Search results

  1. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Well, sloping does increase LOS thickness of the armor which our T-90S are an extreme example of, so it helps in that regard but if you are expecting a modern KE rod to ricochet after impacting a canted surface, then it ain't gonna happen.
  2. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Retarded sentence formation to be the likely cause. 530mm DOP against RHA inclined at 60 degrees and that too, from a distance of 2km is simply a stupendously unrealistic objective to set, something which even the Americans haven't managed to achieve as yet. And no, sloping does not affect...
  3. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    530mm/cos60 - there's your mistake.
  4. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Dude, seriously??!! May be, it will definitely reduce the drag.
  5. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    A smaller rod would also ensure a reduced mass of the projectile, so you wouldn't need to pack as much propellant to attain higher initial muzzle velocity but the problem is, such a projectile would begin to lose the said velocity at a faster rate as well. So there is a downside to that as well.
  6. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Yeah, the problem is shorter stubbier projectiles tend to lose velocity at a more rapid rate compared to a longer thinner one, so the shorter rod might very well begin with a higher muzzle velocity but by the time they hit their targets, it will have been lost more of its ke. The same thing...
  7. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Nothing that I can think of. L: D ratio appears to be barely 20:1, perhaps even less, or at least that's what it seems like from this angle.
  8. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Ok, so how is this thing superior again?? I see none of the earlier weak spots have been rectified, same old wine in new packaging with a new label.
  9. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    You do not seriously believe that, do you??!!
  10. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    As well as reducing production cost as DU is significantly cheaper than WHAs.
  11. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Maybe. Or maybe he got the values all mixed up.
  12. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Well, wish I could share your optimism. Sure hope you're right though.
  13. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    Everything is wrong!! First and foremost, we never got the 2A46M-1........period!! Why?? Because we never operated a tank that came with that gun!! And secondly, the EFC of the 2A46M-1 is stated to be ~1200 rounds, so I don't know where that poster pulled that 250 figure out from. Thirdly, he...
  14. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    800 MPa, even the Germans haven't managed to do that yet as their latest production model Rheinmetall L/55 maxes out at ~750 MPa. I bet this poster had the chamber pressure confused with the autofrettage pressure.
  15. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    That's Indian engineering at display I guess.
  16. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    That would be the 2A46M, which we had aquired the license for equipping our T-72M1s, well at least as far as I can tell.
  17. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    I doubt that, cause even 2A46M hurl a BM42M Mango at a muzzle velocity of ~1750 m/sec.
  18. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    I don't think so, we'd have heard something if it were true.
  19. A

    Indian Army T- 90 (Bhishma) and T- 72 (M-1) Tanks

    It's the same old 2A46M, nothing more nothing less, and certainly nothing to talk about.
Top