Jump to content

History of Soviet tanks


Harkonnen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Now, adding new and improved add-on armor will increase the protection levels of the T-64BM Bulat and the T-80B, but the rounds that could be used against them are obviously generations ahead of the M833.

 

Don't mix the different things, BM Bulat don't use K-5 or other NIIStali ERA, the same as modefied T-80U and "Bleack Eagle".

The "Noz" ERA combined wit add on passive plate will give BM Bulat protection against the latest rounds like M829A3 and DM53.

The basic T-64B of first production series will recieve abot 700/900 protection vs APFSDS for Hull and turret. While the turret is still vulnerable on some rades the turret is again too tough for the prime Western rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim. I did not await such dirty tricks from you! It is nothing but disinformation from your side.

Variant 1 is KONTAKT-1 ERA

Variant 2 is KONTAKT-V Heavy ERA

Variant 3 is for M829A2 and tandem HEAT

Variant 4 – 140 mm gun and so on…

Here is the Upgrade proposals you are talking about and you forgot to mention that M829 goes in the same column as M833. Another thing to note, that it is for plain export T-72M1, not T-64B, T-80B or other.

271711[/snapback]

 

No "dirty tricks" or "dissinformation"...geeze... :lol: The copy I have is poor quality...the Kontakt-5 page does say it's Variant 2, but it's very hard to read. My mistake... There is no mention of M833 on the Kontakt-5 page. So, according to Nii Stali, Kontakt-5/Variant 2 can defeat M833...no surprise really. I'm glad that you realize that this reference is all about the T-72...not the T-64B or T-80B...that was my point. Where is the Nii Stali information you used to support your claims regarding the T-64B and T-80B vs. the M833?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No "dirty tricks" or "dissinformation"...geeze...  The copy I have is poor quality...the Kontakt-5 page does say it's Variant 2, but it's very hard to read.

My mistake... There is no mention of M833 on the Kontakt-5 page.

Sometimes people read what they want but no what reay is :rolleyes:

 

So, according to Nii Stali, Kontakt-5/Variant 2 can defeat M833...

 

And M829 ;)

 

I'm glad that you realize that this reference is all about the T-72...not the T-64B or T-80B...that was my point. Where is the Nii Stali information you used to support your claims regarding the T-64B and T-80B vs. the M833?

 

As we have published information of T-64B turret protection and m833 penetration given by NIIS we can make this conclussion.

There are no NIIStali info on T-64B provided as they do not support upgrades of now Ukrainian tank and no T-64 were exported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Los Alamos 1989 documents are uploaded.  This should validate Xonitex's discovery once and for all.

 

http://rapidshare.de/files/11183981/Los_Alamos_2.pdf.html

 

http://rapidshare.de/files/11184629/Los_Alamos_3.pdf.html

 

Thanks A2Keltainen.

 

Ask questions if some material isn't clear.

 

Rick

271661[/snapback]

Could someone explain how Rapidshare works - whenever I attempt to download anything from there, it always claims that I've been downloading stuff already and sticks me with a 30 minute delay?

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harkonnen,

 

There had been a discussion of ricochet angle earler on the forum. I hope you know where it is. I thought ricochet doesn't begin until 79 or 80^ obliquity and it definitely does not happen at 74^. What is your understanding? So what are the front roof top obliquity angles of the T-72, T-64 and T-80 models? Have you never heard of these being especially vulnerable over on your side?

 

Your diagrams don't give the angles. In any case my understanding is that the M1 glacis is 80^. Is that yours? What is your turret roof front angle?

 

Rick

 

PS Can you give particulars on the 3BM22? Some sources give a DOI of 1976, or 1978 and you give 1980, I believe. Any details besides what Vassily gives? 470mm average at 2 km, right? And velocity loss rate? etc. Thanks.

 

On Rapidshare, they are trying to get you to join. Just be patient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the beginning 80-th the USSR finally turn down the old design glacis for a new one because of this threat.

It may describe already upgraded glacis with add on plate, this may be the reason. Anyway it could not be T-72S as it appeared only in 1990.

271459[/snapback]

In his article "T-72 tanks: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow" in Tekhnika i Vooruzheniye 28 July 2004 Sergey Suvorov wrote "In 1987, Uralvagonzavod launched the production of the T-72S tank. This is the export version of the T-72B, and some sources referred to it initially as T-72M1M."

 

Is Suvorov mistaken in these two assertions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, guys, Rapidshare tracks your IP address. It will only allow you to download one thing at a time. Also, if you download over a certain amount, it will prevent your IP address from downloading anything else for a long time (45 minutes?). If you want to get around the download limit, simply obtain a new IP address. For most home broadband users, this means disconnecting from your ISP and re-connecting, thus assigning you a new IP address. If you have a static IP address, then...I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gorf: "M111 aka DM23 was able to penetrate the glacis of T-72A but failed to penetrate the turret. M833 (~450 mm) was considerably supperior to M111 (~ 360 mm)."

