Bruh, literely you can see 2 different roads and nearby destroyed vehicles, also, first image from Ukranie unit, second is a Recon squad from Russian.
you do know that Russians capture destroyed tanks and move them and then pictures are taken again right?
just because its in a different location does not mean its a different tank/IFV.
you have to also look at the damage on the tank and compare to see if its the same.
5 Likes
Don’t forget the whole ‘our Ka-52s taking out a Leopard’ video… said Leopard 2 then turned out to be a Combine Harvester. I suppose to the Russians some modern Western farm machinery might well be 200 years in the future compared to their tech-base but we don’t routinely use them as MBTs.
Source supplied - 'Leopard 2' Tank Seen Destroyed In Russian Media Video Was Actually A Farm Harvester
If it is a Russian MOD source about ANYTHING to do with destroyed equipment it is usually a pack of imaginary tales, badly-formed falsehoods and dusted with enough obfuscation to muddy the waters. This is the bunch of jokers who claim the Moskva didn’t sink because it headbutted a few anti-ship missiles. It fell over because it was a bit breezy or something similarly inane…
Don’t use RU sources for forming opinions and certainly don’t wheel them out to give support to any argumentation of vehicle performance in War Thunder.
16 Likes
i thought the cattb had a 130mm gun
Yeah, the logic circle Gaijin is making here is so asinine. “Here’s a paper aircraft that we are outfitting for a top-tier position despite never being fitted with such but we can’t apply that logic to the prototype DU Abrams”.
Hey CMs or mods, can we forward onto the devs to remove the Yak-141, citing your own logic here? Just want to make sure we are being consistent with your implementation of top-tier.
13 Likes
Not quite, the XM291 was actually a dual-caliber system. You could swap the 140mm tube out for the 120mm tube. I believe the 120mm tube was actually rated at around 1,000lbs lighter in comparison to the M256 overall.
The reason they wanted it to be a dual caliber tube is because they wanted to be able to retain the ability to use existing stocks of 120mm ammunition.
I’m pretty sure the 120mm version of the XM291 was even used on the 120mm M8 Enhanced Capabilities Demonstrator
Some sources:
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA228163.pdf
3 Likes
That’s exactly what i’ve said, while the XM291 is dual-caliber system, TACOM had to hide the further development of the 140mm gun tube from 1991 and onwards, because the congress no longer wanted to give money for the 140mm gun tube and ammo development, only for the 120mm gun tube.
Just to clear it up for some ppl, some documents like the Finite Element Stress Analysis for Component Advanced Technology Test Bed (CATTB) suggests that the CATTB uses the 120mm gun tube but that’s not true, LW 120 is the “nickname” of the 140mm gun tube.
-
Lightweight 120mm or LW 120 = 140mm gun tube
-
120mm XM291 = 120mm gun tube
Correctly, the M8 Thunderbolt used the XM291, but with a shorter 120mm L/44 gun tube. Watervliet designed and tested with the ATAC System Demonstrator (Thumper) 3 different 120mm gun tubes for the XM291, L/56 (Long tube), L/44 (Short tube) and one between these two lengths (Medium tube).
2 Likes
Afaik the U.S. army never tested nor designed a 130mm gun tube, although the XM291 is Engineered to permit use of bore sizes from 120mm to 155mm.
The CATTB only ever used the XM291 with the 140mm gun tube, while Thumper tested 3 different 120mm gun tubes manned and the 140mm unmanned.
I will write an article about the CATTB and the Thumper with correct information since every single article, blog or website lacks information about them, the CATTB in some aspects is even more advanced than the Abrams X.
3 Likes
so one square meter is about 10.8 square foot. so 5.7x10.8=61.56lbs per square meter. 61.56lbs is about 28kg, so my estimation of 30 kg per square meter for only the kevlar wasn’t that far of :)
granted i added extra steel and mounting weight to that which probably would not be necessary.
but i’m a bit confused how they then got 1250lbs (about 567kg) as a total for just the turret.
that would mean an area of 567/28=20.25 square meters, for just the turret. that does not sound correct at all. lets say, 2m tall cylinder with 1m radius. that gives an area of roughly 2m length and 2m width and 2m height (which seams reasonable in my head).
the lateral area of a cylinder: 2πrh gives 2 x π x 1 x 2=4 x π= about 12.6 square meters to cover ALL the walls. lets say you want the roof as well, add π x r^2=π x 1= about 3.14.
so a total of 15.7 square meters.
admittedly larger than i thought but still only 3/4 of their total.
is the turret volume really that big?
This is for the spall liner
And this is the turret basic structure if you want to calculate the turret crew area volume.
3 Likes
rough calculations done in head gets me to about 8-9square meters for the upper turret.
i looked further and the basket is 1.2m radius and about 1.2m high. so (again roughly) 9 square meters.
which makes things make more sense, a total of 18 square meters (from head-math). but then you probably don’t have liner everywhere since it has to be mounted around some stuff.
but yeah, bigger than i thought.
Another photo from book. It said:
Armor
Composite armor, similar to the British Chobham. The composite includes steel, depleted uranium sheets, ceramics and synthetic fibers. is the equivalent of 560 mm of steel armor on the front of the hul
l and 90 cm of armor on the turret.
7 Likes
They dont consider books credible.
that’s… that’s one of the only things except straight up manuals or manufacturer info that they in fact do accept…
Do I really have to put /sarc every time?
1 Like
yes. its text. sarcasm and text don’t go together and this forum is full enough of misinformed people that many might believe that you actually think what you write is true.
2 Likes
A video showing the effectiveness of different materials vs. apfsds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuWbwP0YRM8
1 Like
What book is this from if I may ask ? Gaijin can be very picky on some of the authors.
Abrams got a very good suspension to handle more weight and armor!
1 Like
"Tanks (inside out) Michael E. Haskew.