That’s the kicker when it comes to using hull down positions. The big mantlet weakspots on soviet tanks means avoiding the hits with a stronger transmission is more important than the extra 0.7°.
As I was reading I was not able to find that info either, but I am assuming 5 to 7, if it is a single piece round which I do believe the grifel rounds are, then it should load faster.
Grifel is a 2-piece cartridge.
Ahh ok, the propellent is then separate. I thought they would make them single piece in the future to limit detonation and fire?
Limiting detonations and flagration isn’t going to do anything if the same amount of propellant is contained in the cartridge. The only thing you can do is separate the explosives from the crew, which was the entire aim of the '90s.
That is true, but one piece makes it harder for fragmentations to hit as oppose to two pieces which increases the likely hood of fire happening in the compartment. How accurate is the diagram bellow, is it just speculation ?
Which is irrelevant if the crew is placed in an entirely separate portion of the vehicle, which again, is what the objective of the '195, current T-14, and… Honestly, not too sure what else, had been trying to do.
I’ve seen it referenced a few times, though I’m not personally sure about the graphic or its origins.
2 Likes
That is the advantage of tanks like T-14 and object 195, ammunition is stored in a compartment area separated from the crew, but it is protected by the armor of the tank. It is harder to destroy the ammo in comparison to a tank like the Abrams or Object 640 which stores the ammo externally in a thinly protected compartment area outside the turret area or hull.
Having a two piece round (propellent separate) allows you to increase the lethality of the round itself, since you can develop a more powerful fragmentation, heat or sabot round. However, you have to increase the number of pieces inside the separate ammo compartment, this increases the chance of fire/detonation. Yes it will not impact the crew but it will impact the tank and the costs associated with repairs, if penetrated (from the side).
I do believe they should improve the turret protection of a tank like T-14, its is too thin and vulnerable from top down rounds. The turret compartment should also be accessible to crews, since technology can brake down and you will be required to operate the tank manually.
Overall the T-14 idea is probably the best solution offered so far, the turret section of the tank has to be re-worked, it has a 1500hp engine increasing the turret armor should not impact the tank that negatively.
I like the discussion we are having we can learn a lot about tanks. (No need for forum moderators, technical directors, baba yaga, restrictive practices to be applied here). Please go through the parts I have written and provide counter arguments to the points above, they are based on observations off already provided online sources which re not always accurate.
what is the reload speed of it, some sources i read stated 4 sec
Well it could be 4, can you provide a link to the sources. I was guessing between 5 and 7. If we cant get access to resources about this tank how will it be implemented in game? Maybe gajiin has access to sources we don’t have?
well, the T80 can reload that fast anyway but for ‘balance’ its 6.5s. T90 can reload in ~7s
nein they cant
the 640 use a different autoloader, the western one which is guarantee 5 seconds if using the standard bustle autoloader formula
I reckon its atleast slowest 5.5 seconds
I have seen a video of the MZ autoloader operating in 4 seconds??!?!
can you share it?
it never was supposed to even have the 152 mm, its fake from a book. Cactus was made between 1985’s K-5 and 2005’s Relict and it looks closer to the latter one, so I guess between their level, leaning forward to Relict
From all I can find Kaktus refers to Relikt itself in its freefloating nature, with no attempt to ever develop ERA for the '640 being done.
well, Relict couldnt exist so early back in 1997, so… There are only speculations
The first application of it was in 1999, with widespread use from 2002-2005… Wouldn’t say it’s too off course for a vehicle that was only publicly displayed 2 years prior with a turret that was nothing but a cardboard box.
all I heard of it being cardboard is rumors not confirmed with anything. So Relict was made earlier than 2005? Guess I found wrong source that time. Is there no actual official info of when Relict was first manufactured? Of course it would be great if such an early tank has such a great (in game terms) ERA kit for the turret, but… Seems off