Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[farhan_9909]

what could be this 6 boxes wire connected, mounted on a stand in circular assembly!?



watch in the video onwards 0.39,(boxes kind of something over the t-80ud)

On 0.49 again

And more in the videos onwards


So what is this device about?

*This clearly isnt the Varta
*Also this isnt the laser threat system.

i have never seen something similar to this ever

The dunya news mentions locking of enemies tank engine

the below part i am posting is from a tank exper

There could be a system installed that consists of laser receivers and senders mounted on the tank. Those register and classify the "Hit" or "Miss". It could be a training aid. NATO uses those for training. Pakistan might have some units like that bought from Germany or something. If right code is received then engine in the tank stops and the tank is "dead

he weapon has the "sender" unit and the tanks, APCs, soldiers have the "receiver" units on them. Then person or unit "hit" gets the info that they are dead or wounded or disabled

Basically a VERY expensive Laser Tag for military

so what basically is this?
please shed some light on this approach

thanks

 

[Damian]

This is not a laser, you can't jam tank engine or any sort of engine with a laser.

If this involved lasers then it is typical training system, where instead of real ammunition you use lasers to simulate real ammunition and hits in to different parts of vehicles, so you can for example simulate engine hit, then such training system just shut down the engine for simulation purpose.

It is similiar to American MILES or German AGDUS systems.

These excercises could also involve EMP technology, however tanks electronics are like in case of all military vehicles with advanced electronics, shileded against EMP's.

 

[farhan_9909]

This is not a laser, you can't jam tank engine or any sort of engine with a laser.

If this involved lasers then it is typical training system, where instead of real ammunition you use lasers to simulate real ammunition and hits in to different parts of vehicles, so you can for example simulate engine hit, then such training system just shut down the engine for simulation purpose.

It is similiar to American MILES or German AGDUS systems.

These excercises could also involve EMP technology, however tanks electronics are like in case of all military vehicles with advanced electronics, shileded against EMP's.

does this offer any advantage in pakistan case?

 

[Damian]

does this offer any advantage in pakistan case?

Hard to say, especially that such excercises are standard these days.

 

[Christoph]

What is that box with the tube directly above the main gun of the Leclerc? I think it is part of the MRS system but I think I am wrong.

 

[pmaitra]

What is that box with the tube directly above the main gun of the Leclerc? I think it is part of the MRS system but I think I am wrong.

Welcome to DFI.

I see you are from Bozeman, Montana?

Please introduce yourself by opening an introductory thread here: Introductions & Greetings

Thanks.

 

[Damian]

What is that box with the tube directly above the main gun of the Leclerc? I think it is part of the MRS system but I think I am wrong.

Yes, it seems that this is part of MRS system, on the gun barrel there are two mirrors, one for the gunner sight, and the second to that element mounted to the gun mantle about the gun barrel.

Something similiar can be seen on recently presented improvements to the T-72/90 series and T-80/84 series this is the T-90MS Tagil and T-84M/BM "Oplot".

It is interesting tough, as it is very different to other MRS systems that can be seen on some other tanks, it seems that only other design having something similiar is K2 Black Panther.

 

[bhramos]

 

[Christoph]

Yes, it seems that this is part of MRS system, on the gun barrel there are two mirrors, one for the gunner sight, and the second to that element mounted to the gun mantle about the gun barrel.

Something similiar can be seen on recently presented improvements to the T-72/90 series and T-80/84 series this is the T-90MS Tagil and T-84M/BM "Oplot".

It is interesting tough, as it is very different to other MRS systems that can be seen on some other tanks, it seems that only other design having something similiar is K2 Black Panther.

It just the size of the box seems to be too big for just being a MRS system in relation to the K2, the age might me a factor thou. What I was thinking is that it also could be part of the " automatic compressed air fume extraction system instead of the usual bore evacuator". If it is just an MRS system where would the compressed air fume extraction system be located?

 

[Damian]

It just the size of the box seems to be too big for just being a MRS system in relation to the K2, the age might me a factor thou. What I was thinking is that it also could be part of the " automatic compressed air fume extraction system instead of the usual bore evacuator". If it is just an MRS system where would the compressed air fume extraction system be located?

Hmmm, good point, Leclerc use compressed air to clean barrel from what left of propellant charge and gases, so it might have also something to do with it.

 

[militarysta]

@methos,. can You clean your PM? I can't sent You any PM now

 

[methos]

@methos,. can You clean your PM? I can't sent You any PM now

Ok, done...

 

[p2prada]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Is that claim of 800mm vs KE true for T-90MS, or is it horse-puckey?

