How do you know that, can i have the proof or you just dont have it again?
Explosion and spalling caused by round is different things, lol. Even in game, I dont think i need to prove why APHE is superior to basis AP in way of post pen effect.
You are ignoring the fact its also Chinese tanks to have them, and that even Abrams and Leopard 2 can be taken as spall liners, because they stop internal, more wider arc of spall from entering.
You do know Leopard 2 has no fuel tanks inside the compartment ?
Because Ukraine had struggle with its industrial capability for quite some time even before the war (actually even before 2014).
I will cross out “superior”. Its simply existed, unlike Ukraines (actually its true for all former-Soviet Union states, but Ukraine suffered the biggest downfall for quite big number of reasons).
This is literally the primary source on the armour of the Leopard 2, if the devs didn’t use it, they would’ve never been able to model any Leopard 2 model past the 2A4.
Explosion and spalling caused by round is different things, lol. Even in game, I dont think i need to prove why APHE is superior to basis AP in way of post pen effect.
Spoiler: AP’s post-pen effects are undeperforming. APHE is overperforming.
You are ignoring the fact its also Chinese tanks to have them
What’about’ism.
and that even Abrams and Leopard 2 can be taken as spall liners, because they stop internal, more wider arc of spall from entering.
Abrams doesn’t have them. Leopard 2’s don’t work to nearly the same degree as BVMs.
You do know Leopard 2 has no fuel tanks inside the compartment ?
Ah yes, obviously that’s why there’s fire coming from the hull and turret hatches in this photo:
Contrary to popular belief, this flaw is not particularly related to the presence of an autoloader but to specific ammo placement inside the turret. The newer tank model can combine autoloader and safer ammo placement. T-72–120 (Ukrainian modernization of T-72) or T-90M (Russian modernization of T-90) has a new ammo placement, which is much more resistant to ammo cook off.
Also the lost Challenger 2 tank had its method of not letting ammo explode fail, resulting to ammo detonation.
Also the lost Challenger 2 tank had its method of not letting ammo explode fail, resulting to ammo detonation.
What? Chally 2 and “method of preventing ammunition explosion”?
You’d be a lot more beliveable if you at least knew what wet tanks are for, cus they’re not there to stop the ammunition from exploding.
Oh you dont see hatches open, do you? If ammo has direct entry for air it burns, like in Abrams blowout panel which can be seen outside. If theres no air enough for the ammo to burn, it explodes.
A missile triggered a fire that apparently cooked off the Challenger 2’s ammunition charges in their special containers. Filled with water, these containers are supposed to prevent catastrophic secondary explosions, but they failed, and the resulting blast wrenched the Challenger 2’s turret from its hull. The Challenger 2 Tank Already Has a Lot of Armor. The Ukrainians Added More.
…well… Its so laughable, that the first thing you send is freaking Wall Street Journal. Absolutely not biased media. And i see no experts in it. Only their own editor (wow).
P.S. And part about Chally is freaking hillarious, why not only abrams or leo, why the least safest western tank?
Second is Channel 4 video (wow, British state-owned media). And its again features no experts, lol. Interviewer speaks with their own correspondent.
Like… Are you even tryin to find credible source?
Nope, simply because they cant made then, lol. Like, Ukraine sold half of its arsenals since SU collapse. They were struggling with production of new tanks (just look at the Oplot and how hard it was to complete Thai batch). Same goes for basically anything: planes, navy, even small arms. Its not because they thought that western is better, its because West can give it them right now and not sometime after 10 or more years.
It was IM munitions btw, Germany only provided those to Ukraine (DM53A1 & DM11 - neither of them explodes because funky fact, STANAG). Educate yourself.
84-120 Yatagan feautres Bustle Autoloader with blowout panels (need to confirm it) and T-90M stores all additional ammo (that isnt in carousel) in bustle stowage (less safer, than full bustle, but still)
Edit: not 72-120, 84-120. 72-120 feautres same bustle loader, but ammo stowage moved to rear part of tank
hahahah, it shows what your leanings are. Muh western media is very biased, but muh russian sources are perfect.
I can’t do anything but laugh at the stuff you write.
It’s okay to not be able to handle the simple fact that Western equipment is superior, you don’t have to fight so hard to defend obselete ones.
It wasnt what i said at all, so give up your strawman. (Or you really think that state-owned British Media and US media wouldnt be biased in this conflict?)
Idk, laughing about industrial catastrophe is kinda not-good, you know.
But jokes aside, idk how you fighting against reality so hard. Or you trying to convience me, that Ukrainian industry havent got problems? That the West didnt have ready for delivery vehicles and equipment? That they couldnt supply them right here and right now? Or what?
