Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[shiphone]

funny ...that's the China's Introduction for MBT2000 marketing which mean nothing to me. (and most of these IIM round info and image are from Chinese members and our forum,and you would like to educate me here??? are you out of mind?....LOL ) .. what we need is something to confirm this rounds in PA service or any TOT happened ...I also believe PA has such rounds ,my or our question is something visual to confirm it ...as simple as that...
---------------------------------------------

3. ARDE 125mm round, most likely based on Chinese Type-2M verion, has been modified for enhanced range (pic above).

Since 2010, they are improving the existing stock and making ARDE 125mm round

is this the so called" ARDE 125mm rounds related to Chinese Type-2M verion"?

YES or NO? make it simple...

 

[Dazzler]

funny ...that's the China's II-M introduction for MBT2000 marketing which mean nothing to me. (and most of these IIM round info and image are from Chinese members and our forum,and you would like to educate me here....LOL ) .. what we need is something to confirm this rounds in PA service or any TOT happened ...I also believe PA has such rounds ,my or our question is something visual to confirm it ...as simple as that...
---------------------------------------------
is this the so called" ARDE 125mm rounds related to Chinese Type-2M verion"?

YES or NO? make it simple...

* Offcourse it is taken from Chinese source, you though i made it up too?

* Are you form the same forum where simple queries go unanswered for weeks?


* Superficially, type-2 has a link there, partially based on local version of Type-2M but most R&D done at Armament Research and Development Establishment,

 

[militarysta]

Fofanov quotes BM-32 Vant penetration as 500mm @ 0 deg @ 2000, i dont believe in predictive values as they are mostly estimates, rather certified values are of more concern to me.

Thanks

And the same Fovanow on otvaga2000 forum claimd that those values where overestimeted a lot, and closer to the truth is 430-460mm RHA on 2000m.

 

[Dazzler]

And the same Fovanow on otvaga2000 forum claimd that those values where overestimeted a lot, and closer to the truth is 430-460mm RHA on 2000m.

sounds more reasonable, i also though the predictive ranges given on his page were a bit over the top

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Everything Wrong below, Why an official source claim something that does not exists ?

You have to eat your own words ..

I gave You reprint from instruction 3Bm42 Mango psoted on otvaga 2000 forum, As I understand WITU sources are not enought for You? In all data from WITU there is circa 460mm,So you are a marketing victim. Sorry - imposible for 3BM42. No, just older ones data for 3Bm32 and 3Bm42 where overestimated a lot. Since last two yers they are avaible data for 3Bm32 Vant and 3BM42 Mango whit definetly other values - mucht lower then previous ones. What is not strange. When we compare well known DM33A1 and 3BM42 we can see that penetratio "mango" can;t be better:

 

[methos]

@ttnt33 posted in post #7614 a link to the official catalogue from Rosoboronexport which provides the value 230 mm penetration at 2,000 m.
Rosoboronexport is the Russian state-lead organization for exporting arms.

So any further discussion about the penetration of Mango is really unnecessary, 500 - 550 mm are not claimed nor possible.

 

[militarysta]

Everything Wrong below, Why an official source claim something that does not exists ?

You have to eat your own words ..

Sure, IMHO you just don't understand what I had tryied to explain in my previous post...

End of the discusion:
ROSOBORONEXPORT catalogue, page 35
http://www.military-today.com/russian_land_forces.pdf

Homogenous armour penetration at 60deg. incidence and 2,000m range, mm 230
which give us circa 400-430mm RHA max on 90. plate on 2000m.

EDIT, lol @methos was first

 

[militarysta]

 

[Sovngard]

That sounds interesting, although I can not read Russian.

 

[Dazzler]

That sounds interesting, although I can not read Russian.

translation please...

 

[Damian]

Here they say, large text to the right upper corner: presented type of protection for frontal projections protects against:
- APFSDS type M829A2 from 1000m;
- Tandem ATGM's type TOW-2A
Presented type of protection of hull and turret sides protects against:
- Tandem RPG granades type PG-7VR;
- Single warhead RPG granades type PG-7L
It is possible to cover vehicle with thermal and radar absorbing protection "Nagidka".

Below is comparrision of efficency between "Kontakt-5" and "Relikt", it says that "Kontakt-5" can be defeated by M829A2 at a range of 6km's and "Relikt" at a range of 1km.

Here the blue texts says preaty much the same, but also says that "Relikt" modules are impenetrable by 7,62mm, 12,7mm, 30mm rounds and also shell fragments, it also says that only hit section of ERA detonates leaving other sections intact, that this type of ERA is insensitive to napalm type threats, simple in installation, can work in temperatures of -50 do +50 celsius degrees, and each block have a service life guaranteed for no less than 10 years.

Sorry my Russian is not perfect, there might be some small glitches in translation.

 

[Sovngard]

@ Damian

Thank you for the translation, but what is this light yellow text saying ?

Does that matches well with the leaked protection levels of the T-90MS ?

 

[Damian]

The text over yellow say technical data. I will try to translate.

From up left to the end.

Weight increase - 0,5 metric tons.
Number of ERA containers - 27 pieces.
Number of reactive elements 4S23 - 394 pieces.

Number of containers per tanks components:
Turret - 9 pieces.
Glacis plate - 12 pieces.
Side hull skirts - 6 pieces.

Level of ERA coverage per vehicle projection:

Per course angle of 0 degrees - >60%
Per course angle of ~20 degrees (for hull) - >45%
Per course angle of ~35 degrees (turret) - >55%

Increase in protection of vehicle:

Against HEAT warheads including tandem warheads, increase of protection is 2 times.
Against APFSDS increase in protection is 1,5 times.

