5 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:


If you are interested on the matter, there is also a patent by Rafael from 2008 which deals with SLERA and NxRA for heavy vehicles. Needless to say, this document not only is very good to speculate about T-14 but also Merkava IV.

 


Patente Rafael 2008 sobre blindajes reactivos.pdf 452.31 kB · 0 downloads

 

Nice , i will give it a read for sure  .

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Ok now i'm disappointed.

 

Honestly simply disappointed for having to wait 6 patches to get a vehicle remotely ''equal'' to other top tier MBTs for the Soviet tree is a bit too soft imo !  This is unprecedented , just imagine for a second US or German tree being left without a true competitor at top tier for 6 patches ,  i can tell you for sure that there would be MUCH more going on than simple disappointment  ............

 

As i commented in the rumor section , i honestly hope Smin is talking about the T-90 as a model not as a platform , otherwise they might aswell not bother with the Soviet tree anymore , add new top tiers to NATO and let Soviet plebs fight with 20 , 30 or 40years worth of outdated MBTs , cause that's pretty much where we are heading to at this point !

 

As long as Ka-50 is selling well , it's all good for Gaijin , why would they need to add anything new ?

 

Edited by Raldi92
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Smin1080p we would like to know why are you guys not introducing a Soviet/Former Soviet Republic MBT matching the current top tier, because the Leopard 2A5 will be out for a year by the time the next patch releases and we all know that T-80U is not its equal (that without mentioning the Ariete, Leclerc and M1A2).

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
  • Upvote 3
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i t seems that until we get a tank to match the current top tier we´ll have to wait at least 3 more patchesT-72B 1989, T-90 1993 and only then T-90A (unless T-84 gets added earlier, which is the least likely thing i can think of). We are talking about August-September at the earliest. By then, all other nations will have newer and even better tanks (Strv-122 is right around the corner).  Have soviet players been neglected? yes, like never before.

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

we´ll have to wait at least 3 more patches

 

More than that, they'll throw in a B3 after the 89, plus the inevitable patches where ussr ground tree doesn't get anything. Plus any incidental tank destroyers and light tanks like the Ob685 to extend the grind even more.

 

Don't expect an up-to-date tank anytime this year basically.

Edited by EventAnyDamage
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the T-90A comes with its more modern ammo, like 3BM60, it will be extremely underwhelming.

 

Spoiler

3VBM23_ARMIA-2019_02.png

(That's worse performance than DM43 [OFL 120 F1] by the way)

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mememeist3r said:

(That's worse performance than DM43 [OFL 120 F1] by the way)

 

By only 10mm, and only at high angles at 2km

 

meanwhile,

at 0° at 2km;

 

3BM60, 740mm

OFL120, 537mm

 

Not exactly "underwhelming".

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, EventAnyDamage said:

 

By only 10mm, and only at high angles at 2km

 

meanwhile,

at 0° at 2km;

 

3BM60, 740mm

OFL120, 537mm

 

Not exactly "underwhelming".

It is, for a round designed in 2002. 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, EventAnyDamage said:

 

Its not, and it entered service in 2002, it was designed a lot earlier but not purchased.

Yet the round only entered mass production really in the 2010s. Very little info is available, but development ranging from late 90s to 2000s seems plausible. Either way, by 2002 the US was almost ready to field M829A3 while the Germans already fielded DM53 in 1998, developed in the early 1990s and superior in all aspects essentially. A prototype version was tested in the Swedish tank trials.

 

But this is besides the point. The only Russian tank that is going to make a real difference is the T-14. Russia is fundamentally flawed for this game, with an unfortunate combination of poor optics, terrible survivability and mediocre mobility of both gun and tank itself. You don't exactly get numbers advantages when you're in a 32 vs 32 battle arena. 

 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mememeist3r said:

Even if the T-90A comes with its more modern ammo, like 3BM60, it will be extremely underwhelming.

 

  Hide contents

3VBM23_ARMIA-2019_02.png

(That's worse performance than DM43 [OFL 120 F1] by the way)

That is a great find! However the claimed performance seems to me a little conservative. Not only because achieving 600mm LOS at 2km was already claimed for eariler projectiles (BM46 Svinets or BM42M Lekalo, as i will show below) but also because a projectile of 8kg and 735mm of length physically would perform a lot better (perhaps someone could run the penetration formula?).

As for the Lekalo:
704363846_MangoM1.thumb.JPG.c95cd740b6fc

 

On the T-90A i repeat what i said before if the current tanks don´t get better ammo and T-90A comes with a 600 plus mm penetrating round, it will be OK.

