On Construction and Other Things (1/2)
Expertise on armour plating already existed by 1916, as the Royal Naval Air Service’s research into armoured cars showed. The pressures of wartime consumption of high quality steel meant that steel sourcing for tankbuilding came from no less than three separate firms already occupied with wartime production (although it should be said Britain nowhere near suffered the shortages that Germany did in 1916). Two thicknesses, 6 and 10 mm plates were needed, the latter for extra protection on vulnerable areas. The steel was cut, drilled and shaped in a soft state, and later hardened through a process that roughly involved heating and then quickly cooling the plate while pressing it flat. The basic shape of the tank was formed through iron scaffolding with armoured panels riveted or bolted on as required. The engine and internals were lowered from above and 26 twin rollers inserted on the frame. Ten of these were fitted with sprung flanges to keep the tracks aligned, and skid rails carried the tracks over the tops of their frames. A toothed idler wheel was installed at the front of the frame on both sides and another wheel meshed with the track links at the back to serve as a drive sprocket. Drive sprockets tended to last for about 20 miles and the tracks usually wore out by 25-30 miles. Two separate firms were allotted tank quotas, with Metropolitan being assigned 75 and Lincoln with 25. 50 more were later ordered, and all came under the umbrella of Mark I tanks. During production, it was found that wartime stocks of guns were far too low for full equipment, so it was agreed that 50 percent would be armed with heavy machineguns, thus leading to the advent of the “male” and “female” distinction. The sponsons had to undergo makeshift modifications to fit the Vickers guns now in place.
>On Construction and Other Things (2/2)
The Mark I, unsurprisingly, but probably disappointingly as well, was incredibly crude. It lacked many of the ergonomic features, practical design tweaks, common sense and component reliability that would become a staple of the superlative British later war tanks, from the Mark IV onwards. Instead, its individual components were liable to fail quite often, and the tracks, a fundamentally important part of the tank’s function were liable to slip off or malfunction. Crew safety was also appalling; for purposes of simplification, a gravity feed mechanism was used for fuel, and thus meant that the fuel tanks were located on the highest aperture of the tank. While a sound idea, in practice, this meant that even the slightest hit along a significant arc of the tank was quite likely to turn the inside into a raging inferno very rapidly. Furthermore, the fact that the petrol tanks were located at the front of the frame with no internal access meant that refilling in combat conditions was an unlikely possibility, and if a tank went nose down into a crater, the fuel supply could be cut off. Spalling was also a fact of life for crewmen in combat rather than a hazard. While supposedly adequate to all small arms fire and some shell fragments, under heavy sustained fire like machineguns, the spalling inside could be just as dangerous. Even worse, it was later found out in trials that grenades on the roof of the tank had the potential to completely immobilise and incapacitate tanks, with severe crew harm too. Thankfully, later Marks of tanks addressed this as soon as possible.
>Into the Breach (1/2)
The first deployment of tanks on the field of battle was druing the 1916 Somme campaign between two villages collectively dubbed Flers-Courcelette, in the early dawn hours of 15 September. A total of 60 tanks had been shipped to France before the start of operations, organised along sections and companies, with four sections of six tanks in each company, on paper, split into equal complements of male and female tanks. By the time of the first tank’s movement at around 5.00 AM, however, only 32 of 49 tanks moved to the front were operational, and thus many sections were only at marginal strength. The main objective for the tanks were to take on the most formidable strongpoints along the length of the two marker villages, and thus assist the infantry in their capture. To this end, there were specific “corridors” of front that were spared from the colossal artillery barrages that preceded the Somme in order to give the tanks clear ground. However, many tankers only had had limited training and experience of wartime use, and poor understanding of the local topography. During the advance, 5 were ditched in shell craters and trenches, 9 broke down and 9 more were unable to keep up with the advance of the infantry, especially as energy and fuel reserves ran low. The final 9, nevertheless, managed to break through enemy lines and do substantial damage, but only along a short section of front. The strategic impact was negligible, and the battle revealed some glaring flaws in the tank’s capabilities. It appeared that female tanks were especially vulnerable to machinegun fire, and all tanks were prone to buttoning, as constant gunfire laced the vision ports and even sent shattered glass into the eyes of drivers. Commanders also were not intimately familiar with their vehicles either; some declared theirs incapacitated over minor damage.
>Into the Breach (2/2)
Three tanks were sent back into action the next day, and were instrumental in the defence of the now British occupied village of Flers against a German counterattack. These tanks suffered grievous casualties, with all three put out of action, one entirely lost with crew due to direct artillery hits. Many of the abandoned and lightly incapacitated tanks on the previous day were recovered in the subsequent days fortunately. Unlike the cadavers of troops that were often collected in ceasefires between trench sections, the carcasses of irreparable tanks were left where they had fallen, and would later be broken up into scrap by German POWs. It was a decidedly inauspicious application of the Little Willie project that had so impressed War Office planners previously. However, Field Marshal Douglas Haig of all people, was especially taken with the merits of new technology, and ordered another 1000 tanks (for my opinion on Haig, see the previous thread). On the 25th, 12 tanks were shifted to the frontline, but only 2 saw combat as the infantry achieved the objectives without their assistance. A later engagement on the day would vindicate Haig’s belief in tanks though, as a single tank took on the mighty strongpoint of Gird Trench taking some 300 prisoners, with Haig noting that “it was the best tank performance to date”. Throughout the rest of the year, tanks only saw limited action as the Somme wound down, but their significance was not lost to the War Office, as they announced an enlarging of tank companies to battalions in October.
>In its Infancy
The early combat record of the Mark I can be interpreted as an absolute failure of tanks to effect great strategic breakthroughs, or as a surprising substantiation of the war planners trust in what was essentially an inordinately crude piece of engineering. In any case, however, glaring flaws were apparent. The trench tails that had been touted to be the lynchpin of steering were found to be fragile obstructions and immediately useless, with their help in crossing trenches of minimal long term effect. The male tanks were heavy and ill-distributed with its weight, and thus had a tendency to bury itself in the soft earth of France, exacerbated by its overly large sponsons. The females were just straight up desultory in their effectiveness, as they were not even able to secure protection against sustained small arms fire, and had far more inconsistent armour quality and thickness than their male counterparts. Mud was an inescapable problem. It made any camouflage pattern obsolete as it spattered over the tank, found its way inside the crew compartment and crevices of the tanks, and even clogged up drives to the extent that some gears were unworkable. The debilitating effects of mud in the components were compounded by poor worksmanship and inexperienced maintenance, and inexperience, above all, proved to be the biggest killer in operations, whether one was inside a tank or not. These flaws were not ignored by the War Office, as we shall see though. To rectify the issues of training, a new facility was built at Bovington Farm.