Rough translation.

Does that matches well with the leaked protection levels of the T-90MS ?

Hard to say, doubtfull.

 

[charlie]

ATGM's effectiveness against modern tanks is hardly spectacular, in fact it is relatively low compared to their advertisements.

Either you want to prove that India's ATGM are not good or you just don't know anything about about tanks, Do you even know why Israel needed to develop trophy ?

Also remember that all these ATGM's you mentioned have relatively short range, which means that their carriers or operators are well within range of MBT's main armament.

I don't know if you even know how man carried ATGM are used, infantry men normally hide and fire the missile from close ranges.

Nag have a range of what? 4000m at best? Any Pakistani or Chinese tank have gun launched ATGM with a range of 5000m. Basic infantry carried Javelin or Spike have a range of about 2000m. US is working on new Javelin variant with range increased to 4000m.

Arjun can fire Lahat ATGM which has a range of 7000m in case you want to compare.

So modern tanks can fire their ammunition even further than most ATGM's have a effective range.

For example M1A2SEPv2, as the ones on pictires above, have thermal sights with maximum 50x zoom, and new fire control system that gives it capability to accurately fire conventional (non guided) rounds up to 5000m, and there was ATGM tested on that tank, XM1111 MRM-CE, fired from it's main gun with a maximum range of 12,000m.

well in Indian conditions it's pretty hard to identify a target 5000m with thermal sights

So good luck with trying to efficently engage modern tanks that are properly commanded and their crews are properly trained.

I met a guy who contributed in designing Arjun, and he did share his view regarding tanks around the world and they did considered different design or Arjun and selected what they felt was the best

So it would be nice if you stop acting as you know more then the tank designers themself, after all you are speculating from what you read from the internet or from books.

In war those things work well which have been heavily scrutinized, something Indian army is really good at.

 

[Damian]

Either you want to prove that India's ATGM are not good or you just don't know anything about about tanks, Do you even know why Israel needed to develop trophy ?

Or you did not even read with understanding my post.

What I said, is that all ATGM's performance is overestimated... you get that subtle difference?

And Trophy is nothing special, active protection systems were in development all over the world for decades, israelis are just first to field another factors increasing vehicles survivability on a large scale.

Not to mention that actually israeli reports backs up my claim, even 9M133 "Kornet" ATGM had very small effectiveness against the most modern Merkava Mk4.

I don't know if you even know how man carried ATGM are used, infantry men normally hide and fire the missile from close ranges.

So? Close range means that tank can see you too, hiding in a bush does not mean much in age of thermal sights.

Besides this, you need to get out of your hideout to actually guide your missile or lock it on target before launch.

If tank crews are properly trained and keep scanning their sectors, they can very quickly kill ATGM operator with a coax burst or firing programmable HE round.

Arjun can fire Lahat ATGM which has a range of 7000m in case you want to compare.

And?

In fact LAHAT had a maximum range from ground platform of 8000m, at least officialy.

well in Indian conditions it's pretty hard to identify a target 5000m with thermal sights

Depends on thermal sight, if thermal sight is old, have smaller resolution, perhaps, however modern 2nd and 3rd generation thermal sights can detect targets from very long ranges.

I met a guy who contributed in designing Arjun, and he did share his view regarding tanks around the world and they did considered different design or Arjun and selected what they felt was the best

So it would be nice if you stop acting as you know more then the tank designers themself, after all you are speculating from what you read from the internet or from books.

In war those things work well which have been heavily scrutinized, something Indian army is really good at.

Spare me lecturing, I stand with my opinion, and won't change it.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

spike have range of 4 km and can be fired hiding
.
NAG have range of 7-8 km and can be fired hiding
.
javelin tested on 4.7km range
.
and this guy show himself over-smart and their are many examples like faulty range of ATGMs,
.
there was a israeli guy on a forum who collaborated in design of arjun and arjun mk2 and he was well satisfied by tank.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

double post

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

http://-----------/threads/arjun-mark-ii-an-israeli-view-must-read.95660/
.
sorry if violation of rules by me........
.
this guy says that israel has impressed by armour and rifling technique and israel is taking it from india.
.

 

[militarysta]

spike have range of 4 km and can be fired hiding

yes.
.

NAG have range of 7-8 km and can be fired hiding

In fact -no.
Current NAG range is 4km for land version and NAMICA. Air version (HELina) is 7-8km, but air version is
And again -no, NAG now is not BLOS capable:
The NAMICA version of the missile is a 'lock-on before launch' system, where the target is identified and designated before the missile is launched. As the targeting system is based on visual identification, the range is limited

So neither of your steatsmen is correct.

javelin tested on 4.7km range

After one test, current range is 2,5km. .

and this guy show himself over-smart and their are many examples like faulty range of ATGMs, .

And mostly Damian have right.
ONLY Spike now can be fire in BLOS mode -in other examples (NAG, Javelin, etc) we have ony limited to LOS range.
So in fact those ATGMs can be used as typical ones.


btw: have You consider the fact how small % of the fired ATGMs can destroyed tanks?
If Yoiu want I can give SPIKE atgm values You will be suprised.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

Nag (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.
helina have lock on before launch but helina have lock on after launch
.
twinblade already proved how nag can be fired hiding
.
the launches can be raised 5m upward which makes range of land version 8km and gives ability to fire it hiding behind stone