Damian
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2011
- Messages
- 4,836
- Likes
- 2,202
And you again shows that you do not understand any language besides Russian. Militarysta talks about Svinets-1/2. As for BTVT, it is obvious that data there for western weapon systems is biased and unfavorable for them, but it is good source of informations about soviet weapon systems.You should check your skills, because it is the fifth time you show your inability. We are talking about Svinets-2, active part 3BM60, you think it is Svinets, 3BM46 which was 80-90 s developement So true, 3BM46 is analogue to M332, Svinets-2 was developed a decade later, passing trials in 2009-2010 . Your only knowledge comes from outdated websites (btw have you seen value of m256 gun in btvt ?)
M-392 can't support all NATO types of ammunition. Using DM53 in this gun would end with blown off gun and crew casualties. Even firing this type of ammunition from Rh-120/L44 without modifications can be dangerous.About gun system it is the same. Even old Mango can approach 600 kg/cm^2, and for 125 caliber this is higher energy than 120mm (can reach 10% according to chief engineer), not to mention 15 % longer barrel
and the fact that Svinets-2 uses more energic propellant according with developer, 4Ж96. About gun level, look at 120 mm M- 392 which supports use of all NATO rounds (DM-53), ÐртиллерийÑкий завод â„–9 :: ÐŸÑ€Ð¾Ð´ÑƒÐºÑ†Ð¸Ñ :: Ð’Ð¾ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð°Ñ :: ÐžÑ€ÑƒÐ´Ð¸Ñ Ð´Ð»Ñ Ñ‚Ð°Ð½ÐºÐ¾Ð² и СÐУ :: 120 мм
This shows quality of your sources, that are silly as allways. And more repsect to what Militarysta says, as he have access to sources you can only dream to have.
So about energy it is clear. About dimensions, you have no argument (And I use actual source, questions of ballistics written by academics from scientific institutefor proffesional use) . Increase of L/d ratio does not lead to lineal increase in performance, in fact to obtain improvement it is necessary to achieve optimum velocity (depends on material and l/d ratio), for example, 140 mm projectile with l/d of 40 was estimated to need 1830 m/s velocity to give improvement, it is one reason why Grifel with great ratio, velocity, energy were much increased. M322 l/d will not give any improvement as it's velocity is similar or lower (it's effectiveness coefficient is lower). Not to mention that it is much older developement using probably old monoblock, or simpler construction. From newer penetrarors it is also logical to expect measures, differential (by lenght) material properties to optimise use of energy, lower parasitic mass, etc... Only biased idiot would argue that super israeli 80 s tech while being obviously outdated is superior to modern m829.., dm... 3BM59,60 projectiles and effective against current composite structure.
As far as I can see on this forum, everything you say is biased in favor of Russian made weapons, without any deeper toughts. Russian sources are greatly known to overestimate capabilities of Russian made weapon systems, and "overestimating" means hilarious claims about absolute superiority.T-90 trials, I did not say it was against old projectiles, it is in fact part of goverment evaluation, and of course hard to know details, but it is not different. That Leopard 2A6 was tested against projectiles representing mid 80 s level,
M332 from 2 km hardly shows anything about superior effectiveness, so less fantasies, it means nothing yet for modern rounds. Surely both T-90 and Leopard were extensively tested, but for now we do not have evidense and anything else is bias.
The fact is however, that T-90 could not had been tested against modern ammunition for several reasons, First no such ammunition in Russia's army inventory, many units do not even seen obsolete 3BM42 and use even older ammunition. Second thing is that newer ammunition is even cleared for tests, also because firing ammunition from weapon systems, in this case tank guns that are not cleared for more powerfull propelant charges, means it can be dangerous.
Just like in case of this silly claim that M-392 gun can fire DM53, firing this ammunition as well as M829A3 from this gun, would meant very dangerous situation, where gun can blow up and kill someone inside a tank.
This is why both Germans and Americans designed proper modifications and I know that Americans are very cautious firing M829A3 during peace time, and are carefully monitoring the use of tank guns, because the more gun is used, the bigger probability something bad can happen.
But why this lack of proper procedures and carefull use of weapon system does not surprise me in case of Russia. I wonder how many soldiers died during accidents in Russia with ammunition cook off's, I seen several photos, but I am sure that there were and are much more accidents with such careless approach as you represent and engineers making such claims, knowing nothing about ammunition used outside Russia.