It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I feel Tanks are no longer useful, but Russia's most advanced Tank

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   
90% of this page is crap, stop your drivelling chinawhite. I wouldn't call mnay of your posts too professional.




posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 02:50 AM
link   
What have you added here?


Originally posted by rogue1
90% of this page is crap, stop your drivelling chinawhite. I wouldn't call mnay of your posts too professional.


But your post dont make up 90% of this thread


Did i say that ATS was the one trying to be more professional or did i say conspiracy type disscussion .

Nor do i try to promote myself as a military man, your speaking to a 16 year old which i said in many threads and you yourself is something like 12~17. And if you are older you should be ashamed because you dont project the image.

Deny Ignorance



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Nor do i try to promote myself as a military man, your speaking to a 16 year old


Aha, well that explains alot, no more needed to be said. I thought you were just a dopey adult, rather than a kid who knows nothing.

BTW, I was referring to your one liners taking up most of page 4 of this thread.


[edit on 22-2-2006 by rogue1]



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 03:28 AM
link   
How old are you. 12? 13?.


Originally posted by rogue1
Aha, well that explains alot, no more needed to be said. I thought you were just a dopey adult, rather than a kid who knows nothing.


Strange thing is you asked this same question already in the china invade taiwan thread. Add forgetful to this list or you just pretending to get my sympathy.

This kid which knows "nothing" is still waiting a response from a forgetful kid in this thread

You forgot this to?

[edit on 22-2-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 03:47 AM
link   
What the hell are you two on about here?

We're meant to be talking about the best tank in the world....



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 03:51 AM
link   
I dont know what his ranting about but he included me in it.

And rogue1. I already added my 2 cents. Where is yours. First page

Heres some reall actual pictures of the T-80UM2. aka black eagle. No mask no netting






Looks impressive huh?

Without the netting the armour looks a lot more interesting. Looks like they overlap. Its not Kontakt 5 its a new one called Kaktus. Its not brick like normal ERA but its like a thin scale. Whats inside? I dont know but we can b sure its a improvement over Kontakt 5. Its smaller thinner and most probaly more capable. Overlapping scales would be more effictive
Heres a estimate of its armour

Gun?. Still has a 125mm. Maybe going to be improved later. If its going to have a a new 125mm indifinatly than new gun fired missiles will be included. New missiles in development i suppose. But is this new russian tank going to be revolutionary or is it just going to be a evolution. When pictures of it first surfaced there was much speculation about its abilities. Manless turrnet supergun etc. In reality its just a improvement of a older tank just like the T-90 was a improvment of the T-72 while this is a improvment of the T-80U. New production line new equipment new everything. Yes the russian economy is recovering but its not stable as yet to fund large moderization of the russian tank fleet. Priorities i would rank the russian missile capabilitiy first since by the end of this century russias ICBM are going to be to old or broken from lack of maintance. Since the fall of the soviets the only reason why people take them seriously is because of the "large" number of missiles during the cold war. If thats gone what else do they have?.

Then it would be the airforce since all the Su-27s Mig-29s are still relativly new airframes at a little over two decades for some planes, their airframes would have been punished hard in the bad years of indepe ndence. Their bomber fleet trainer fleet their training hours need to be looked after before their ground forces can be moderized. Navy?. Well, a nuclear submarine is expensive to buy but russia has a lot of submarines to replace. Even the Akula submarines that entered service in the 80s were retired. Russian needs new SLBM carriers. Russian carrier still in the works?. Then the ground forces which tanks can still works can still be upgraded without buying new tanks. You cannot upgrade a old aircraft so upgrading old tanks with new developed technology and russias already large fleet of T-72s can be fitted with ERA and ARENA self defence system

Is it going to be brought. I highly doubt it since it does not offer any more improved capabilities than say buying more T-90s which can be also fitted with new FCS or Kaktus. So cost vs effictivness the T-90 while being a less capable tank is better value. I probaly suspect the russian making a no man turrnet design than go with a normal design. I think it was more of a export gimmick than as a genuine tank which the russians will buy. Im just thinking will new tactics be a smaller role for the gun and instead more of a missile carrier?. Just wondering since missiles have better range better accuracy and better peneration than a sabot round will the gun be replaced by a missile mount?. Any thoughts about this

But no doubt this is one of the better tanks that were design. What i love about russans tanks is their ability to be upgraded with add ons which come alone. But lets no forget that these upgrades are post-gulf war gulf war two post chechnya so lessons from IEDs or RPGs will have been learnt and i suspect by the size of the new Kaktus ERA it was not meant to stop sabots but HEAT rounds. Well thats me speculating on this.

