Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[militarysta]

 

[militarysta]

 

[militarysta]

RPG granade. God aim - in turret side, but...nithing happen bad for tank.
Again - not alway hit mean destroyed, or even wounded

Screenshots (there is visible RPG round on video)

 

[Andrei_bt]

1. Armour - it was always circa 15 yers behind avaible in Soviet Union solutions.
2. Amunition - again - very downgraded (3BM15 and 3BM22 when in Soviet union was avaible 3BM26 adn 3BM42)
3. Lack of the normal FCS, downgraded main sight, etc
4. Older and whorse stabilisatnion mehanism and gun model.

It is not downgraded, maybe not the most newest tanks were offered for export. But export T-72-s were the same basicly as non export t-72.

 

[ramakrishna]

Challenger 2 is an advanced main battle tank built by BAE Systems Land Systems (formerly Vickers Defence Systems, then Alvis Vickers Ltd). Challenger 2 is in service with the British Army and with the Royal Army of Oman.

Read More about Challenger2 Challenger 2 Main Battle Tank - Army Technology

A British Army Challenger II main battle tank firing during a training exercise.

 

[Sovngard]

Challenger 2 is an advanced main battle tank

What makes the Challenger 2 more advanced than the others MBTs ?

 

[Damian]

What makes the Challenger 2 more advanced than the others MBTs ?

Nothing?

 

[rusellviper89]

Export tanks for India, Iraq, and others was circa 15 yers ago Soviet Union tanks

Sir does that mean the T90 s exported to India are also inferior compared to russian counterpart. I am aware we did not get Shotra, but if they are inferior in other parameters then it is an alarming news.

 

[Damian]

Sir does that mean the T90 s exported to India are also inferior compared to russian counterpart. I am aware we did not get Shotra, but if they are inferior in other parameters then it is an alarming news.

No, T-90S represent much higher standards, simply because times changed, Russia no longer can let itself to sold inferior weapon systems because this means lost of clients. Rights of free market.

Besides this, it is not "Shotra" but "Shtora", and your T-90S have "Shtora" system, just without IR dazzlers, IR dazzlers are taking space for ERA, which means that Indian T-90S without IR dazzlers have better ERA coverage and thus better ballistic protection.

 

[Sovngard]

Nothing?

Their boiling vessel



T-90 versions and upgrades are a bit complicated for me.


What is the difference between :


- The original T-90 (object 188)

- T-90S

- T-90S Bhishma

- T-90SA

 

[Damian]

Their boiling vessel

Not any more, M1 tanks have BV mounted from some time. Dunno about other NATO tanks.

T-90 versions and upgrades are a bit complicated for me.


What is the difference between :


- The original T-90 (object 188)

- T-90S

- T-90S Bhishma

- T-90SA

It looks like this:

T-90/Object 188 (original T-90 with cast turret)

T-90A/Object 188A1 or A2 (new, series manufactured T-90 variant with welded turret for Russian Army)

T-90S (export variant, there is no distinction in designation code between old T-90S with cast turret, and new T-90S with welded turret)

T-90S Bhishma (export variant for India)

T-90SA (export variant for Algeria)

T-90SM (improved T-90S for export)

 

[Sovngard]

Not any more, M1 tanks have BV mounted from some time. Dunno about other NATO tanks.



It looks like this:

T-90/Object 188 (original T-90 with cast turret)

T-90A/Object 188A1 or A2 (new, series manufactured T-90 variant with welded turret for Russian Army)

Rumours are circulating that some T-90A or T-90S were used in 1999, during the Second Chechen War.

Object 188A1 (2006 russian army version) featured an improved autoloader which can hold longer APFSDS, self-sealing fuel tanks (fuel capacity also increased by 100 liters).

T-90S (export variant, there is no distinction in designation code between old T-90S with cast turret, and new T-90S with welded turret)

T-90S Bhishma (export variant for India)

Is it this one who has sometime two large air conditioning units mounted on the turret bustle ?

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c88/Karl187/Kjjbx.jpg

 

[militarysta]

Rumours are circulating that some T-90A or T-90S were used in 1999, during the Second Chechen War.

Object 188A1 (2006 russian army version) featured an improved autoloader which can hold longer APFSDS, self-sealing fuel tanks (fuel capacity also increased by 100 liters).

1.No, there is no single evidence of using T-90 in second Chechenia war. Using T-90A was impossible due to moment of the DOI in Russian Aramy.

2. Yes it's true.

 

[Damian]

Challenger 2 with smoothbore gun.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

An Industrialized country does not NEED to worry about barrel life. If we have 5,000 tanks and we need 2000 barrels a year, thats no big deal. Thats like producing 6 a day. In war times you may need more, so you will have to produce 10 to 20 a day of these pipes. Who cares and How is that a big deal and worth sacrificing on your aim and targeting accuracy? I think we can stick with the Riffled bore.

If the argument swings the way of maintenance then that to is no big deal, as tanks require regular maintenance every month anyway.

 

[Damian]

I wonder how many times it would be needed to repeat to trolls that modern smoothbore guns are just as accurate as rifled guns, and during trails, tanks armed with smoothbore guns were actually more accurate than these with rifled guns?

Well it seems that it is immposible to eliminate slogans and schematic thinking that is deep in human mind, isn't it?

 

[Godless-Kafir]

I wonder how many times it would be needed to repeat to trolls that modern smoothbore guns are just as accurate as rifled guns, and during trails, tanks armed with smoothbore guns were actually more accurate than these with rifled guns?

Well it seems that it is immposible to eliminate slogans and schematic thinking that is deep in human mind, isn't it?

Here you start of with an verbal attack as usual you theory vomit. Rifle bores require less calibration and yes they are more accurate as a barrel.. not talking of Ammunition or Fire control. Recent improvements in ammunition and fire control have made the smooth bore equally better but as a bore design the rifle is better. You never know when they come in handy.

 

[Damian]

What theory vomit?

I talk about reality, all highly developed nations scrapped idea of rifled tank gun and preffer smoothbore guns. Nobody needs obsolete rifled gun only because in the past it was more accurate. With fin stabilized ammunition there is really no point in using rifled guns. And there is many many more reasons explained here and other places to death.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

I recently bought a car freshener, it read made in poland. I liked the smell and i bought it.. Its a ocean perfume, you know anything about it?

India and Britian are both advanced in terms of technology we choose to use it for reasons specific to our liking. Just because everyone apes USA does not mean we should start jumping, there are certain rounds best suited for Rifled bores like HESH and APFSDS which are required for India specific combats.

The rifled bore seems to suit the Arjun and its fire control. Changeing it will require wasteing of resources which is not required. If it is just for keeping up with the joneses then that makes as much sense as a teenage girl up for a boob job..

 

[Damian]

Discussing with you is just a waste of time for any sentient being...