First off you have a request, so no one has signed off on anything. Second unless you provide documentation that say they built and deliver these tanks they were never built.
The army asks for money all the time and gets denied. You have provided nothing to prove 215 SEPv3 were built before 2020.
Read what MJPIA posted.
I’m sure being radioactive does absolutely nothing helpful. What these documents keep saying is simply there’s no conclusive proof, but strong indirect evidence and it would be silly if the radiation was irrelevant to the health of exposed populations.
In my mind, it’s clearly all but proven. Radioactive material, heavy metal or otherwise, is generally speaking not particularly healthy. It’s factually hazardous at the best of times.
Fine.
Seems you haven’t understood what I’m saying.
The statement about DM53 being proven only in Ukraine isn’t true. As far as I recall, tests done by Germany happened even in the 2000’s or something. Those nations knew long before 2021 if DM53 could punch through the vehicles that existed at that time.
My next sentence I mention that DM53 and equivalent ammunition was known to defeat all then-existing T-64, T-72 and T-80 variants. Because of firing trials during the 1990’s.
danielo is making wrong statements. Even Relikt won’t have been a mystery since basically any major power could construct a T-72B3 equivalent hull composite based on schematics they have, make a copy of relikt based on its technical schematics (which afaik are in a patent application) and just test it out. It’s not like you need live fire trials to figure out things like that.
The 130mm+ guns just aren’t related to T-64, T-72 and T-80 variants because those tanks basically cannot be protected in any meaningful way against any half-decent 130mm+ APFSDS round made since the 80’s.
130mm+ guns are total overkill for that role.
Armored Warfare always did pretty nice research and showed it off, useful information about 140mm programs.
First off you have a request, so no one has signed off on anything. Second unless you provide documentation that say they built and deliver these tanks they were never built.
I gave you a document from 2017 that showed what they were asking for and then a document from 2018 showing they got what they asked for…
Regardless, here is the budget for FY 2019, it shows that what was being asked for in 2017 and 2018 was approved which is why nothing was changed:
I was however wrong on the 2017/2018 as it was actually 2019 i.e. according to the following the SEPv3 entered service in 2019 not 2020:
Regardless, like I said, the Army got all those tanks.
The only mystery about Relikt and new version of Kontak 5 is the explosive they used.
Now the Russian only use 4S23 (which is still a secret) for the Relikt and newly produced K5
4S23 is less sensitive again normal round but much more sensitive to anti-tank round.
Again you’ve shown nothing that say any tanks were delivered.
It being radioactive is actually pretty irrelevant, you do know how dangerous heavy metals are right? You ever hear about lead? It doesn’t give off any radiation like DU does, and I am not going to go around inhaling it, same with Arsenic, I also just gave you a study that found the non-radioactive Tungsten could be carcinogenic… point of fact even Aluminium isn’t safe:
Surprise, heavy metals are dangerous, DU being radioactive is actually the least of its issues.
In my mind, it’s clearly all but proven. Radioactive material, heavy metal or otherwise, is generally speaking not particularly healthy. It’s factually hazardous at the best of times.
I can tell, meanwhile Tungsten is A OK even though there is limited research, the research that has been done points to it being carcinogenic, but hey DU bad Tungsten good.
some people man.
I will concede 148 tanks were built and not fielded. Does not change the first units received their’s in july of 2020.
Never said tungesten is safe. Probably it isn’t. If you recall my original statement and the purpose I mentioned it.
Doesn’t mean Tungsten is fine, simply that.
I.E. They said nothing convincing because of the obvious conflicts of interest and lack of transparency on the matter.
Like in what I cited.
AKA Armies and nations suppressing evidence that their weapons are callously harmful. Water is wet. Agent Orange anyone?
You can cite where I ever sung the praise of Tungsten. It’s simply not radioactive. If you consider that a plus point, then sure.
Oh wow, so roof armor is far underperforming too? Sounds like the SepV2 should have a composite roof
What the hell, do you need the Bill of frikin Lading and a selife from the supply shop with all 148 tanks? Jesus christ the gymnastics here
My god. 2s38.
And no, its not a concept, we need a combat stipulation? Holy crap dude. Do you know how many vehicles we should remove based on that, and how many russian vehicles dont belong too
A concept is a 1 off that isnt built all the way and used for tech demonstration, this is so far from that. Youre remaking definitions
Im from Poland so heres translation. M1A2 sep features semicircular reactive armor and additional machine gun on gun barrel. DU armor is present on the lower front plate and turret(book said turret, not cheeks only, so maybe DU is on breach armor too?). Fire control system was modified increasing data speed. M1A2 sep mass grew to 65,2t and speed has been sligthly decreased to 66km/h
They actually did a pretty mediocre research full of nonsense and mistakes, they even said that the ATAC System Demonstrator “Thumper” got built by Lockheed Martin… Thumper got built in 1988 at the anniston army depot years before the CATTB.
They also said that the Thumper was armed exclusively with the 120mm version of the XM291, which is not true. In 1992 they reffitted it with 140mm gun tube and a rearm port to work with Future Armor Rearm System (FARS), and afaik it still had the 140mm gun tube installed when they moved it to Sierra Army Depot in 2010.
Thank you for showing me new information.
I will say, this kind of documentation can make for very interesting future vehicles, much more so (at least to me) than giving some additional protection to an M1A2 hull.
Photo of the ATAC System Demonstrator few days before the 140mm gun tube got installed in 1992.
And this is the ATAC System Demonstrator " Thumper" with the 140mm gun tube.
Ayeflyingcowboy clamed that SEPv2 entered service in 2018 when it was in 2020. He clamed that the sources did not mean anything, so now we are going through the integration process.
Officially entering service is not the same as manufacturing start, you have to build them before they can start service, thats how US service dates work
