@AlexandruC4
·
11h
The most important manufacturer of armored vehicles in Russia - the company Uralvagonzavod - suspends all other activities and switches to mass production of tanks
GarryB, Werewolf, Big_Gazza, zardof, Sprut-B, Hole, Broski and like this post
The most important manufacturer of armored vehicles in Russia - the company Uralvagonzavod - suspends all other activities and switches to mass production of tanks
par far, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
GarryB, ahmedfire, Werewolf, par far, zardof, Sprut-B, Hole and like this post
GarryB, Rodion_Romanovic, Broski, jon_deluxe and Belisarius like this post
GarryB, flamming_python, Rodion_Romanovic, zardof, Sprut-B, lancelot, Broski and like this post
lyle6 wrote:Demand for bulk transport of feedstocks to Europe has cratered so there is actually a surplus in rolling stock.
UVZ is just catering to the demands of the market like good capitalists.
And the market needs less railcars, more tanks.
sepheronx, GarryB, flamming_python, lyle6, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
GarryB, franco, par far, ALAMO, Sprut-B, Mir, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
The M1A2 has uranium tiles on its side. The tank weighs 55 tons.Isos wrote:Uranium tiles won't change anything. You can't protect the side from even basic cold war era apfsds because if you want enough protection you would need just as much armor as on the front so you will end up with a 150t tank. Not realistic.
Tolstoy wrote:The M1A2 has uranium tiles on its side. The tank weighs 55 tons.Isos wrote:Uranium tiles won't change anything. You can't protect the side from even basic cold war era apfsds because if you want enough protection you would need just as much armor as on the front so you will end up with a 150t tank. Not realistic.
Russia will have to protect its tanks in Ukraine from Sabot rounds that NATO is providing Ukro Nazis.
GarryB, flamming_python and jon_deluxe like this post
If you wabt to stop a modern apfsds you need heavy material and a lot of it.
The M1A2 has uranium tiles on its side. The tank weighs 55 tons.
flamming_python, Regular, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
Tolstoy wrote:
The M1A2 has uranium tiles on its side. The tank weighs 55 tons.
Russia will have to protect its tanks in Ukraine from Sabot rounds that NATO is providing Ukro Nazis.
sepheronx, Robert.V, Isos, lyle6, Broski and Belisarius like this post
GarryB, Werewolf, lyle6, Broski, jon_deluxe and Belisarius like this post
GarryB, franco, flamming_python, Werewolf, Big_Gazza, Rodion_Romanovic, LMFS and like this post
GarryB wrote:
The M1 with the 105mm rifled gun was about 55 tons but the M1A1 was 65 tons and the M1A2 is about 73 tons.
GarryB likes this post
Gerashimov said on two successive occassions on national TV that Russian tanks are vulnerable to APFSDS rounds.GarryB wrote:Or you intercept the APFSDS and make it yaw before impact and it is like swinging a hammer so hard it goes into the wood with one hit... but if the nail is at an angle all the energy of the hammer goes into bending and crushing the nail and it does not go very far at all into the wood...
GarryB, Regular, ALAMO, LMFS, Mir, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
Tolstoy wrote:Gerashimov said on two successive occassions on national TV that Russian tanks are vulnerable to APFSDS rounds.GarryB wrote:Or you intercept the APFSDS and make it yaw before impact and it is like swinging a hammer so hard it goes into the wood with one hit... but if the nail is at an angle all the energy of the hammer goes into bending and crushing the nail and it does not go very far at all into the wood...
Since an APS is not available yet the Russian MoD will have to think about novel ways to intercept APFSDS rounds. IDK to what extent an APS will be successful, because Israeli tanks had APS and yet took hits from ATGMs, obviously they can't stop APFSDS rounds.
GarryB, Regular, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
Nato tanks can't even get to the front to fire their rounds.
Wonder what happened to the Challenger? Really thought it was up for the challenge
You are mixing the ton(n)s and models.
M1A1 weight is approx. 57000kg, while M1A2 - 62000.
US materials are addressing a TON, that is 2000lbs.
And there is a tonne which is 1000 kilos.
Both are not equal. A tonne is 907kg only.
Gerashimov said on two successive occassions on national TV that Russian tanks are vulnerable to APFSDS rounds.
Since an APS is not available yet the Russian MoD will have to think about novel ways to intercept APFSDS rounds.
IDK to what extent an APS will be successful, because Israeli tanks had APS and yet took hits from ATGMs, obviously they can't stop APFSDS rounds.
NATO is actually on record that even their best shells have trouble piercing Russian armor. And they're not supplying Ukraine with their best.
You can give Ukrainians T-14s and it still wouldn't change the outcome. Its that one-sided at this point.
Good to know nato tanks are safe from apfsds and have their own physics that applies only to them.
Big_Gazza, Hole, lyle6 and Broski like this post
When fired from close range tanks are vulnerable to all types of rounds, APFSDS rounds are not an exception.GarryB wrote:All tanks are vulnerable to APFSDS rounds when fired from close range.
GarryB likes this post
GarryB wrote:
Western tanks face all the full range of Russian and Soviet weapons designed to destroy them, but also the mud and the fact that each type of western tank has different engines and wheels and guns and ammo and spare parts, none of which is compatible and how much support equipment did they send and is that safe from a visit in the night by Kh-101s because Russian satellites notice damaged western tanks keep getting sent to this large building in the west of the Ukraine... and then come back out headed to the new eastern front...
GarryB, Sprut-B, LMFS, Hole, lyle6, Mir, Broski and Belisarius like this post
The point that Gerasinov made to Россия-1 was interesting because he said Russian tanks have had the better of Ukranian tanks throughout the conflict but now western MBTs capable of firing APFSDS rounds and an increase in Ukro ATGM units launching top attack ATGMs does call for Russia to change tactics and adopt novel technologies.
Equiping T 72s with a roof rack filled with ERA tiles is probably one such novel technology. I suspect we will see similar technologies designed to nullify APFSDS rounds.
The one that will be used as a roller, and nothing will stand after. It is a matter of political decision only, and acceptance for increased casualty rate.
Sprut-B, Hole and Broski like this post
GarryB wrote:
Russia has quite a few different APS systems and together with ERA and NERA and other technologies as well as composite main armour Russian tanks are probably potentially the best armoured vehicles on the planet, but the fact that very few APS systems are deployed on Russian vehicles means this is theory and not reality.
Sprut-B, Hole and Broski like this post
Sprut-B, lyle6 and Broski like this post
GarryB wrote:The irony is that Russia has better uranium processing technology so give them 1,000 Abrams tanks with DU armour suites and Russia could make them much lighter and also power American houses for a couple of centuries on the useful Uranium they can extract.
They will have breeder reactors that can enrich the DU and make it usable fuel rod material again... that will be essentially fully recyclable and vastly more valuable as an energy resource than as an armour plate or round of ammo...
GarryB, zardof, Sprut-B, Hole, lyle6, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
|
|