>The Detour to the Near East
While the colossal battles of the Western Front were still raging, the British and French expeditions to the Middle East remain something of a mystery to many. While the Dardanelles campaign is very well documented, particularly by Turkish and Australian archives, the desert campaigns of Townshend, Allenby and Maude remain maligned topics in discussions of the Great War. While the Lawrencian view of Bedouin cavalry has found purchase in the popular imagination, the Middle Eastern front was just as indicative of modern, industrialised warfare as the west, as the Turks used the full extent of German and Austrian armouries. It was here too that tanks saw action, along with armoured cars. Eight tanks were sent from Bovington in 1917 to the Egyptian Expeditionary Force readying for an assault on Gaza. A number of the detached tanks were sent straight into the breadth of Turkish defences, and were promptly wrecked by direct fire artillery backed by stiff, unfazed Turkish resistance, who had employed similar tactics against armoured cars. Desert conditions were even more trying than France; sand was the ultimate component killer, and the blistering sun did not help the crewmen either. Replacement Mark IVs and the existing tanks then participated in the third assault on Gaza, and this time succeeded quite handily. Unfortunately, in what is either a missed opportunity or understandable logistical decision, tanks were never employed again in the Middle East.
>The Mark II
The Mark II came about as a consequence of Haig’s insistence on 1000 new tanks, for they would need a complement of training vehicles at Bovington. As they were training tanks, it was seen as unnecessary for them to undergo the full armouring process, and thus were assembled from mild steel and boilerplate. They would be built in batches of 50, with 25 males and females, the former being built by Fosters and the latter by Metropolitan. Mark IIs were not that aesthetically divergent from their Mark I counterparts; it added protected loopholes at the side for crew vision and extra escape ports, and due to a wider series of tracks, the tank had narrower cabs with uneven riveting at the top. Tail attached steering wheels were abandoned, as was the hydraulic jack. With regards to experimentation purposes for a better drive train, five Mark IIs were distributed to a variety of firms, and by 1917, three of these prototypes were assembled at Oldbury Testing Ground for trials. One of these, made by Walter Wilson from the development of the Mark I, won the competition with ease, using an epicyclic arrangement in place of the secondary gears. In preparation for the Battle of Arras, and in response to a desperate shortage of tanks, 27 Mark IIs, inadequate for combat duty as they were, got shipped to the Western Front. They were hastily modified, some with different sponsons, makeshift armour and the inclusion of Lewis guns. Performance was less than stellar, with tanks deployed in a piecemeal fashion, attaining success in some sectors and less than stellar performances in others. The famed Canadian assault on Vimy Ridge was not brilliant where tanks were concerned, as they entire detachment got bogged down and failed to assist the troops. Near Bullecourt, D Battalion’s support of the Australian attack was marred by overnight snow, highlighting targets for German gunners.
>The Mark III
The Mark II was the second batch of interim tanks commissioned by Army authorities in the wake of Haig’s request. Like the Mark II, it was unarmoured in the sense that it did not have hardened steel plates. Unlike the Mark II, its existing plates were 12 mm thick instead of 8 mm, making it half a tonne heavier than the Mark II. Visually identical to the Mark II, save its accommodation of the Lewis gun sponsons from the start of the female’s development, many of the male tanks operated with empty sponsons, possibly due to a shortage of the 6pdr that a handful operated with. The advent of the Mark III precipated a formalised training system for new tank recruits, with the instructors learning from the tanks first then passing it down to their crew, with specific features on the newer Marks. One instrumental area of training appears to have been measures to undertake when a tank was stuck in mud or a ditch of some sort, with a variety of tools and improvised solutions in the employ of tankers. One of the more successful solutions was the “torpedo spud”, a piece of round timber with a metal collar around the middle that could be bolted to each track to increase the tank’s traction on the earth around it. This was not just limited to the Mark III, but also became a staple of tanks of varying Marks along the span of the Great War. Of course, this did not obviate the need for spades to extricate a tank.
>>29316929
OP: Hello again all, and welcome to the 101st thread, continuing on the theme of the Great War from last week.
This thread spans the period of early tank development and use up to 1917, and some of the problems as well as successes that the early landships had. Tanks, and the manner in which they were utilised experienced a massive turnaround by late 1917 and early 1918, and they became a pillar of Entente offensive doctrine. Moreover, the assistance of American industry and the increasing efficiency of British manufacturers also meant that tanks of better quality in design and make, could be deployed in larger numbers, and with experience to back them up. Germany, on the other hand, suffering from an abject later of industrial spare capacity, and the commodities with which to feed it under wartime strains and the blockade, was not able to enter the tank arms race until it was too late, and with a design that, while innovative in some limited aspects, did not have a realistic chance of challenging the superlative quality of British Mark V, nor the utility of French designs like the FT-17, both of which continued to be deployed in increasingly large numbers.
I will, however, be a little busy next week, so do expect a thread on late war tanks and more in around two or so weeks. I do apologise for my absence in advance.
>>29317162
More tank news, as per the new format.
The United States Marine Corps has received its first Assault Amphibious Vehicles-Survivability Upgrade (AAV-SU) pattern vehicle from manufacturer SAIC, out of an initial batch of ten. It is expected to serve as an interim measure while the Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) programme gets underway.
At the International Armoured Vehicle Conference 2016 held in London, USMC Colonel John Atkinson, director of fires and manoeuver integration at Headquarters USMC Combat Development and Integration, outlined features of the Ground Combat and Tactical Vehicle Strategy for future procurement by the Corps. The USMC has an existing requirement for 1058 AAV type vehicles to transport 12 infantry battalions, to be fulfilled by the AAV-SU upgrade in Phase 1, then followed by the ACV 1.1 and 1.2 in Phase 2 and 3.
Poland has intentions to replace its BWP-1 and BWP-2 IFVs with more modern tracked vehicles according to the Ministry of Defense. Costing between 20 and 80 billion zloty, it is expected to occur within the span of the next dozen years.
A Thai delegation has reportedly visited the facilities of the KMDB as an observer to Ukrainian operations to fulfil its existing contract for delivery of Oplot-M main battle tanks to the Royal Thai Army. The next batch is allegedly completely ready for shipment, having been demonstrated to the delegation. In addition, a shipment of BTR-3E1 APCs have also been delivered to Thailand.
The Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (OCCAR) has given approval for Lithuania to participate in its Boxer IFV programme. Lithuania seeks to equip two battalions with Boxer vehicles, and this move allows OCCAR to negotiate for Lithuania’s acquisition on her behalf.
And that’s all for now.
Got a couple goodies.
>>29317330
>>29317373
General Dynamics and Boeing have tested a small 2kW laser on a Stryker.
>>29317406
In April the US army will test the vehicle during exercises.
>>29317422
The equipment (blue boxes in picture) would not be needed for a standardized system, this was just a proof of concept on a loaner vehicle so no modifications were made.
I've never opened one of these threads before. I'm glad I did now, this is pretty interesting.
>>29317715
OP does not always write up this much, you got lucky.
Bumping the literally only good trip on /k/ besides OPpenheimer and the planes guy
>>29317715
>>29317985
>>29318279
Yeah /thg/ guy is so based
>>29318601
>>29318609
>"Track maintenance? Pffft.. That's what officers are for!"
>>29318800
Yo Merk, how many years are you in? How much longer will you serve?
>>29318954
I was drafted in November 2013, so that leaves me with about 8 months. 248 days if you want to be precise.
>>29319030
Oh cool cool. Hey what's it like if you wanna re-enlist or something? How is it if you wanted to go career with so many draftees? Also great pics as usual, thanks for sharing
>>29319078
You either go the officer's path earlier in you service, or you sign extra time as an NCO at the end of your 3 years. Re enlisting is more problematic and as far as I know doesn't really happen. I'll still be a reservist for something like 20 years after my discharge, though.
>>29319134
I see. Wait so what rank are you, if you don't mind me asking? That's not you chillin in the photo? >=D So what would you do as a tanker reservist? Do you kinda just become foot patrol, or training on weekends or something? Maybe I should just wiki this instead of bothering you...
>>29319134
>>29319181
Also, have you ever fraternized with some of these pic related rare attractive personnel? I swear female IDF soldiers get posted daily. Most look kinda frumpy in the baggy uniform, but there are definitely some lookers unless tuvan throat singing imageboards deceive me. Also how did you learn english?
>>29319181
>>29319286
Currently a sargeant (getting promoted next week). As a reservist I will be participating in exercises once in a while, probably catch some infantry lines in the territories and participate in whatever war we might have. And no, that's not me in the picture, they are from our company though.
I've been with girls in service before, yeah. There are both good lookers and bad lookers like everywhere else in the world. I learned english in school, obviously.
Also, I think we should cut this here. We are getting off topic and I really this thread any further.
>>29319367
>I really don't want to derail this thread any further.*
>>29317373
It looks like the LAV 6 competing for Australia's Land 400.
>>29319367
Alright, yeah you're right. Sorry for interrogating you but thanks for the info, very interesting and congrats on the impending promotion man. Postin more WWI tonks
>>29318601
>>29318609
>>29318616
Where'd you get these from?
>>29316973
>On 29 January 1916, it gave a live demonstration in front of Hatfield House, conquering marshes, trenches and barriers, to the delight of everyone present, and the peculiar indifference of War Lord Kitchener.
Perfect example of the Victorian era upper-class officer’s disregard for the suffering and mass deaths of the soldiers in the trenches during WWI.
“We don’t want anything to do with these dirty and nasty “tanks”, just chin up and charge head-long into the murderous hail of machine gun and artillery fire!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjwyMGtc8uk
>>29318439
Fuck me is that a He 162? No idea they were that big
>>29319376
>>29319367
Many years from now, there will be an ultimate /thg/ thread and there, at the end of all things, it will be revealed that you were one of those QT girls all along.
Also I wonder how bothersome track maintenance is on your kind of tracks. Pads are a fucking hassle to change and you don't have those so I guess... it's easier ?
>>29318609
>>29318601
Wonder why they went with the greenish hue. Pic is how it looks for us, though my phone camera greatly altered the image quality and slightly changed the colour.
>>29316929
Have any of you got anything like a DIY tank?
Something Renault size I bet would be good for a single enthusiast who wants something functionally correct if not militarily capable (in the modern battlefield). Gun doesn't even matter, but the Renault was just an MG carriage at first, and I assume a braced and mounted large caliber semi-auto gun could do go work there, if you were into that. Even a fucking potato cannon could be very interesting.
But forget about weapons, the tiny tank must become real, and it must be fully bullet proof, and it must be awesome. And hobbyist buildable-affordable.
>>29320007
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9uM3yKqKWg
cool, this one is from a T-72B3, they use Thale camera though
>>29320015
That's pretty nice, but hey, Thales, so no surprise.
Related :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcYFZd8P_UY
>>29320007
Your eyes are most sensitive to green light. You can distinguish the most shades of green. I'm not sure if that's what you meant by the question though.
Also, I want it to be true, Merkgunner was a QT all along, is pic related you? >=P
>I've been with girls in service before, yeah.
Wewlad, some hot, sweaty girl on girl tank aciton
>>29320123
Forgot pic D=
>>29319983
What the shit?
>Korean movie
That makes sense
>>29320123
Oh, ok, it makes sense (our screens are in black and white. And far from the size the Abrams ones.
>>29320007
>Many years from now, there will be an ultimate /thg/ thread and there, at the end of all things, it will be revealed that you were one of those QT girls all along.
Who knows? Maybe I'll make a reavel once I'm out.
>Also I wonder how bothersome track maintenance is on your kind of tracks. Pads are a fucking hassle to change and you don't have those so I guess... it's easier ?
I don't know how tough pads are to maintain, but pins aren't great fun either. You can make your job easier by flushing it with lube, though.
>>29320173
Pleease pleeeeeease be true
>>29320011
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Semple_tank
>>29320028
Reminder that the Russians would not eveb have decent night vision in their T-72 and T-90 if the fucking French government didn't sell it to them starting in the 2000s. Yeah, Russian tankers will pop you using Thales night vision systems, because the French government decided a job program is more important than not committing treason against NATO.
>>29320200
At least we can hope, knowing the French, they've put a Trojan horse in the night, like in any tech they ever sell foreigners, like how they've put kill codes in Exocets before selling them to the Argentinians. When the British begged for assistance against Exocets, suddenly the French were like "Oh the Exocets well all you have to do is constantly broadcast this long digital passcode on this frequency, and the missile will just shut down". So I can see this happening with the nightvision systems "Oh the nightvision blocks we sold to the Russians, funny you're having trouble with that, all you need is to put up an IR emitter and have it flash this long passcode and the nightvision block will self-disable."
