Jump to content
tanknet.org

Companion

Members
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Companion

  • Rank
    Crew
  1. @Wiedzmin Do you happen to know what changes were made to T-64B and T-80B armor composition during 1980s? both hull and turret. Especially, Baryatinskiy mentions "standardized turret" for both T-64B and T-80B in 80s. Were they standardized with either corundum or sandbar turret or something newly designed? Maybe something similar to T-72B?
  2. It is not surprising to see tanks built in similar time period to have rather similar protection levels. Especially when the tanks are built in the same country. However, as is always the case, Soviet tendency to not separately designate each revision of its tanks make tracking changes difficult to observers. "The Hunt for mod. 19XX" if you will. Since we're on the subject of T-64 armor, any response regarding following thread is welcome: http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=37823 ...Or actually, I'll just copy its contents here for your browsing/replying convenience.
  3. Please, elaborate. Do you think the T-72B's primitive FCS is to blame? Would crews of equal qualification perform better on technologically more sophisticated tanks? Yes, not only so called FCS but entire tank at all (it caused injuries by it's autoloader, for example)/ No T-80 or T-64 tanks were allowed for competion. Cause they remove them fron sercice for this T-72 shame. Wouldn't choosing something other than old T-72B put some military districts/units under disadvantage due to unfamiliarity, etc.? Of course that works both ways but T-72B could be found in every MD unlike othe
  4. Logically, why would they prohibit basic maintenance?. ATGM failures might be excused as shelf life problem.... dunno. What's more interesting is that scores are very unevenly distributed. Western MD and Southern MD teams pretty much nailed it with one miss each, while Central and Eastern comrades failed horribly. On top of gunnery, Eastern MD team had a mobility problem during the latter part of the race, abruptly stopping for a minute.
  5. results.jpg Thanks for translation. It seems Southern MD team didn't incur penalty loop despite hitting only 2 targets in first round, what's the rule? Still, 5 hits out of of 12 shots fired on targets sub-2km, 1 hit out of 4 ATGMs fired Even if practice rounds have some quirks, result is rather surprising. I thought T-72B could manage better than this...?
  6. What exactly the scoreboard at 51:58 mean? a simple hit/miss count? If so, accuracy seems to be suffering a lot considering they are firing from a static position. Also, is it that difficult to guide gun launched ATGM? It seems only one out of four managed to pass.
  7. Is there a 3rd part yet, about the other stuff that is displayed in the museum? Indeed there are a few more. I'll try to post something this weekend. I'll have to post on WOTT forum as remaining articles deal no more with tanks. (No afv=No fun by my standard ) The name Junma-Le is written as 준마-ㄹin Korean. Here, "ㄹ" is a 4th letter of Korean alphabet, consonant part. Unless NK assigned some unknown special meaning to this "ㄹ," there very well can be 준마-ㄱ, 준마-ㄴ, and 준마-ㄷ preceding 준마-ㄹ. The above six wheel APC could be one of those I'm thinking. very interesting, thanks, what
  8. @Warford If you are quoting Chonma-2 from my post, my apologies for confusion. Original article refers to the tank as Chonma-92 and not Chonma-2. I found that I unintentionally omitted "9" in first mention of the tank and editted the post accordingly. I'll be sure to doublecheck for any mistake in future postings. But in all fairness, Chonma-2 would also make sense since according to the article, it is the second model in Chonma series of tanks anyway. Having said that, the naming pattern is quite inconsistent. First, we have first series Chonma (1976) without any number suffix. After
  9. http://v.ifeng.com/mil/arms/201307/011497af-269a-4082-8f89-d26ca567aa11.shtml equipments are paraded from about halfway through the video
  10. Sometime ago, a member with alias "Jartsev" had this discussion on steelbeasts forum: To put some context, current version of tank simulation game SB Pro PE has a "naked T-72B" and the postings concern that model Jartsev: current "naked" T-72B is actually a late-production T-72A D: no, the difference between T-72A and T-72B is the "bulging" armour on the front turret. J: This is common mistake. -Turret with "bulging" armor(drawing 172.10.077СБ) became available in 1982 and was used for assembly since 1983 parallel with "sand-rods" turret(drawing 172.10.073СБ). -Pilot batch of tanks
  11. Why don't you mind T-80 (without FCS) is cheaper than T-80B with it? T-80's case is understandable since it was only produced in limited numbers, which would affect cost per unit. However in T-55 and 62's case, they were produced in 5 digit numbers. And some anecdotes were posted on this forum before about how Pact nations refused to purchase T-62 because it was more expensive than T-55 yet the performance didn't justify cost. T-80's case does not concern numbers, which where comparable to T-64. It concerns gasturbine and pricious drivetrain. Well then, could you explain why
  12. The word the reporter uses is "nyunshik" nyun means year and shik means "Type." The word comes after the numbers. e.g. 1969 nyunshik Or alternatively I think you could just use "Type" (shik) Junma would mean a swift horse. Thoroughbred is similar in meaning also. I suppose that must be 130mm. I had a look at the original text and he wrote "103mm" twice. Unless he made a double typo, maybe there realy IS such a gun. Still it's an odd calibre and maybe he meant 100mm. I have this picture of a 100 (or maybe 85mm) anti-tank version of the "323" and so far I couldn't find a des
  13. Why don't you mind T-80 (without FCS) is cheaper than T-80B with it? T-80's case is understandable since it was only produced in limited numbers, which would affect cost per unit. However in T-55 and 62's case, they were produced in 5 digit numbers. And some anecdotes were posted on this forum before about how Pact nations refused to purchase T-62 because it was more expensive than T-55 yet the performance didn't justify cost.
  14. AFAIK no info. Just wild speculations. The name Junma-Le is written as 준마-ㄹin Korean. Here, "ㄹ" is a 4th letter of Korean alphabet, consonant part. Unless NK assigned some unknown special meaning to this "ㄹ," there very well can be 준마-ㄱ, 준마-ㄴ, and 준마-ㄷ preceding 준마-ㄹ. The above six wheel APC could be one of those I'm thinking.
  15. Wait, T-62 is cheaper than T-55?
×
×
  • Create New...