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

main-qimg-3447bf1a641f19817842c498812b27

 

When fired from Sprut gun D-81TM ( which is the designation given to 2A46 )

 

3BM59 = 370mm 2km 60°

3BM60 = 320-330mm 2km 60° 

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, EventAnyDamage said:

More than that, they'll throw in a B3 after the 89, plus the inevitable patches where ussr ground tree doesn't get anything. Plus any incidental tank destroyers and light tanks like the Ob685 to extend the grind even more.

 

You may hate them, but properly modeled, properly armed, not overtiered and with sane repair costs stuff like Sprut-SD would be much more viable in top tier meta than any of the T-series tanks.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jackTIGR said:

You may hate them, but properly modeled, properly armed, not overtiered and with sane repair costs stuff like Sprut-SD would be much more viable in top tier meta than any of the T-series tanks.

 

I fully expect the Sprut-SD to get the same Object 685/BMP-3 treatment at this point. Missing its thermals, overtierred, overpriced, fictional reload. Like clockwork.

Edited by EventAnyDamage
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, EventAnyDamage said:

 

I fully expect the Sprut-SD to get the same Object 685/BMP-3 treatment at this point. Missing its thermals, overtierred, overpriced, fictional reload. Like clockwork.

 

No doubt, if anything then 2019 proved Gaijin hates Russian light vehicles, so yeah you're no doubt correct. But for me hope dies last.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, this picture 

Spoiler

704363846_MangoM1.thumb.JPG.c95cd740b6fc

 

is indeed supposed to represent the Svinets. I confused it with Lekalo or Mango-M because this mockup has several visual differences with other Svinets models (and also there is plenty of projectile/penetrator protruding from the 600mm block). But yes, the official figure for penetration is 600mm or 300mm at 60º at 2km. However, other specs of Svinets make me very suspicious. Other public specs are as follows:
 

  • Weight of the projectile - 8.4 kg (including sabot?)
  • Projectile length - 735 mm
  • Muzzle velocity - 1660 m/s

Now, compare those numbers with DM53, which has a projectile weight of 8.35kg (including the sabot), length of 745mm and its muzzle velocity is 1750 m/s and 1670 m/s when fired from L55 and L44 guns respectively. In other words, BM60 and DM-53 are EXTREMELY close in specs. Not only that but BM60 is claimed to be able to defeat heavy ERA and also complex spaced armor arrays (clear reference to Leo 2 wedges and i understand why it would negate their effectiveness), which makes both projectiles extremely similar. Below are 3d models of soviet/ru and german apfsds and see how similar BM60 and DM-53 are:
 1632990404_mixAPFSDS120y124sovyger.thumb

For the DM-53 it is officially claimed to pen 700mm (from L55) at 2km and about 600 when fired from L44 (virtually the same muzzle velocity as BM60). Just to leave a point of reference, DM-53 when fired from L50 barrel with muzzle velocity of 1710 m/s loses about 40mm of pen compared to L55. Source:
 

Spoiler

1810754414_PenetracionDM-53segunindustri


So yeah, with the things we know right now we have to conclude that DM-53 and BM60 are pretty much equivalent and given the later´s velocity it may well perform closer to 600mm than 700mm. However it should also be noted that western and soviet/russian norms for declaring a penetration level are different with the western´s criteria being less strict leading to a difference of claimed performance of about 8 percent. So bywestern standards, BM60 may well be represented as having a penetration about 650mm of pen. At this point the only way to standardize the values would be running Gj formula.

As an added comment, having BM60 as reference, we can be sure that BM59 (DU) could be much better.
 

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you get 1660 m/s  for 3BM59/60 from ( or length and weight for that matter ) ? The only place stating something close to that is wiki .... 3BM59/60 fly at 1750m/s at the exit of the muzzle .

 

Also something worth mentioning is 3BM60 ( Tungsten ) seems to be more of an export round since it is proposed along with T-90MS , while 3BM59 ( DU ) is kept for domestic usage .

 

Edited by Raldi92
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Raldi92 said:

Where do you get 1660 m/s  for 3BM59/60 from ( or length and weight for that matter ) ? The only place stating something close to that is wiki .... 3BM59/60 fly at 1750m/s at the exit of the muzzle .

 

Also something worth mentioning is 3BM60 ( Tungsten ) seems to be more of an export round since it is proposed along with T-90MS , while 3BM59 ( DU ) is kept for domestic usage .