One can hope.
>>29320213
Got a source on that Exocet story? I know a few or possibly all did not detonate. Still managed to sink a ship though
>>29320246
Exocet killcodes is a very long running pile of bullshit that has never had the slightest scrap of evidence presented in its support. What the French shared with the British was just about all the technical information on the missile, ie it's flight profile and operational limitations, which ultimately didn't really tell them a great deal new.
Also offhand I don't recall whether there were issues with Exocets failing to detonate, but you may be thinking of the bombs that failed to go off due to being dropped too low, causing their fuses not to prime, which in turn was caused by the Argentine pilots having to fly lower than they were supposed too in order to not get shrekt by the RN AA.
>>29320198
But it's a pos.
>>29320274
A few, I think 2 failed to detonate, some ship crew claimed 1 did though, but wiki says 1 definately did
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exocet#Operational_History
But yeah, killcodes definitely sounds dubious.
Okay, posting armor because off-topic sorry
>>29320200
Russia have better night vision on their tank
what they lack is thermal, in the 80 and 90, only T-80UK have thermal
>>29319971
>“We don’t want anything to do with these dirty and nasty “tanks”, just chin up and charge head-long into the murderous hail of machine gun and artillery fire!”
>I've based my entire opinion of those in charge from episodes of Blackadder
The fact that they even bothered developing a Landships committee etc shows that they were actively seeking a solution to the problem of stalemate.
>>29320304
about 120mm mortar
Ruskie are replacing their 120mm Nona wit pic related
in 2017, the tracked version will be ready for testing
>>29320200
Well first of all, screw Nato*. Big time. Thoroughly. Without exchanging names first or buying chocolate and flowers. No lube.
Secondly you're half-wrong, it's Sagem which makes the thermal sights of the T-90.
Thirdly, Russian tankers will not pop me at all, because in the real world outside of the Pentagon fantasies, small-scale conventional war between France and Russia is not a reasonable expectation, and in the event of thermonuclear war, I couldn't care less about who is popping out who because I'll be with my family waiting for the end.
Fourthly, we did stop the Mistral deal, didn't we, out of solidarity ? I don't remember the Brits doing anything against the russian money sleeping in the City, or the Germans slashing down on their oil deals, so thanks for the passive-agressive lecture against our government but no thanks.
And finally, on behalf of our government**, my apologies for having an independant diplomacy and selling whatever we want to whoever we want. We can't all be Nato's tiny bitch.
*The French government does not endorse this opinion.
**The French government has not granted this poster the right to speak on its behalf.
The T-90 obj 1992 that took a TOW in Aleppo
>>29320566
higher res
>>29320595
and an even better res pic
>Thirdly, Russian tankers will not pop me at all, because in the real world outside of the Pentagon fantasies, small-scale conventional war between France and Russia is not a reasonable expectation
I am sure that is comforting to you, but it is not Pentagon fantasies making your neighbors to the east nervous.
>>29320702
>but it is not Pentagon fantasies making your neighbors to the east nervous.
it is
the world would be much better without the bombing of Serbia, and the invasion of Iraq
no refugee, no ISIS
>>29320716
>Serbia dindu nuffin
I am surprised you did not blame NATO for Libya as well.
>>29320213
>they've put a Trojan horse in the night, like in any tech they ever sell foreigners, like how they've put kill codes in Exocets before selling them to the Argentinians. When the British begged for assistance against Exocets, suddenly the French were like "Oh the Exocets well all you have to do is constantly broadcast this long digital passcode on this frequency, and the missile will just shut down
Except none of this statement is true at all.
>>29320393
> I don't remember the Brits doing anything against the russian money sleeping in the City
Most of those guys have been sanctioned already. The issue is that many of them cannot legally be challenged, London's such a massive nexus for money that virtually everyone has something running through other countries, and thus it can't be touched. For example, you know Alan West's company? Thats got Russian money in it, but that can't be touched because then the UK would be sanctioning British companies.
It's probably going to be a small factor in the next election, and likely woulda gotten bigger press if it weren't for Google tax evasion and shit making more headlines.
tl;dr - Attempts were made, but it's buried in beaurocracy.
For what it's worth, I'm not hugely bothered by the Sagem sights being sold. NATO almost certainly won't be warring with them, and it's money. Same reason I'm okay with us selling Typhoons to the Saudis.
Irn Bru Challenger for humour's sake.
>>29320735
sure, they fucked up Lybia for no good reason too
and look all the Lybia refugee in Spain and France right now
>>29320765
France was the main reason for Libya.
>>29320702
Quite, but that wasn't the point. And besides, I understand their concern, but I still do not see war between UE/NATO members and Russia in the near future. Note that I'm fully aware that Russia acts as a drunken bully with them and that it should be kept in check and the baltic states/poland need to be reassured we have their back. I just don't see that devolve into actual warfare.
>>29320757
Makes sense. I mean, we did back down for the Mistrals but we did manage to circumvent the embargos/sanctions to allow Thales to keep doing business with them.
>>29320614
Awesome, and no to the the other side. From there it looks like a piece of ERA is missing, maybe that's where the missile hit and the ERA did its job ? I don't see penetration.
Godamnit, I never thought I could love and the same time hate a place so much.
>>29320765
who cares about libya
they are muslims
The marxists love importing foreigners, so that alone is a good reason for them to start civil wars & destablize nearby countries
>>29320833
the TOW hit near the main sight, T-90 have two sight, the one in the front is the main day sight, the one on the back is the night/day sight. you can see in that pic one of the sight is broke by the force of the explosion
there is no ERA there where the TOW hit
>>29320833
>Russia acts as a drunken bully
lol
as opposed to NATO
?
>>29320854
>plastic glass
>piece of rubbish in front of the tank on the right
Damnit Merk get your crew to police the area !
Also why the complicated relationship to this place ?
>>29320854
you flipped a tank there?
>>29320887
The scenery is amazing, and I truly believe it's one of the most beautiful places on the planet, but there are so many shitty memories here it's not even funny.
>>29320889
Nah. I didn't manage to flip a tank yet.
>>29320875
Last time I checked NATO wasn't practicing nuclear strikes on border countries.
>>29320875
>muh poor babu russia did nuffin wrong!
>>29320872
Say this happened to an Abram or any other western tank. Would it break the sight too?
