/thg/ Treadhead General

File: M42nam2.jpg (907KB, 792x595px) Image search: [Google]

907KB, 792x595px

>>31518960
OP: As always, feedback, suggestions wanted and appreciated.
Business as usual this week, with the continuation of our exploration into post-WWII SPAAGs, their development and doctrinal changes.
One of the most interesting facets of the M42’s service was the nature of its deployment in Vietnam. From 1966 onwards, due to ongoing concerns about the limitations inherent to the HAWK missile batteries, the M42 Duster was reactivated and shipped over to the Republic of Vietnam largely to cover the inadequacies of the HAWK against low altitude targets. In actual practice, however, the M42 found engaged in direct fire against opposing ground forces and positions, as the explosiveness and fragmentation of its 40 mm rounds were excellent against fortified positions and clearing out large concentrations of enemy infantry and also eliminating light vehicles. Unfortunately, a major limitation, particularly pertinent to the Vietnamese theatre, was that the sensitive point detonating fuse of the Bofors invariably led to difficulty in penetrating thick vegetation. In these instances, the M55 quad .50 cal was used instead. An interesting quirk of the M42 was that it was maintenance heavy, and simultaneously easy to repair in the field, on the proviso that scarce spare components could be found. One of the most enduring memories of the M42 in Vietnam was its role as a premier convoy escort vehicle along contested roadways, able to easily suppress ambushes and also provide covering fire for vulnerable supply trains. From the Tet Offensive to the dying days of the American presence in Vietnam, where fire support was called for, the M55 and M42 were invariably on the scene.

File: modern day m42.jpg (196KB, 1080x810px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1080x810px

>>31518969
More tank news, as per the new format.
If you have more queries regarding a news story, just point it out, and I’ll further elaborate and provide links.

Bit of a slow news day (or perhaps I haven’t been paying attention):
South African defense consortium Denel has signed a memorandum of understanding with Saudi Arabian defense firm ITAEC Group on the joint manufacture of anti-tank missiles in the country. This implies that the Ingwe missile could be produced out of Saudi Arabia and marketed abroad.
The British Army’s Multi-Role Vehicle Protected (MRV-P) programme has progressed to a downselect for Group 2, with two variants such as the Troop Carrying Vehicle and Future Protected Battlefield Ambulance. BAE Systems, GDLS UK, Mercedes-Benz, Rheinmetall MAN and Thales are all the selected contenders for Group 2.
The Indonesia Marine Corps has taken as of last week deliveries for the first batch of Ukrainian BTR-4Ms. It is expected that the nation will receive a total sum of 55 BTRs.
One important thing last week I neglected to mention was Peace Mission 2016, as members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation assembled with military and counterterrorist equipment and personnel in Kyrgyzstan. Over 1100 service members from China, Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan and Tajikistan participated in the event. (If anyone has more Chinese internet sourced information on some of the battlefield scenarios, I would dearly appreciate it)

And that’s all for now.

File: vietnam-1 tracers tracking viet cong sniper.jpg (564KB, 2295x1536px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 2295x1536px

>>31518981
Pictured is an incredible long exposure shot of US troops, including AA vehicles, firing wildly into the Vietnamese countryside after provocations from Viet Cong sniper(s).

frenchfag i summon thee

File: CtoKbHfXEAAvff3.jpg (554KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

554KB, 1536x2048px

>>31518981
>Bit of a slow news day (or perhaps I haven’t been paying attention):

AUSA 2016 starts on Monday.

http://www.generaldynamics.com/news/press-releases/2016/09/general-dynamics-ausa-2016-ready-today-prepare-america%E2%80%99s-army-future
>In Booth 6029, Land Systems is demonstrating its new, non-developmental medium-weight ground combat vehicle.
>Land Systems’ lethal, medium-weight tracked vehicle demonstrator, the Griffin, combines the DNA of the Abrams turret and 120mm gun with innovations from the company’s full series of ground combat vehicles.

File: 2490.jpg (2MB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1936px

>>31519257

File: 2488.jpg (1MB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1936px

>>31519267

File: 2873812975_d5fdd87e31_b.jpg (340KB, 1024x700px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1024x700px

Could we have a It Ain't Me/Vietnam War armor pics thread?

>>31518969
>From 1966 onwards, due to ongoing concerns about the limitations inherent to the HAWK missile batteries, the M42 Duster was reactivated and shipped over to the Republic of Vietnam largely to cover the inadequacies of the HAWK against low altitude targets
Were airborne attacks by north Vietnam such a problem? My knowledge about the airwar pretty much ends with NV reactions to US raids, not the other way around.