 

[Dejawolf]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Is that claim of 800mm vs KE true for T-90MS, or is it horse-puckey?

russians claim 850mm for T-90MS. 250mm for the K5 ERA plus 600mm for the main turret armour.
this is only for the extreme sides however(2/3 of the turret front), where the physical LOS thickness of the turret is ~850mm.
the remaining 1/3 is weaker.
for comparison physical LOS thickness of the leopard 2A4 turret is 800mm or so, and the germans claims 700mm vs KE.

 

[Austin]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Arjun or T-90 or some other tank penetration values are at best guess work ....... be it 650 or 850 or what ever.

Unless you know the exact armour composition and the type of APFSDS that that specific armour composition would face we would never know how good the armour is viz a viz specific design APFSDS or HEAT or how well it behaving against one armour composition versus another or one types of integrate ERA/Composite versus another type of APFSDS , its possible that some APFSDS rounds are better against one type of composition and bad in dealing with ERA/Composite and vice verse.

So we can liberally use some values which may be true to the extent we do not know how these value fares up against certain type of anti-tank weapons.

It similar to the claim that aircraft maker or missile make makes that their EW are good at deafeating this type or that types ....experience has shown such claims do not necessarily hold true in real combat and there is the entire world of tactics that can be used to defeat advanced weapons.

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Most important point in Indian context, that Arjun is domestic product and T90S is export version of T90 tank. So armor protection of T90S tank is not same as what Russian army T90A tank.

We have seen this with T72 tank in Iraq.

 

[pmaitra]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Most important point in Indian context, that Arjun is domestic product and T90S is export version of T90 tank. So armor protection of T90S tank is not same as what Russian army T90A tank.

We have seen this with T72 tank in Iraq.

Mr. Sayare,

There is another thing with T-72. It was their smoothbore gun. Merely introducing a smoothbore just doesn't cut it. It is worse than a rifle when it comes to accuracy. M1 compensates for that with really superior sighting systems, which even the Russians could not match. On top of that, whatever the Russians had, the Iraqis did not. I also heard that they got a lot of 'parts' from some of the Warsaw Pact countries, and called their tank the "Lion of Babylon."

T-72, for its time, wasn't a bad tank at all. If seen in the context of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe (Soviet doctrine), it would have been a part of a massive multi-pronged thrust, backed by bombers, fighters, transporters, gunships, and deep insertion troops (VDV). In that context, T-72 would have probably come out victorious. In case of Iraq, it was just a completely different situation. Then, there was the relentless bombing (softening up) carried out prior to the land invasion.

 

[The Last Stand]

@Damian, what do you think of unmanned turrets on old tanks to increase survivability?

Also share your opinion of the falcon unmanned turrets designed in Jordan for Challenger 1 and Chieftains in service with Jordanian army.

Falcon Turret | Military-Today.com

Supposedly the 120 mm L11 is replaced with a Swiss 120 mm L/50 gun (made of cheese ? ) What is the capability of Switzerland to make NATO 120 mm guns. Will their guns be on equal level with Rheinmetall L/44 ? Also which are the countries going for unmanned turrets.

 

[Damian]

@Damian, what do you think of unmanned turrets on old tanks to increase survivability?

Possible from technical point of view, but difficult either, too many deep modifications.

Also share your opinion of the falcon unmanned turrets designed in Jordan for Challenger 1 and Chieftains in service with Jordanian army.

Falcon turret is not unmanned design, it is low profile manned turret, crew is still sitting in turret basket below turret race ring. Idea not bad, but the problem is low ammunition capacity of autoloader and problems with reloading it from the inside. Only solution is real unmanned turret with high capacity autoloader.

Supposedly the 120 mm L11 is replaced with a Swiss 120 mm L/50 gun (made of cheese ? ) What is the capability of Switzerland to make NATO 120 mm guns. Will their guns be on equal level with Rheinmetall L/44 ?

RUAG CTG is comparable in performance to Rh-120/L44, have a bit longer gun barrel tough.

Also which are the countries going for unmanned turrets.

There are countries that have experience and desire to switch in future to unmanned turrets, among them Russia, USA, Germany, I know UK and France were working on such designs for different platforms, Israel have such turrets for IFV's. Recently also my own country, Poland, is working on unmanned turrets for tanks and IFV's.

 

[pmaitra]

Something like a VSPU-24 remote turret as in the Mil-24/35.

I cannot find the link. What I can remember is that it takes inputs from the cockpit (not from the helmet sight IIRC), and it introduces its own correction (some kind of filtering, perhaps).