>>29320939
sure, HEAT create greater shock wave than HE
if the armored shield infront of the lens isn't closed, it will break the lens
same tank, pic was took in 20th December
>>29320924
Instead they do actual illegal drone strikes all around the world
While activing undermining their host countries
>>29320872
MH ok. Well, a piece of ERA is definitely missing, the one between the Shtora thing and the main gun. Of course it might have been blown off by the explosion without a direct hit. Damn the photographer for not taking another pic from the right angle, heh.
>>29320875
I did not imply that. Also, 1) this is not a zero-sum game, you can have several bullies at the same time 2) others being assholes do not excuse you for being an asshole.
>>29320939
A direct missile hit ? Absolutely.
>>29320989
there should be a better pic some where, but it isn't uploaded
>>29320861
they are Arab but not Muslims
Assad isn't muslim ethier
>>29321022
you're some special kind of stupid, aren't you?
>>29321002
Yeh, hope it's going to surface soon.
>>29321022
>Assad isn't muslim ethier
Assad is an Alawite, so yeah. That makes him a muslim.
>>29321044
i saw he go to church and such
>>29321087
>French tank
>British flag
>French gun in hand
>British Paratrooper
>French kit
>British camo
What the fuck am I looking at here?
>>29321126
UK paras wearing French MILES gear and training alongside French tankers in our main Urban training grounds.
>>29321147
CENZUB?
Was very disappointed the Leclercs couldn't come out to play while the Challies were over.
AMX-30s provided some entertainment though. All I can say is, they are sneaky fuckers.
>>29321167
CENZUB indeed.
You guys brought challies 2 ? Omfg there was a possibilty of joint tank training and we did not grab it ?
I'm so mad right now. Do you have any more pics ?
>>29321087
Why not have a towed "chariot" so they are not so fucking exposed huddling behind a tank
What is this, ww1?
>>29321194
Sure thing. This pic was taken from CENZUB too. I'll have a look for any videos.
>>29321204
Slav method is far more better, even the American use it
>>29321194
>>29321211
Found a video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNMQ3NP_0P8
I'm certain there were other ones showing Challengers ramming through barricades. There were...a few concerns afterwards about some of the dozer blade rams that took place on things they weren't actually supposed to do it on. Woops. Sorry about that.
>>29321261
>>29321194
Found another Chally 2 at CENZUB.
They did love their dozers while out there.
>>29321204
>exposed
>behind a tank
Pick one.
If you're not a complete and total fuckup, you have the tank facing towards the enemy and the infantry can advance, using the tank as cover.
If it was a stupid idea and didn't work, they wouldn't have been doing this for almost a hundred years.
>>29321370
Just because its done, doesn't mean it can't be done better.
Usually the tank is advancing by itself because it's 2016 and we don't just throw away peoples lives.
>>29321461
>>29321370
>>29321204
It's usually an urban combat procedure. The tank offers mobile cover/concealment while advancing down a street, the grunts provide rear protection.
>>29321370
>>29321461
need more heavy IFV
>>29317473
>>29317422
>>29317406
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww-nAv63PaQ
>>29321789
>Army wants to turn their ground vehicles/artillery into SPAAG's
how come you people laughed at me when I said this before
>>29321909
What they are testing, and what you suggested, are very different things.
>>29321924
I don't see how
Not much difference between lasering a target at 3km to shooting it with your vehicles main weapon
>>29321968
Setting aside the FCS requirements to hit a very small flying object at 3km with a gun, specialty ammunition to increase the Pk, cost per shot, so on and so forth.
>>29322018
But the FCS to keep a laser steady on a small maneuvering target at 3k is nothing huh?
Thats just electronics upgrades & networking, stuff they've needed to do for a long time anyways.
If they had programmable airbursting rounds, they'd discover they are useful against all sorts of targets.
>>29322075
>But the FCS to keep a laser steady on a small maneuvering target at 3k is nothing huh?
Having your shot travel at effectively instantaneous speeds greatly simplifies things.
>>29320614
Well that confirms the expected external damage (gunner sight, ERA and Shtora). Too bad its taken at an angle where the barrel hides the actual impact site.
>>29316929
Does anyone have any links to download books about tanks like jane's or The World Encyclopedia of Tanks & Armoured Fighting Vehicles?
>>29321052
Have you had to clean camo-netting from the tracks at any point? We managed to lock up the track of a Leo2 with one of those thermal-camo nets one time, absolute pain in the ass to get it out.
>>29322801
No, but I feel your pain...
>>29320716
Right, and I suppose you think the wholesale massacring of Kosovars and Bosnians were a good thing?
>>29320320
??? Really? Hmmmmm... is the T80UK thermal Russian produced?
>>29317373
>>29320566
>>29320595
>>29320614
Where the hell do people get these pics?
>>29320393
That makes me curious. In your opinion, what is France's stance with NATO? I mean there was the whole screw NATO deal in the cold war but what do you feel the relationship is like now?
>>29317373
>>29317406
>>29317422
>>29317473
All very interesting information. So the 30mm Strykers will be a thing a year from now. Always a plus.
As for the laser, sounds like an anti-drone measure. That would be VERY handy, if you don't want Ivan finding you and then erasing your gridsquare. If you had to ask me, probably a single vehicle in a company. More likely a platoon in a battalion, but attaching one per company.
>>29324298
I managed to trace it back to some vk page (warpolitik or something), but who got it and uploaded it... no idea.
>>29324337
Mh, the official stance is we're best friends working together yadda yadda. Now, what do our higher-ups think about it, I'm not sure, as they would not disagree openly. There are officials (politicians) who were strongly against our re-joining of the central command in 2009. Some still are. It's seen as a loss of independancy because some perceive NATO to be the USA's instrument. And they don't feel the need of the alliance/US's umbrella as would the Baltic states, because we don't have any threat on our borders and we're a nuclear power.
As for me, I'd rather have UE states get out of NATO and form a proper military alliance instead of the pathetic half-assed abomination they call the Europe of Defence.
>>29320716
>bombing Serbia is why Lavvy Boii keeps reminding the Czechs that they will get nuked
You're delusional, just like everyone in the Orthosphere
>>29321022
>[insert muslim sect here] isn't muslim!
This is what buttmad sunnis ACTUALLY BELIEVE
>>29324095
yes, Soviet was working hard on light intensifi, they were light year ahead of the west
Soviet first operational tank thermal sight is the T01-P02-01 "Agava-2" in the T-80UK, it make by Belarusia.
>>29324298
i got it from the Slav version of 4chan
>>29324656
Agava-2 viewfinder next to the main gunner sight
>>29324698
Agava-2 viewfinder for TC
>>29324472
Are you saying you don't like me because i'm a burger? I thought we were friends you baguette eating faggot.
