Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Glavcom]

PT-17 - Polish-Ukrainian upgrade of soviet tank T-72M1 to NATO standards

 

[square]

A layman's question...

How does an APC survive if there is a Tank.

Tank has better fire controls, tank crew knows that every modern APC/IFV can fire ATGMs from a long distance.

Tanks also have protection systems and CLGMs. APCs lack protection like smoke grenades.

Tanks can look farther and shoot farther than any modern APCs.

In open field, Tank with few soldiers to protect it can easily take on couple of APCs.

But even if there is place to hide, APCs can't escape unharmed thanks to Killer Killer Fire control systems which is an upcoming system.

If we assume that target is a tough tank, then one hit may not help. While one CLGM or HE can put an end to APC.

sir please explain to me in layman terms.

correct !
tanks are more of a mobile heavy ammunation firing units in a battle field...

one way to understand their role in a battle is to check the resent russian battalion games....
get info from surrounding spread infentery...
more fast towards the target..
fire and leave......

 

[square]

PT-17 - Polish-Ukrainian upgrade of soviet tank T-72M1 to NATO standards

you think it will suit indian need for the light tank at easten boarder ?

 

[Glavcom]

you think it will suit indian need for the light tank at easten boarder ?

PT-17 for NATO standards, it is developed on the basis of developments on the T-72-120 tank.

India has more approached the option of upgrading the T-72MP or T-72AG.

 

[Glavcom]

T-80UD ukrainian main battle tank

 

[Glavcom]

BMPT-64 battle machine support of tank


http://glavcom.blogspot.com/

 

[Tactical Frog]

Nice vid with French Leclerc MBT and Panhard VBL (scout vehicle). Always operate by pair on battlefield.

 

[aditya10r]

MBTs even with 1500 hp engine can't be operated in all places of Himalayan terrain. To make it accessable in most part we need light tanks. Light tanks are solely China centric. Chinese have deployed their own light tanks and tankdestroyers (wheeled platform) . We will follow same.

Understood,but what's the point of deploying these t-72's in Ladakh when they can't be used to the fullest???

And what's the point of having a dedicated tank destroyer platform when a help armed with atgm can do the job while maintaining higher distance???

Or even an APC or IFV armed with atgm can do the job of a dedicated tank destroyer platform.

 

[Vinod DX9]

T-72s can be used fully only in Ladakh, hence they are deployed only there. For other places in northern / north eastern mountain region we need light tanks.
ATGMs can do the job and hence they will be in pur Light Tanks. But ATGMs are heavy. How many ATGMs can a vehicle carry? 8 in case of NAMICA. And how many NAMICAs can we send together? They don't have any other weapon to be protected. So we have to send IFVs to protect them. Besides, sending such a vehicle which have only 8 weapons is not a good option either. Light Tanks not only will be able to fire some ATGMs but additionally they will have many more to offer.

 

[aditya10r]

T-72s can be used fully only in Ladakh, hence they are deployed only there. For other places in northern / north eastern mountain region we need light tanks.
ATGMs can do the job and hence they will be in pur Light Tanks. But ATGMs are heavy. How many ATGMs can a vehicle carry? 8 in case of NAMICA. And how many NAMICAs can we send together? They don't have any other weapon to be protected. So we have to send IFVs to protect them. Besides, sending such a vehicle which have only 8 weapons is not a good option either. Light Tanks not only will be able to fire some ATGMs but additionally they will have many more to offer.

Understood.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks

 

[Akim]

Understood,but what's the point of deploying these t-72's in Ladakh when they can't be used to the fullest???

And what's the point of having a dedicated tank destroyer platform when a help armed with atgm can do the job while maintaining higher distance???

Or even an APC or IFV armed with atgm can do the job of a dedicated tank destroyer platform.

Guided cumulative missile is much more expensive than APFSDS. In addition, high-explosive rounds are used much more often than anti-tank, Main purpose of tanks in the defense is not the destruction of enemy tanks, but the suppression of infantry. APC or IFV are useful only in maneuver defense. In the mountains, maneuver defense is very limited. Do not forget that before the offensive begins, the enemy deals air and artillery strikes. Some lightly armored equipment can be destroyed, but the armor of the tank will survive only if it is not a direct hit. The transition to a counteroffensive, without tanks, is not possible at all.

 

[Vinod DX9]

India eyes next MBT be of 50T
http://thestrategictimes.com/rfi-for-frcv-issued-by-mod/

 

[Akarnanbat]

Chief designer of Type 99A gave a seminar. Some significant informations:

1). Protection

I. The front of Type 99A (for both hull and turret) exhibits a protection equals to 7 * * mm RHA versus APFSDS, and 1 * * * mm RHA versus HEAT.
II. The roof of the turret has a protection equals to * * * mm RHA versus HEAT (note that it is not 1 * *, but * * *, implying a value may be larger than 200), and (here emphasized) immune to nearly all terminal-sensitive projectile or other types of top-attacking ammo in the world.

according to the audience attending the seminar, the chief designer also said that the side-armor of the turret has a protection equals to 7 * * RHA versus HEAT！ The amazing performance is ascribed to the heavy ERA mounted on the side of the turret, which is reported to be very advanced, angle-insensitive, and with the capacity of countering both HEAT and APFSDS.

2). Firepower

I. Penetration of the main gun is 6 * * mm RHA (unknown distance. According to my another post, the new APFSDS, i.e. DTW10-125, has a penetration larger than 700 mm RHA at 2000 km).
II. A special ammo designed to destroy reinforced fort. It has a penetration of * . * m versus reinforced concrete, and after penetration, it has a explosion yield of * . * kg TNT. Very interesting!
III. The gun-fired missile of Type 99A can be used to attack helicopters (i.e., multi-role. Maybe two types of guidence systems).

Some other interesting information: the number of Type 99 is already larger than Type 99 / Type 99G. Maybe 500?

 

[Vinod DX9]

Well, both the protection and firepower is quite low comparing to both Western designs and latest Russian T-90MS. Possibly T-90S has less protection. But Indian made Bhisma has at least equal protection if not better. Arjun Mk 1 defitely has higher and Arjun Mk 2 is far better in protection. In a blog some said Chimese are working on new tank hence will not induct Type-99 in huge no.
What we lack is cutting edge ammo. Still using Mangoes. Indigenous 120/125 can achieve 500 mm RHAe at 2000mtr still. It must be better. Ww must get good INDIGENOUS ammo. We must have M829-E4 and Vaccum equivalents.

 

[bhramos]

Impossible Challenge: Chinese soldier drives

 

[bhramos]

T-90A Autoloader System working.........

 

[Vinod DX9]

Now US is considering to construct a Universal Combat Platform....
future system...a common platform, different weapon systems for different role...
but in case of MBT again unmanned turret

 

[bhramos]

Tank Stretching in Russia !!!

 

[bhramos]

Underwater Tanks


..........................................................

 

[bhramos]

Tank T-72M1M with KAZ "Arena".