Trolling is keeping quite when inconvenient points countering your view are raised and suddenly surfacing when you think you have found out something to counter.Can't you just stop trolling?
Average width of the human head is about 15 cm, not 20 cm. In case of a Chinese study the average width was 14,7 cm for males and 14 cm for females. This American dissertation cites another study where the average is 14.5 cm.
Using your completely unscientific and flawed measurement methods, the result would therefore be 157 x 14.7 cm = 230,8 cm, which nicely illustrates the failure of your methods.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm,Hmm, no a human head is not that wide: head dimensions
STGN
So againthis will give the same scale of 1:20.7.[
If you say the crew hatch cover measures only 400 mm , you will be trapped by your own statement in the perspective estimate based on the picture above.
Since you yourself has admitted you don't know anything about perspective drawing and visual reduction of dimensions due to different depth of measuring planes from the observer, I don't see it fit to debate this topic further with you.Oh, so when independent research shows that beliefes of some individuals and official propaganda are wrong, then you need to attack these who shows you are wrong and your beliefes are false? How mature!
please show proof for the asymmetry of turret around centerline.Again if we assign turret width on that drawing to 3.2m the hull gets way too wide and long for DRDO measurements an on that picture using official width turret is about 2.8m wide now that drawing is inaccurate in my opinion because it doesn't take into account that the turret is not symmetrical in width around the CL.
Now you have to give a unit for the scale for it to have any meaning, what does 1:68.75 mean?? And because we don't have the same monitor or the same measuring tool I can't replicate your numbers and as I know, from having tried it earlier in my life, using a ruler on a screen gives inaccurate and numbers I can't repeatedly make there is always to much guess work too large error in measuring. Now I have already provided link for you to go download Photoshop completely legal, then we can use the same standardized measuring tool, that will eliminate personal bias in the measuring.please show me proof that the turret is not symmetrical around CL. The drawing above was used by DEJAWOLF to generate his 3D image using 3d max. AFAIK there is no asymmetry of turret around CL
I don't know Dejawolf, so I am not good friends with him. Just so happens that I agree with him on his measurements regarding the Arjun tank. And can only admire his work on models. If I thought he was wrong on something I would point it out.
STGN
"I don't want to admit that I was wrong so I simply try to distract the discussion". I provided you data for the average head size of Chinese and Americans. Important is that the average Indian is not taller than the average Chinese, while the average American is taller than the average Indian. I am from a country with an even greater average height, and nobody here has a 20 cm wide head.See average measurement on chinese heads has no place in a military thread, Chinese are traditionally smaller, shorter than Indians,
And also even among the chines , men who are fit enough enter military service will measure far higher than the average population,
Considering the average Indians are taller and stouter than chinese, and Indians fit enough to enter military service will measure more,
You did not post a single valid way to measure the distance. You simply said "the head is 200 mm, so the turret is x mm" or "the hatch is 550 mm, so the turret is x mm" - that is not measuring. I only response seldomly because I don't have much patience with trolls.this is not the only way of measurement I posted , I posted many ways of measuring in this thread and the ARJUnvs T-90 thread, for which neither you nor any of other members advocating 2.75 meter turret width has responded.
The pixel measurment has been done on various different image with different angles of view (inlcuding scale drawings without any perspective distortion). Dejawolf also provided an example how much perspective distortion is influencing measurment.You have not tried to question their so called unscientific "PIXEL MEASUREMENT", with out taking into consideration the perspective distortion and different depths of measuring planes from the observer shows what is your motive.
please show proof for the asymmetry of turret around centerline.
hope this video will settle few controversies here. :thumb:Discovery channel Episode on ARJUN MBT
Waited for long time..Discovery channel Episode on ARJUN MBT
"I don't want to admit that I was wrong so I simply try to distract the discussion". I provided you data for the average head size of Chinese and Americans. Important is that the average Indian is not taller than the average Chinese, while the average American is taller than the average Indian. I am from a country with an even greater average height, and nobody here has a 20 cm wide head.
That means you again say completely nothing in a whole post and just randomly troll.
You did not post a single valid way to measure the distance. You simply said "the head is 200 mm, so the turret is x mm" or "the hatch is 550 mm, so the turret is x mm" - that is not measuring. I only response seldomly because I don't have much patience with trolls.
The pixel measurment has been done on various different image with different angles of view (inlcuding scale drawings without any perspective distortion). Dejawolf also provided an example how much perspective distortion is influencing measurment.
What is however much more important is that the pixel measurement is based on scaling the size of the turret from a known dimension (like the hull width which has been given by DRDO). You "measure" things by choosing a random part of the image which size is unknown (like the hatch or the head of the driver) and then you choose an incredibly large value to manipulate the calculations for reaching to high values.
Indeed, image is worth more than thousands words, and I am happy that this video proves many of points made by me, Methos, STGN or Dejawolf... pity that they didn't show more of the welding process though.hope this video will settle few controversies here. :thumb:
note the turret is tilted not facing straight on.that's the reason for this kind of pixel measurement inaccuracies.
STGN
proved what?indeed, image is worth more than thousands words, and i am happy that this video proves many of points made by me, methos, stgn or dejawolf... Pity that they didn't show more of the welding process though.
Arguments about turret designs... seriously, you need explanations for even such obvious things?proved what?
I know that children do not understand advertisement typical for such silly TV shows. This is what image is worth more than words, image is objective, gives possibility to make own conclusions.See the part about hydro pneumatic suspension and the specialized gyros that are the reason for the gun's accuracy, it proves it to be a world class tank with best armor protection .
Yeah, you can say that the most advanced and most experienced armies around the world like US Army, Russian Army, whole NATO and ex Warsaw Pact are just bunch of idiots, but you know what, I take their experiences and knowledge over your ridiculous posts, and you know what, I think that you do not deserve my time. Do not respond to this post, you are not welcome to discuss with me, as I do not tolerate trolls.The tank was developed to meet the battlefield conditions of future wars, your are comparing it with obsolete world war -two statistics to support the case for weaker armored , smaller turret geometry based protection, which was not the GSQR requirement for arjun.
Yes, this proves that designers are aware of this tank designing principle, however for some reason turret is designed such way, it does not provide such protection completely for crew compartment and bustle. IMHO there was a good reason, and this reason is weight efficency of armor. If you look at the vehicle weight and where composite armor is placed and compare it with other modern MBT's, their weight and composite armor placement. Weight efficency of armor might be plausible answer to this problem.in the video i think they mention about 60 degree protection.