>>29324737
i tried burger one
it is suck
>>29324737
Wow chill dude. National politics has nothing to do with personal relationships. You should be grateful for all Frenchfag has brought to this board for so long.
>>29324737
Nah, it's not out of misplaced hate or spite or whatever against the US. But I believe in a strong E.U. with enough clout on its own. We have the human, financial, etc potential to be n°1, and it's frustrating to see it squandered because none of us has enough hindsight or vision to go beyond mere national interests.
In any case we'd still be cool, burgerbro.
>>29324898
I feel like that's sort of an odd sentiment honestly. There's no particular reason a region with such varying cultures should feel any urge to unite.
>>29324995
Achieve the critical mass needed to compete. How far should unity/integration etc go is obviously a matter of debate, but that's the underlying principle in my point.
I feel we're slightly veering off-topic, though.
>>29324839
I do believe he was joking, anon.
>>29325053
Euro Tank soon? Which parts should come from where according to you, oh Frenchiest of the fags?
>>29325053
Yeah I definitely fell for that one. Gotta watch my /edge/ Oh well I got too defensive of my sexy sexy frenchfag
What happened to that Leclerc? Did they save it? Is turtle leclerc kill?
>>29325100
Is he Frenciest of the fags or faggiest of the French? I really want him to giggle "I'll never tell, tee-hee" then swirl around, finger on the corner of his mouth
>>29325100
Soon, no, I don't believe so. Now about the parts... I don't know enough of the Leo2 to be able to compare and decide. Let's see :
- chassis : the Leclerc suspension is excellent, I'd take it over torsion bars but that don't mean the Germans can't pull off a better hydropneumatic system. The engine, I'd say both, because the Leclerc engine is awesome and Germans have a stellar reputation in that regard.
- turret : I'd say French optics and German main gun, but to be honest it's because of the cliché or German steel, I have no idea how close to reality it is. Let's split the mechanical parts for Germans and electronic stuff for us.
Can't really say more, it would depend on the design choices I suppose (autoloader or not, etc).
>>29325164
>I really want him to giggle "I'll never tell, tee-hee" then swirl around, finger on the corner of his mouth
these frenchfag fan fictions are becoming alarmingly specific
>>29325144
It took a sharp turn and the side of the track wasn't prepared for that kind of punishment. It's a pretty old story, I have no more details than that.
>>29325164
You are now aware that nope.
I'll dump the rest of the toppled Leclerc pics.
>>29325264
>>29325211
Lol okay, I'm done now.
On another note, what happens with the NBC systems on tonk? Info on different tanks appreciated. Do you seal all hatches, then throw on gas mask and flip on an NBC system? Do you have a full MOP suit or just a mask? Could you open the hatch (to do repairs or idk some reason to go outside) then come back inside and purge the system or once sealed, never open hatches, even in emergency?
>>29325053
>>29325323
>>29325376
>>29325438
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMq7rTo7C6M
Where can I find those pics of abandoned tanks with greentext in the pic itself?
>>29325100
>German L55 Rhienmetall 120mm Smoothbore with DM61 and LAHAT
>Nexter Pattern Autoloader
>Sagem Sights
>BAE Active Hydropneumatic Suspension
>French engine and gearbox
>British Dorchester Armor
>British Boiling Vessel
>German AMAP-ADS
>British ISTAR Suite from Ajax
>German FCS
>British Open Network Architecture
>French tracks
Tack on a Norweigan Protector RWS and Swedish Barracuda covers and you have one hell of a tank with a fair share of tech from all three "big" nations for tonks in the EU. And it uses entirely existing technology. Roughly following the tone of Germans providing the firepower and modular systems, British providing the armor and battlefield awareness systems and French providing the mobility and precision elements.
>>29320336
Is that stuck?
>>29320352
Half track?
>>29325364
> what happens with the NBC systems on tonk?
read "Total System": http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/army/fm/3-4/Ch6.htm#fig6_6
then scroll down to "Hatch Vehicular System Without an Air Lock" and read that, too.
pic related, the "ventilated facepiece": the M25 gas mask
>>29325669
the archive
>>29326182
Not seeing that one...
>>29325726
>LAHAT
the LAHAT is a meme round. it basically doesn't exist, the myth is merely kept alive by people on the internet who wish tanks fired missiles out of their gun barrels.
just ask merkgunner. I believe he's stated in the past that he's never even seen one LAHAT and his entire job revolves around squirting rounds out of a tank gun.
>>29316961
>METAL BAWKSES
>>29326154
Thanks for that anon
And fuck any sort of NBC environment. There are so many important procedures to follow, you just know shit's gonna get fucked in the field. There's just no way.
>>29325726
>L/55 Rhienmetall gun
I know its great and all but cmon guys why not get a new gun, perhaps one that utilizes ETC or go up to 140mm.
>>29327230
because tank autists gonna autist
>>29326311
>THE COWARDS! THE FEWLS!
>>29327230
Can anyone explain ElectroThermal Chemical ignition better? How does the plasma cartridge "increase predictability and rate of expansion of propellants"? Does it use conventional propellant or some sort of hybrid?
Hey anyone have photos or video of reloading smoke grenade launchers? Do ya generally just stuff em in?
>>29328393
>>29328520
You just stuff them in like so
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=R_Q0q6wD5jYC&pg=SA2-PA401&lpg=SA2-PA401&dq=reloading+smoke+grenades&source=bl&ots=PrNjSmAoex&sig=QSnC94CFhTVaakR2E1seK7R46VI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiiss2v-tDLAhVmHqYKHdh5CKoQ6AEILjAF#v=onepage&q=reloading%20smoke%20grenades&f=false
>he thinks tanks of today aren't the battleships of WWII
>>29329392
Given how tanks are still used in their intended role while battleships rarely did, no.
>>29329595
Battleships still played a huge role in WWII dumbshit.
>>29329649
Yeah, mostly AAA escort and shore bombardment.
>>29329392
Who are you referring to? There's a reply function you know.
>>29329734
Wrong wrong wrong. But nice meme.
>>29329649
With less than a handful of exceptions, not in their intended role.
>>29329734
aka they're the tanks of today
>infantry escort and urban bombardment.
Something rare for you.
I have only seen these two shitty pictures of Patria made prototype for the competition in which CV-90 was chosen for FDF. DELCO LAV-25 turret was used in this prototype from earlier prototype. In the end this vehicle lost to CV-90 and it is stored somewhere in Patrias factory.