Possible export markets.

India- Arjun II(?) And new rhino upgrades. It doesn't look like a good possibility
South korea - They have their mini-M1 which has just got a new upgrade so this is leaning to no
China - Hell no.
Third world - Umm if i was a small poor country where i was offered a upgraded T-55 which is 2million and a Black eagle which was 5million. Which would be my choice?
America- Yeah they'll buy a few, just to get whats new in russia defence industry



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Strange thing is you asked this same question already in the china invade taiwan thread. Add forgetful to this list or you just pretending to get my sympathy.


LOL, ok whatever you say
You didn't mention your age, but the more I read of your posts the less I take notice. All I know about you is that you maybe Chinese ( who knows ) and that you live in country Victoria in southern Australia
Hardly makes you qualified to talk about much does it.



This kid which knows "nothing" is still waiting a response from a forgetful kid in this thread

You forgot this to?


LMAO, a response to what ? I've already proven you wrong
You made up many things in that thread, no more needed to be said.

You have any more problems u2u me, stop wrecking this thread.

[edit on 22-2-2006 by rogue1]



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 04:36 AM
link   
Proven me wrong?.

Im sorry but you never even answered my last post.

You forget basic logic?



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Proven me wrong?.

Im sorry but you never even answered my last post.

You forget basic logic?


Go Away, your last post was nothing but a rehash of your previous ones, there was nothing new in it. Anyone reading the other thread can judge for themsleves, not listen to some kid ranting - you hvae been shown to BS a fair bit, when asked to post a link or something you refer to another forum and say you can't be bothered finding it LMAO. What a great argument.

So yes I have proven you wrong, if you have a problem go and post in that thread
not this one.

No doubt you'll prove how infantile you are by wrecking this thread with another post which has nothing to do with it. What else do we expect from you




[edit on 22-2-2006 by rogue1]



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 05:29 AM
link   
Kiddo

Who was the one which was making a pathetic attempt on me?. My age, my creditbility and my information?.

Who was the one which started this in this thread?


your last post was nothing but a reahsh of your previous ones, there was nothing new in it. So yes I have proven you wrong, if you have a problem go and post in that thread not this one.


So you dont answer and you "won"


Your lacking basic logic as well. Great this kid is lacking in two main compartments

And if no one there denied my previous post or presented anything which disputed me, How did you prove me wrong?.

No one was talking about chinese radar development or chinas AEW or AWACS history before you made your remarks. WHy dont you reply to them

Actually. Quote something i got wrong



posted on Feb, 22 2006 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
No doubt you'll prove how infantile you are by wrecking this thread with another post which has nothing to do with it. What else do we expect from you



You have to edit your post to include this


I cant answer or post in that thread unless you've answered me or i would be arguing with myself. What more do i except from someone who hasn't gone though puberty



posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL, ok whatever you say You didn't mention your age, but the more I read of your posts the less I take notice. All I know about you is that you maybe Chinese ( who knows ) and that you live in country Victoria in southern Australia
Hardly makes you qualified to talk about much does it.


Another edited post?.

What are you trying to do here
. Quite pathetic really

Country victoria?. I would hardly call dandenong a country area since it is the second city of melbounre. And what makes anyone else more qualifed.

You think your more qualifed kiddo?


And about my age. Go re-check. I mentioned it at least twice

[edit on 23-2-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
BTW, I was referring to your one liners taking up most of page 4 of this thread.

[edit on 22-2-2006 by rogue1]


Why did you edit everyone of your posts?


ummm... Why me only then
. There was someone else in page 4 to



posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 06:58 AM
link   
You will all stop with the childish comments about each other or I will lock this thead...