 

That's actually correct, the Tungsten rounds are for export and "peace time" use.  The DU rounds are reserved for Major conflicts, open war.  I think he means the 1660m/s velocity is for 3bm46 svinets.  Other books and documents list 1650m/s for it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

So, this picture 

  Reveal hidden contents

704363846_MangoM1.thumb.JPG.c95cd740b6fc

 

is indeed supposed to represent the Svinets. I confused it with Lekalo or Mango-M because this mockup has several visual differences with other Svinets models (and also there is plenty of projectile/penetrator protruding from the 600mm block). But yes, the official figure for penetration is 600mm or 300mm at 60º at 2km. However, other specs of Svinets make me very suspicious. Other public specs are as follows:
 

  • Weight of the projectile - 8.4 kg (including sabot?)
  • Projectile length - 735 mm
  • Muzzle velocity - 1660 m/s

Now, compare those numbers with DM53, which has a projectile weight of 8.35kg (including the sabot), length of 745mm and its muzzle velocity is 1750 m/s and 1670 m/s when fired from L55 and L44 guns respectively. In other words, BM60 and DM-53 are EXTREMELY close in specs. Not only that but BM60 is claimed to be able to defeat heavy ERA and also complex spaced armor arrays (clear reference to Leo 2 wedges and i understand why it would negate their effectiveness), which makes both projectiles extremely similar. Below are 3d models of soviet/ru and german apfsds and see how similar BM60 and DM-53 are:
 1632990404_mixAPFSDS120y124sovyger.thumb

For the DM-53 it is officially claimed to pen 700mm (from L55) at 2km and about 600 when fired from L44 (virtually the same muzzle velocity as BM60). Just to leave a point of reference, DM-53 when fired from L50 barrel with muzzle velocity of 1710 m/s loses about 40mm of pen compared to L55. Source:
 

  Reveal hidden contents

1810754414_PenetracionDM-53segunindustri


So yeah, with the things we know right now we have to conclude that DM-53 and BM60 are pretty much equivalent and given the later´s velocity it may well perform closer to 600mm than 700mm. However it should also be noted that western and soviet/russian norms for declaring a penetration level are different with the western´s criteria being less strict leading to a difference of claimed performance of about 8 percent. So bywestern standards, BM60 may well be represented as having a penetration about 650mm of pen. At this point the only way to standardize the values would be running Gj formula.

As an added comment, having BM60 as reference, we can be sure that BM59 (DU) could be much better.
 

 

Unless the 3BM60 is monobloc, we can’t use the L/O equation on it.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mememeist3r said:

Unless the 3BM60 is monobloc, we can’t use the L/O equation on it.

 

Depends on the equation you use.  If it's a Jacketed penetrator there is the L-O equation for jacketed Rods, which can't be found on the web site anymore.  Monoblocs use the standard equation from 2009.  Remember though, L-O only predicts how the projectile would react against semi infinite RHA plate.  And is difficult to compare to what they would do against Heavy ERA like K5 or Rellikt, or NERA for that matter.  A jacketed segmented rod like 3BM42 can be calculated using L-O jacketed equation against RHA..  It would behave differently against NERA though.  

 

I have actually always gotten a chuckle out of the claim that Russian penetration criteria is more strict.... The difference between 50% chance of penetration and 80% chance of penetration, was found to be 3-5mm during WW2 testing.  It's also mostly due to misunderstanding of US penetration criteria.  L-O is based on US Protection Criteria, which requires enough mass of the projectile to pass through the plate in fragments to cause damage to or perforate a 1in thick plywood witness plate, though some times thinner metal is used, a decent analogue to a human body getting hit by the fragments. The irony being, Russian Criteria for APCR and and apfsds is about the same.   The things you see in game where the dart flies through the tank intact and keeps going till it's stopped by the engine or exits the other end is pure fantasy, outside of lightly armored targets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Conraire said:

 

Depends on the equation you use.  If it's a Jacketed penetrator there is the L-O equation for jacketed Rods, which can't be found on the web site anymore.  Monoblocs use the standard equation from 2009.  Remember though, L-O only predicts how the projectile would react against semi infinite RHA plate.  And is difficult to compare to what they would do against Heavy ERA like K5 or Rellikt, or NERA for that matter.  A jacketed segmented rod like 3BM42 can be calculated using L-O jacketed equation against RHA..  It would behave differently against NERA though.  

Yeah I was referring to the standard equation. I can't seem to find the jacketed rod equation.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.