pdoktar

As an armored infantryman riding in the back of a BMP-1 -Very cramped even though I´m 5ft 8in. Very low head space even when seating. -Lots of protruding objects and hanging straps etc. to get scarred and entangled with. -White walls, small seats, small heavy back doors for infantry to get in or out, very difficult to open if the vehicle is parked nose down even on a moderate hill. -Air conditoning through open weapon ports.. not very effective -Light oil and grease odor -However the ride was smooth IMO and the vehicle was fast, rugged and had good acceleration. I´ll never forget the roaring and clattering of the tracks when doing 60+kph on a dirt road As an infantryman riding on the back of a T-55 -Hard to get on top and a long drop to the ground from the engine deck with full gear -Very grumpy ride, stopping and starting was like riding a kangaroo. Grab and hold on wherever you can. Also broke my RK62 rifle´s butt (had served me for one year before the final exercise) on top of the T-55. I dont know how and when exactly but it was badly bent afterwards. -The exhaust fumes sometimes were staggering, I wouldn´t advise to make smoke when inf. is riding on engine deck. -The best thing ever was warming your totally wet pants and ass on a frost night on top of the engine exhaust.. can you feel the burn?! I sure could smell it.

To supplement Pasis with US MRAPs. Also MRAPs are thought safer (no kidding )

Damn you.. I didn´t read the warning.

This one had a pretty good section about the industrializing Japan and how the close-nit bonds between the government and companies worked to start it. Peter Stearns: The Industrial Revolution in World History, 2007

"Tankers have told me of seeing training films where experimental animals inside the tank have been literally turned inside out or sucked out through the exit hole." Isn´t this again just one of those sabot-tank-myths? The article doesn´t seem very unbiased science to my eyes.

Great doc. Thank you Argus and 67th Tigers both.

Sweden probably has the capability to assemble the helos by themselves, and even manufacture a lot of the parts (if not all of them). Saudi-Arabia may be lacking in this sense.

Hmm. On what terms equiv? IMO the T-34/85 was in a totally different class as a tank than the Sherman 76.

IIRC in 2000 a typical finnish inf squad had 4 M72 LAWs each and maybe 3-4 Apilas at platoon level. Platoon weapon kit included about a dozen 10kg AT-mines, some AP mines and marking flares and Ikaros-lighting rockets that were usually stored in 3-4 Xa-180 APCs, each that had a 12,7mm NSV. Also if we got really lucky we had a claymore or two at platoon level.

Looks a bit small to my eye to be 23mm. Also the iron sights on top of each 8 barrels seems to be from a DshK-type gun. Maybe even a 14,5mm? starting at 1:59.

IIRC the penetration formula/estimate of an basic solid AP penetration from 1930s was given as one caliber against armor plate. Old HEAT was maybe 1.5 x caliber.

Looks like this could get stuck pretty easily. What kind of assaults is it meant for? Paved road-assaults?

Oh that´s why germans were giving away Leo2A4s so cheaply. They had no worth because they couldn´t be battle-tested.

Well at least the LEO2HEL turret has been tested against modern (DM53?) APFSDS and according to results posted somewhere on this site provided almost perfect protection that was afterwards still enhanced.

So why don´t they just put an Apache or something on it against small craft. It would seem a lot more nimble, durable and effective against several small opponents than a lumbering MH-60? Can´t you fit sonobuoys and a sonar on it against subs? However a 200,000buck Hellfire against a 20,000buck speedboat armed with a DsHK seems a bit overkill cost-wise so perhaps the 57mm is a wise choice on a steady fast platform?

Should be a pretty big frigate? Triple 16in turret and all that apparatus.. how tall was that turret complex? 5-stories high?

Okay call me crazy but I´d like to know what rounds from which guns will usually penetrate Leo2A4 frontally from 2000+ meters. I think we can discard the 105 and 115 immediately, and a lot of 125mm stuff, even oldest 120mm ammo..

Probably non-existent wihtout add-on armor packages.

Paris peace treaty and restrictions for Finland: Active land forces 34 400, no missiles (later revoked, even during Soviet Union) Naval tonnage max 10,000 naval manpower 4500, no submarines, torpedoes are allowed for the navy but only with direct contact fuzes (no missiles count torpedo-wise here too, no homing torpedoes) Air forces first-line fighter max 60, no bombers, manpower 3500 No Nukes Forbidden to purchase military material from Germany -EDIT oh, and motor torpedo boats were banned too and some kind of aggressive assault ship derivates -EDIT 2 This gets even more interesting, it was also banned to procure or produce any parts of german or japanese (!) Civilian aircraft and airliners.

And given that a Bradley weighs already over 30 tons and doesn´t have any of the armoring you requested for a light tank I can´t see your armoring proposition anymore as a light tank. Is a 36 ton T-55 a light tank? To me no and still it can´t meet your specifications even from the frontal arc. Is reactive armour the answer, if so, how are you going to operate it with infantry etc. Is it even possible to armor a light tank to withstand the simplest PG-7 from the side and keep it a seemingly light weight tank? And I don´t know.. if you want a TANK, it should have a gun not a cannon.

Float reliably?

Overstatement of the year.. no wait, all the universes and their multidimensions there are. -edited for a more witty remark-

Yeah, my uncle had three of those and they looked certainly cool. He used them to walk in total darkness and drive his car in the night without headlights.. don´t ask Also I remember they were tested by us while driving a boat in darkness. Worked pretty well for that magnitude of precision needed (like it ever was .)

I thought we did this in the "Iraq´s buying 2000 T-72 or whatever"-thread, when tanknut had Turkey invading Europe with Syria, Egypt and the likes.