History of Soviet tanks

[Jim Warford]

 

 

 

80 + 140 in 1961 project.

 

 

140mm of what ?

 

 

Wiedzmin; thanks for posting this great pic!

[Wiedzmin]

The model pic is a great one...thanks! Where did it come from?

 

[Wiedzmin]

[bojan]

T-72A or M1?

[alejandro_]

T-72A or M1?

 

Apparently T-72M1 only has 4 KMT mounts, so thet can use the KMT-6 but not the KMT-7. So it should be a T-72A. By the way, which country is this tank from? I have never seen that symbol in the projector.

[Panzermann]

 

T-72A or M1?

Apparently T-72M1 only has 4 KMT mounts, so thet can use the KMT-6 but not the KMT-7. So it should be a T-72A. By the way, which country is this tank from? I have never seen that symbol in the projector.

A double headed eagle and a white-blue-red flag band at the bottom. I think it is safe to say russia.

[urbanoid]

The source of the image is Montenegrin VKontakte. The problem is that Montenegro doesn't have tanks.

[Wiedzmin]

it's in Russia, near Sertolovo

[Mr King]

[urbanoid]

Pancake tank?

[Damian]

Object 775, gun is in fact a missile launcher only, and crew was made from two people, driver and commander/gunner.

[alejandro_]

Russia has transferred T-72A to Mongolia:

 

 

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1694496.html

[Sovngard]

I've read on the net that the T-72B is sometimes referred as "Olkha".

Is anyone has an explanation ?

[Harkonnen]

it is T-80U

[Lieste]

I've read that Objekt 219A/T80U was the Alder/Olkha.

Not anything to do with Obj 184/T72B afaik

[Harkonnen]

that is the designation of T-80 produced in Kharkiv in 1985

[Wiedzmin]

T-72B hull front

[Mr King]

[dejawolf]

estimate of Armata front armour array, based on various pictures i have:

 

[Damian]

Not impressive.

[dejawolf]

Not impressive.

 

No, but if figures of 55% reduction vs KE of relikt is true, and this ERA is supposed to be superior, it seems like they are relying on the ERA to defeat KE.

[Damian]

For a tank with unmanned turret, such thin armor makes no sense, as it does not use advantage the unmanned turret gives for better weight distribution allowing thicker armor to protect hull front.

 

Of course if your drawing is correct Dejawolf.

[dejawolf]

For a tank with unmanned turret, such thin armor makes no sense, as it does not use advantage the unmanned turret gives for better weight distribution allowing thicker armor to protect hull front.

 

Of course if your drawing is correct Dejawolf.

 

yes, it could be too thin, but it should be in the 420-450mm range.

 

i did some pixel measures of what i believe to be the front armour based on these photos: you can see in the second picture the roof goes pretty far forward.

 

also Armata is supposed to be using a new type of steel which should provide the same protection to basic RHA steel at 15% reduced thickness.

also according to Andrey nikitin, head of Ceramic armour bureau NEVZ-Ceramics, Armata is supposed to implement Ceramics in it's armour.

quote nikitin: Combined ceramic-steel armour plates enhance the armored vehicles protection 50% in contrast to that of their full metal counterparts.

"for instance, a 24mm composite plate is capable of withstanding the impact of a 14.5mm bullet"

 

if any of this is true, armata could have a base LOS RHAe of 650-750mm vs KE. if you take into consideration the backing plate of the ERA bricks, of possibly 10-20mm

that would add another 25-60mm.

the most impressive aspect of armata however is the allround protection it offers.

and in a battle position, you should be unable to hit the hull.

Edited February 3, 2016 by dejawolf

[Mr King]

[dejawolf]

taking a second look at the new steel called 44S-sv-Sh it's rather unimpressive. the protection level is basically the same. it's main advantage is that it's weldable, while the older one was not,

so there's no need for soft-steel support, and that's how the russians think they will get that 15% weight reduction. i guess some people in the propaganda department of russia must have misunderstood a few things.