>>29329753
How many BB on BB engagements happened?
>>29329774
Another pic
>>29329765
More meming. Their intended role was their threat.
Look up "fleet in being" and you'll understand far more about naval strategy in both world wars, and the interwar period. Battleships served a crucial role, even if that didn't mean head to head direct combat.
Hell, the Bismarck scared the vaunted Royal Navy like they'd never been scared before.
>inb4 a biplane took it out
>>29329776
Quite a few actually. But that's a non sequitur. Fleet in being. See >>29329803
>>29329791
more proto pics
>>29329819
more
>>29329829
And final picture. This prototype is IMO the most interesting one of them all. BMP-1 with LAV-25 turret.
>>29329844
If anyone has any questions regarding FDF, I might be able to answer them. Quite boring day will be ahead of me.
Pic is every tankers nightmare.
>>29329890
Have fun.
>>29329811
>Quite a few actually
9 times between 1940 and 1944, 2 of which were chasing down the Bismark.
>>29329753
>how battleships were actually used during the majority of the war
>meme
If it wasn't for the Vichy French you could count the number of battleship slug outs on one hand.
>>29329803
Fleet in being only works if your opponent has a fleet which is markedly inferior. When you've got someone who can make a fight of it, it flies completely out the window. Germany found this out to its detriment.
>B-but muh Bismark
While scary, would never have made a big impact in the war. It's only one ship. Even if it sank a handful of convoys, the result would be the same. It would be hunted down and killed, most likely by aircraft.
>B-but Jutland
Exploding Battlecruisers besides, the Germans could never have won. They were at too much of a deficit in numbers.
But all that's besides the point. We're talking BB use in WW2. The Germans had no credible threat.
As such, for a proper naval war you have to look in the Pacific. Which, if you didn't notice, is strangely lacking in BB on BB engagements.
>>29329811
>Quite a few actually
In the Pacific there was a grand total of two. In the Atlantic, there were not many more.
>>29330187
>>29330187
>>29330265
Man, that's pretty.
>>29326295
>by people on the internet who wish tanks fired missiles out of their gun barrels.
but slav have their barrel launch ATGM, and they work
>>29319971
Now if you've read anything that /thg/ guy has written on WWI before, you'll know that's not true.
>>29330265
>>29331178
>>29331181
>>29331191
Wow Merky, this are very beautiful, you're right. What kind of field is that? Is it just wild growth?
>>29331279
That's wild growth.
>>29317096
>>29317140
>Explicitly designed training tanks
>Send them into combat anyway with full knowledge they wouldn't be protecting jack shit
I mean, I know Great Britain was running out of war material and all, but jesus that's going into the really desperate range
>>29324337
>Frogs going to Africa solely for the pretty pictures.
>>29331560
>they know
SHUT IT DOWN!
>>29321052
What are these?
>>29331597
baguette-storage and something something fromage
>>29331597
White flag storage and fondue set.
>>29331597
Snorkle and croissant stowage
>>29331597
All jokes aside, they look like they're just bits of random shit strapped to the turret to break up the outline. Like the wooden box on the turret's cheek and the other one by the optic.
New tank chat:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rUocSj2dHc
Previous one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FafvSJDEfwA
Somebody placed a HD cam on one of the new Norwegian CV's. Shows of the new chain-gun coax quite well. Almost makes me miss the place.
http://cdn.tu.no/vr/cv90/index.html
>>29331842
same place and units, except someone went overboard with the PR and pyrotechnics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Gx6KoertYM
>>29316929
Thank you for posting everything with the excellent photos. I really enjoyed reading up on these early tanks.
>>29329769
>infantry escort and urban bombardment.
wat.jpg
>>29331842
>>29331892
thank you anon. This effectively satisfies my tank fetish for today.
https://2ch dot hk/wm/src/2061375/14585599637820.webm
what happen
>>29331979
Yeah, is the video new? Can anyone translate? I especially wanna know what that guy says when he steps in front of the camera. Looks like he's making a joke
>>29331979
probably just another epic jewish tank crew failure
upsidedowntonk.png
>>29332062
Lol, but you know I can found an upside down tank from just about every country. Abrams, t-72, whatever. Hell Frenchfag posted some pics of an upside down Leclerc in this very thread. Not his, just some photos floating around
>>29331191
What t0nk do you serve in? Mk 4? Mk 4m?
>>29329376
Wow thanks, that whole manual was awesome
>>29331562
Quick! We've been had!
Come in Frenchfag! They're onto us!
>>29331560
This is Mali, right?
>>29332039
those are Mk-4 with trophy, so i think this is a new video
>>29332158
>Frenchfag gets deployed innafrica
>get pics of Leclerc innadesert
>>29320323
>>29316929
Was it true they vented the exhaust internally ? If so, why?
>>29332267
I'm fairly sure it was intentional. You have to remember that, by this time, making an engine move around and do things was still a relatively new concept. Between it being an incredibly advanced piece of technology for the time, questionable craftsmanship and design choices on the industrial scale, and less than optimal battlefield conditions, it's not beyond reason that you'd have problems with your exhaust system.
>>29331979
An old Mk.2 went up in flames in a repairs shop. The incident is under investigation.
>>29332039
>"A tank is going up in flames."
>>29332107
Merkava Mk.4.
>>29331941
no problem, anon.
>>29332322
What's the hardest thing about your job ? Also, most interesting story during your service?
>>29332322
7th division?
What are your yetsiot?
Are the memes true? Is daily/weekly maintenance such a nightmare?
Have you fought in the last gaza war? Any stories?
Do new recruits get the Mk. 4 in the 7th division?
T. Israfag Sadirnik that unironically thinks about joining armored corps through tofes 55
The Merkava fire.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=ll5_pxfGXXw
>>29332603
Also, how are the people there? Are there any arsim
>>29327230
The entire point of the summary was to use only broadly existing components to demonstrate possibilities. Currently, those guns don't exist in any prwacticality, 140 was already dismissed as being impractical, the new 130 isn't made yet and ETC has yet to form a gun in the EU.
>>29326295
Again, it exists. Summary was just to highlight what elements could come from which nation, and it can be done, in reality it likely wouldn't get added.
>>29331597
Snorkle and I think it's a plain old wood pallet.
>>29332158
Hey that's actually me rubbing my eye.
Also, Africa can be beautiful, there's no denying that.
>>29332205
Well there are Leclercs in the UAE, so desert pics are available. Not mine though. Not... yet. Hehe.
Pic related. That's one of ours though.