 

No version of the Hetz has ever been fired at the T-72A. In Lebanon '82 the M111 version of the Hetz was up against the Ech1 and Ech2 export versions of the T-72. Both have steel turrets and the difference is in the FCS. I'm sure you've seen the quote by the President of Syria about his tankers hugging their T-72s with joy after the battle so there are two sides of the story to that story. Here in the US the pro-Israeli experts who were not part of the IDF sales force made it quite clear that TOWs fired by Israeli "commando's" did most of the killing of the T-72s. Seth Carus for example was saying this. Ed Luttwak, etc, were sales men for Israeli companies. The big 105mm contract they were looking for was with the Chinese who'd asked for bids to put a 105 in a T-59. The Israelis beat out the Brits but the sale of tens of thousands of 105s and hundreds of thousands of rounds never materialized. But the Israeli relation stayed and you can see it in the Chinese ammo today.

 

360mm? You've got the wrong Hetz round. The M111 is 271mm long with 3 slip rings up front totaling 57mm. It's WHA, not DU. Its advantage vs the L52/M728 is that it doesn't slip off the turret of the T-62. Israeli tanker friends of mine whooped for joy when shown film of it hitting T-62s and 'putting out all the light bulbs". It's straight up penetration isn't much better than the L52. I doubt if it does 310mm at 1 km. 360mm? Probably the 426 could do that.

 

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, guys, Rapidshare tracks your IP address.  It will only allow you to download one thing at a time.  Also, if you download over a certain amount, it will prevent your IP address from downloading anything else for a long time (45 minutes?).  If you want to get around the download limit, simply obtain a new IP address.  For most home broadband users, this means disconnecting from your ISP and re-connecting, thus assigning you a new IP address.  If you have a static IP address, then...I don't know.

271813[/snapback]

Doesn't work for me - I've never succeeded in downloading anything from Rapidshare ever, and yet it insists that I have downloaded 35 MB (the last time I looked.) It's fundamentally broken for ISPs that use "transparent" proxies, I suspect.

 

Never mind - it's not like I'm going to die if I don't see stuff posted there.

 

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gorf:  "M111 aka DM23 was able to penetrate the glacis of T-72A but failed to penetrate the turret. M833 (~450 mm) was considerably supperior to M111 (~ 360 mm)."

 

No version of the Hetz has ever been fired at the T-72A. 

271817[/snapback]

Hetz were captured by Syrians in M48 tanks at Sultan Yakub and passed to Russians. Russians tested them on T-72A. Glacis was penetrated and thats why 17 mm HSS plate was added.

 

360mm? You've got the wrong Hetz round. The M111 is 271mm long with 3 slip rings up front totaling 57mm.

Hetz is 367 mm long.

 

Cheers.

Edited by gorf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

gorf,

 

"Hetz" is a family name. 367mm is not the M111 so must be a later version. If the Soviets got a round of that dimension then they got an early 426 in Lebanon or 'stole' them. Is your dimension from Sov/Russian sources?

 

Of course I'm talking about penetrator dimension, not the length of the round itself. Which are you talking about?

 

Rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes people read what they want but no what reay is  :rolleyes:

 

I would really try to have an impressive comeback to this comment if I understood what you were saying...I'm sure it's something emotional.  ;)  Just kidding...

 

As we have published information of T-64B turret protection and m833 penetration given by NIIS we can make this conclussion.

There are no NIIStali info on T-64B provided as they do not support upgrades of now Ukrainian tank and no T-64 were exported.

 

Please clarify this last bit...is there published information from NII Stali regarding the performance of the T-64B and T-80B vs. the M833? You said earlier that NII Stali is one of the sources you used to come-up with your "facts." If there isn't any such information from NII Stali, I guess you may be using Newsweek (or the Russian equivalent) as well.

 

271725[/snapback]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was he killed? Rather strange situation ...

270789[/snapback]

 

 

There were strict rules that the various "missions" were supposed to follow as they kept an eye on each opposing force. There were both unrestriced and restriced areas designed to provide some access to the watchers, while keeping them out of designated training/deployment/high-priority areas. If found in a restriced area, the team (weather it be USMLM, SMLM, BRIXMIS, etc...) could be "detained" by the owner of that restricted area. In some cases this "detention" got pretty physical and dangerous...the intent, however, was not to injure or endanger the team members themselves.

