If somebody interested:
2 Likes
Interesting info about automatic loader, I read parts of it, how long will it take to bring the round into the gun chamber? Is this loader more reliable than the auto loaders in other T-series tanks?
Well the object has been pushed back a bite to winter operation. We are now stuck with T-72b3a no reverse speed. I wonder why is it so hard to re-work the transmission of the t-72 tank and increase its reverse speed?
Just use the T-80s.
2 Likes
The T-72 variants have slightly more gun depression, they are mostly -5.7 so they can use some spots to hull down where the T-80s with -5 couldn’t, their turret armor are pretty decent especially the T-90 series, where they only can be penned by top ammunition like DM53/M829A2, except if you get hit in the breech.
This guy would have killed me if he had -5.7 instead of -5.0, he was taking way too long to lower his gun enough to hit me, only around .5 second late because I was still reloading.
Not likely, the T-80 was cresting the hill a lot faster than a T-72 would. The extra 0.7° depression doesn’t come into it when its further back and still cresting the hill.
He was dead either way.
Given the speed of T-80s yeah, I was aware that he was giving me way too much time to reload so I was thinking he probably couldn’t lower his gun enough.
Unfortunately, I didn’t find answers to these questions there.
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.