>>29332322
Very nice pics as usual !
>>29326295
I don't think that it's as much of "doesn't exist" as it's "doesn't used".
And what you would use it for? To blast away Ahmed and his 40 goats? LAHAT is expensive, over-complicated and a general overkill for your day-to-day COIN. In Merkgunner's case, it's an overkill even for the armored threats that do exist in the area (aside Egypt's Abrams-s, but Egypt isn't a de-facto threat).
I don't jerk over the LAHAT, but if you ask me, I believe there is still a warehouse somewhere that stacks them and takes care of them until the day that they're needed
>>29332603
Not him, but I had similar questions to my friends and we discussed their service quite a lot, so this is what I can tell:
> Is daily/weekly maintenance such a nightmare?
It sucks, but you just get used to it and it just stops bothering you.
> Have you fought in the last Gaza war?
Yes, Merkgunner fought in Gaza. Didn't save any of his stories though (and he's not overly talkative about it).
> Do new recruits get the Mk. 4 in the 7th division?
Yes, I think.
If you're planning solely on form 55 to get you out, might as well use the paper to wipe your ass- cause that's what your commanders will do with it. If you're a 'jobnik', it's a bit easier and you just need to harness the entire system (Tash, Shalishut, high ranking someone, etc.) into the "I want to do something meaningful... contribute far more... armored is the place where I will fit best and make the best of my service..." spirit.
If you're 'kravi', well... I wish you good luck and that you'll keep me a ticket to the movie you're living in.
It's not a particularly successful design. What do I love so much about the BMP?
>>29321243
Until everyone gets shot off the tank.
>>29329890
What is your opinion on the MT-LB? Do you have any modernized variants?
>>29324995
UK here, we're not that different from the any other part of the EU when it comes down to it, I agree with Frenchie, we should form our own real force and integrate better. Sure we already have various commitments in place and you be sure as shit if anyone invaded any part of the EU they'd get fucked up pretty bad even without Amerifat help, but it just doesn't feel like we're letting go of the burgers hands.
>>29333955
I dont know, I feel the same for the BMD-series
>>29333666
>a plain old wood pallet
Oh. Now i see it.
>>29330677
>but slav have their barrel launch ATGM, and they work
you've totally misunderstood my post. go back and read it again.
>>29333605
>Again, it exists.
you've totally misunderstood my post. go back and read it again.
>>29333787
>I don't think that it's as much of "doesn't exist" as it's "doesn't used".
this is exactly what I was driving at.
yes, somewhere in israel is a warehouse with some boxes of LAHAT sitting around. but that's it. they are not put in anyone's tanks and actually used.
the picture I posted is what the LAHAT is today - a surface to air missile that can be fired from helicopters and UAV's. the dream of shooting LAHAT out of tank guns is basically dead for the moment.
>>29333955
>It's not a particularly successful design
nope, the Fin use it, so it is good
>>29333955
why?
lack of armor
there are plenty up armor kit for BMP-2 even from the 80
fire power?
2A42 is more than what you need, you can only ask for more accuracy
Soviet tier ergonomics?
it is a myth
>>29331597
pallet, and some sort of combat-foie gras dispenser
>>29333955
>BMP
>not successful
it's the most-used IFV in the world.
>>29335104
Armor kits are available, but they still offer nowhere near the protection of a western IFV. Their poor sensors and fire control make them suffer even against insurgents, they were destroyed in the hundreds practically everywhere they fought. Israel, Afghanistan, Chechenya, Iraq, and now Syria.
2A42 is not an accurate autocannon and it doesn't fire rounds with an awful lot of firepower either. Even .50 caliber SLAP rounds offer comparable penetration.
The AT-5 it carries is not effective either, even for it's time. While the TOW could frontally destroy most Soviet armor, the AT-5 would always need a side hit to do any damage.
For what it does, transport troops and shoot things, it's fine, but it's decidedly inferior to the Bradley, the Warrior, and many more western IFVs.
>>29335163
That's because it's cheap.
>>29320015
LOL M1s had better thermals in early 2000s.
>>29335169
>Armor kits are available, but they still offer nowhere near the protection of a western IFV
what is this western level of protection then, withstand 30mm
>2A42 is not an accurate autocannon
effective range is 1000 for point target and 4000 for area target. Inaccurate? i think not
>Even .50 caliber SLAP rounds offer comparable penetration
3UBR8 can penetrate more than 70mm of RHA at 1000m, and it make bigger hole than .50 SLAP
not to mention 3UOF8 HEI
at top ROF, BMP-2 can deliver 500g of high explosive per second dowrange, killzone per round is 12m.
>The AT-5 it carries is not effective either
Yemen just rekt a M1A2 Sep this year with AT-5,
so AT-5 and TOW are compareable because they can both rekt obsolete tank.
>decidedly inferior to the Bradley, the Warrior, and many more western IFVs.
greater fire power, better mobillity
and most of those western IFV haven't capable of survive an ATGM hit any way
>>29335360
>M1A2 SEP
>M1A2S
Pick one. Also the crew can be seen around the tank after the ammo cooks off.
>>29335360
>greater fire power
30x165mm is on par with 25x137mm.
And Saudi Arabia does not have M1A2 SEP, they have old M1A2's and M1A2S's which have updated electronics.
Sorry for late reply. Posting throughout an exercise.
>>29332359
>What's the hardest thing about your job ?
Winter. Definitely winter. Winter and tanks just don't go well toghether. Everything becomes instantly shittier.
>Also, most interesting story during your service?
Hmm.. I don't know. Not the greatest story here. I guess Protective Edge was the peak of my service when it comes to interesting stuff.
>>29332603
>7th division?
401st.
>What are your yetsiot?
17-4 while in batash. Yetsiot get better in training.
>Are the memes true? Is daily/weekly maintenance such a nightmare?
Yeah, but you get used to it eventually.
>Have you fought in the last gaza war? Any stories?
Yeah. See above.
>Do new recruits get the Mk. 4 in the 7th division?
Yes. They got rid of the Mk.2's completely. Even in Shizafon.
>>29336045
>And Saudi Arabia does not have M1A2 SEP, they have old M1A2's and M1A2S's which have updated electronics.
M1A2S are not old.
>>29334083
At the very least we both do a lot of integration, joint exercises etc, which is great. We do a lot more with you than with the Germans, and they are the ones we share a common brigade with.
>>29336092
You do have AC in the Mk. 4 don't you ?
>>29336161
Saudi Arabia upgraded M1A1s to A2S they are still old