You have been warned...



posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Perhaps we should find out how effective this "2nd generation" ERA armor is, since it makes or breaks the T-80UM2's defenses.



posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 11:48 PM
link   
What im actually interested is the Arena defence system.

Actually its third generation.

First one were the israeli ERA brick type blocks which were basic explosives which defeated Heat or other chemical rounds.

Then russian Kontakt-5 which were like the brick ERA but had a thicker denser outside to try break the tip of a APFSDS round and gave it extra protection which was mildly better.

Then there is this new Kaktus type of interweving armour which is a lot thinner and looks like it doesn't contain a lot of explosives or maybe none at all. Im just assuming this is just going to be used to defeat APFSDS rounds

Comparision



As you can see a lot thinner. And possibly the armour arrangment is a clam shell one as well

Here is a good read about ERA
Modern Explosive Reactive Armours



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reactive armor can be defeated just check this out www.army-technology.com... tandem wargeads can defeat modern reactive armor
predator complemnts it www.army-technology.com...
designed to replace AT 4



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   


reactive armor can be defeated just check this out www.army-technology.com... tandem wargeads can defeat modern reactive armor


That depends on how big the precurrsor charge is. The more resent ERAs like Kontakt 5 have outer steel skin and inner skin of 1 inch at 60-70°. Combined with the spaced plate effect , that should consume ~ 15-20cm of penetration. Most such precursor charges are only few cm in diameter resulting in only 10-15cm penetration. Their may not be sufficent residual penetration to cut the ERA before it detonates in the face of the main charge. To over come such ERA and leave a large enough hole for the main charge to follow , a tandem charge would have to be on the order of 6cm just to achieve penetration and given the variablity from shot to shot more likely 7.5cm tandem charge.



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by psteel



reactive armor can be defeated just check this out www.army-technology.com... tandem wargeads can defeat modern reactive armor


That depends on how big the precurrsor charge is. The more resent ERAs like Kontakt 5 have outer steel skin and inner skin of 1 inch at 60-70°. Combined with the spaced plate effect , that should consume ~ 15-20cm of penetration. Most such precursor charges are only few cm in diameter resulting in only 10-15cm penetration. Their may not be sufficent residual penetration to cut the ERA before it detonates in the face of the main charge. To over come such ERA and leave a large enough hole for the main charge to follow , a tandem charge would have to be on the order of 6cm just to achieve penetration and given the variablity from shot to shot more likely 7.5cm tandem charge.


the precursor charges should be quite large i mean cmon its dsigned to deal with advanced tank threats aso dont forget ERA armor is reactive just what these weapons are desiged for they strike where the armor is weakest



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158

Originally posted by psteel



reactive armor can be defeated just check this out www.army-technology.com... tandem wargeads can defeat modern reactive armor


That depends on how big the precurrsor charge is. The more resent ERAs like Kontakt 5 have outer steel skin and inner skin of 1 inch at 60-70°. Combined with the spaced plate effect , that should consume ~ 15-20cm of penetration. Most such precursor charges are only few cm in diameter resulting in only 10-15cm penetration. Their may not be sufficent residual penetration to cut the ERA before it detonates in the face of the main charge. To over come such ERA and leave a large enough hole for the main charge to follow , a tandem charge would have to be on the order of 6cm just to achieve penetration and given the variablity from shot to shot more likely 7.5cm tandem charge.


the precursor charges should be quite large i mean cmon its dsigned to deal with advanced tank threats aso dont forget ERA armor is reactive just what these weapons are desiged for they strike where the armor is weakest


Actually now that I look over the cal I made it assumed a simple spaced plate. In the case of the K-5 ERA, there are two reactive elements. To penetrate and detonate the first layer requires 4 diameters [d= 15cm; 60cm] of shaped charge penetration, while penetrate both requires 5-6 diameters[d= 15cm; ~80cm]. I doubt any tandem charge is geared to penetrate that much since they are usually shallow coned to ensure wider penetration holes to clear a path through all plates. That means they usually get about 4 diameters penetration.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join