 

In Major Nicholson's case (see the memorial in the attached photo), he was basically murdered. Open press reports confirm that he was in a restricted area and should have been detained...not shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While again posting, I forgot to mention several other sources for documentation on the 105s vs the late model T-72s.  In the late 80s, starting in 86 IIRC, Janes Defence Weekly (JDW), had 3 separate articles that I saved--sadly now in storage--that stated that late model T-72s were "virtually immune over the frontal arc to all NATO 105mm ammunition".  I was subscribing to JDW back then.  They were very specifc about it and emphasised that it was APFSDS.  Back then ERA was viewed as only  a problem to TOW, etc.

 

Also, also sadly in storage, Newsweek had 2 separate articles -- I think May 16 and 23 of '88--saying that the US had tested a late model T-72 against the latest 105mm ammunition which had failed to penetrate it.  This purported to be a report on a secret US operation that got the 'stuff' from corrupt East Europeans.

 

I gave copies of both of these to Paul L. who may now have access to them and could maybe post scanned images.  I don't now have access to my storage which is several cities away now.

 

In any case here's 2 more sources claiming to give classified information out for whatever it's worth.

 

Rick

270907[/snapback]

 

 

I remember reading the Jane's articles when they were published. They were specifically about what the referred to as the T72M1 version, if I recall correctly. The claim according to the German tests were, "immune to all NATO AT weapons from the front". Must have thrown quite a scare into them, to learn that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gorf,

 

"Hetz" is a family name.  367mm is not the M111 so must be a later version.  If the Soviets got a round of that dimension then they got an early 426 in Lebanon or 'stole' them.  Is your dimension from Sov/Russian sources?

 

Of course I'm talking about penetrator dimension, not the length of the round itself.  Which are you talking about?

 

Rick

271847[/snapback]

They got M111 and 367 mm is length of M111.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't work for me - I've never succeeded in downloading anything from Rapidshare ever, and yet it insists that I have downloaded 35 MB (the last time I looked.) It's fundamentally broken for ISPs that use "transparent" proxies, I suspect.

 

Never mind - it's not like I'm going to die if I don't see stuff posted there.

 

David

271820[/snapback]

 

 

Try "Universal Share Downloader v1.3" it automates the Rapidshare download process. Doesn't always work for everyone but for some people it works really great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In his article "T-72 tanks: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow" in Tekhnika i Vooruzheniye 28 July 2004 Sergey Suvorov wrote "In 1987, Uralvagonzavod launched the production of the T-72S tank. This is the export version of the T-72B, and some sources referred to it initially as T-72M1M."

 

Is Suvorov mistaken in these two assertions?

271799[/snapback]

 

No but he miss the serial production withthe 1-st prototype. At that time it was not called "S".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re hits on Glasic plates (be they Soviet or American) due to their small height are they realistic targets at normal battle ranges, or merely "lucky hit" areas ?

271905[/snapback]

 

Hi Phil:

 

The color palette isn’t particularly marshal in appearance. This is just a quick and dirty target aspect distribution for straight-on frontal shots --firing tank from the 12-o'clock position. Assuming no sort of defilade, glacis represents about 25% of the vertical exposure of a T72. Obviously as you work your way from a 12-O’clock firing position to say a 3-O’Clock position, the fraction representing the glacis exposure will become less and less.

 

 

Assuming a frontal shot on a completely exposed T72; a center of visible mass aim point; and no range errors, the fraction of shots hitting either the glacis or turret should run much higher. Moreover if your MPI is about the turret ring than inherent shot dispersion should put about 50% of the hits on the turret and 50% on the glacis. "In theory" :rolleyes:

 

Small ranging errors: Small underestimations of range would increase the fraction of glacis hits & decrease fraction of turret hits. Aim point is still the ring -- MPI is shifted down to glacis area. Conversely small over estimations would increase the fraction of turret hits and decrease the fraction of glacis hits. Aim point still the ring, MPI is up on the turret now. Again all in theory --

 

Has anyone ever come across photos of Iraqi T72s with glacis penetrations – from either HEAT or APFSDS?

 

Regards

JD

Edited by jwduquette1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

360mm?  You've got the wrong Hetz round.  The M111 is 271mm long with 3 slip rings up front totaling 57mm. It's WHA, not DU....I doubt if it does 310mm at 1 km.  360mm?  Probably the 426 could do that.

 

Rick

271817[/snapback]

 

 

Rick, 100mm Yugo M98 APFSDS (basicly M111 in a 100mm sabot) does 150mm@60deg@2km. 80% success required.

 

http://www.prvipartizan.com/products/milli...illery_ammo.htm

(note, we measures armor from a horisontal, hence 30deg on the site).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever come across photos of Iraqi T72s with glacis penetrations – from either HEAT or APFSDS?

 

I had a pic of T-72 hit in the driver's sight (2003). There are also several shots of glacis hit by aircrafts and helicoters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...