>>31519732
North Vietnamese air defenses were pretty punishing, but it was US and NV dogfights that had some really hairy moments for both sides.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpYfqI8uMKM

File: bigguns2.jpg (464KB, 1416x1173px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 1416x1173px

>>31519576

>>31519732
>>31519806
they one used AN-2 to bomb US radar station

File: 14752474220212.jpg (503KB, 1050x700px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 1050x700px

Russian QT making Sabot for T-14

File: 14752503804600.jpg (541KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 1440x1080px

>>31520097

>>31520097
>>31520116
Where is this? Kurgan?

>>31520122
Leningrad Mechanical Plant named after Karl Liebknecht in St. Petersburg
https://topspb.tv/uploads/video/109585.mp4

>>31520126
Cool. You know, I find the idea of hand made tank round distinctly uncomfortable. I always envisioned them on a gleaming production line with automated mills and whatnot.

File: 298656_original.jpg (277KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1200x1600px

>>31520139
those could be the early batch for testing
maybe so they are hand made to keep the cost down idk

>>31520148
>touching depleted uranium
I know breathing it in's the real killer, but touching it can't be too healthy either.

>>31520298
the penetrator is tungsten
and i don't think anyone make DU sabot

>>31520351
US makes DU sabot?

>>31520360
Yeah, that's pretty much our jam.

>>31520351
Pretty sure the Russians still have DU.

>>31520360
i am talking the sabot she was making here >>31520097
not the whole APFSDS round that people commonly called Sabot

File: 14752533573531.jpg (278KB, 438x600px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 438x600px

>>31520365
yes, but we are talking about the sabot that separate from the penetrator
they are make from aluminium and composite, not DU

>>31520373
Ah ok, I was confused about that.

>>31520373
a DU sabot would be pointless then

File: la-24pin03.jpg (105KB, 970x644px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 970x644px

>>31518987
Might not be enuff dakka, but it's pretty close.

File: 8634564038_13bed44549.jpg (91KB, 500x398px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 500x398px

>>31520498
>tank shell tracers
Oh muh dick

File: CgdyrDOWwAAqFLU.jpg (38KB, 600x391px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x391px

>>31520580
These photos are incredible.

>>31520139
>>31520148
Its all hand-made, even serials. They don't exactly make like millions of tons of these unlike arty shells for it to make sense that they make the whole process automated. Plus, the women are their own QC; millions of years of handling shafts and they'd be able to ascertain defects in an instant.

>>31520387
This, the entire point of a composite sabot is to have as little parasitic weight as possible.

>>31520126
what a fucking shit website, cant even load more than 5 seconds before choking

File: C68ZJzZKQSs.jpg (164KB, 1068x712px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1068x712px

>>31518981
>This year's Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s (SCO) Peace Mission anti-terror exercises will be held in Kyrgyzstan on September 5th to the 13th. With only 270 troops, 4 ZSL92 (WZ551) APCs and 2 Dongfeng jeeps participating, a far cry from the 2005 mission where 8000 troops from the 127th Light Mech Infantry Division conducted an amphibious assault against a "troubled island"

Referring to China's participation.

>>31522295
Branding on a military vehicle? God! Can China NOT hard-sell something? I bet it has labeling on it somewhere like, "Beauty strong war transportation."

File: IMG_5406.jpg (227KB, 1341x887px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1341x887px

Hm, no Walker Bulldog-based SPAAG at hand, so here's the base vehicle.

File: IMG_5405.jpg (224KB, 1328x848px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1328x848px

And least it'd be missed, >>31521052

>>31518981
The guy who owns that duster is a cunt

>>31523232
I don't think anyone wants to own that one.

File: e1474994043209-1024x754.jpg (95KB, 1024x754px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1024x754px

>>31524914

>>31524956
Apparently BAE's contender was designed (at least in part) by Iveco.

>>31522295
I do find the labelling of the exercise as "counter terrorist" since a lot of what they do is direct military action and "ejecting illegal enemy military presences".

Apparently Leopard2A6s are rolling out in Dresden.
Muzzle socks are on.

>>31526014
Autists on /pol/ always want a happening.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Unity_Day

>>31526014
>>31526138
Any pictures or live feed?

http://newatlas.com/color-changing-tank/45690/
Spoopy color changing tanks boys, and it looks like the shitposters down under are at the forefront.

File: Czołg_lekki_PL-01_(02).jpg (56KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1024x683px

>>31526607
Not exactly the same, but the first thing that popped into my mind.

>>31522825
>>31522841
Have you ever been inside a Walker? It's pretty spacious (although I'm a manlet).

File: tumblr_nm8w22SZ7b1rji3x6o1_500.jpg (83KB, 500x326px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 500x326px

>>31519576
>tfw you will never ford your M60 down the Mekong

File: M60 was NOT in Nam.jpg (399KB, 697x648px) Image search: [Google]

399KB, 697x648px

>>31527402
Victor non Charlier here. Don't worry, the GIs back then didn't ford their M60s down the Mekong either. That was the older Patton tanks.

Side notes: if you folks want some reading materials of dubious origin regarding tanks and other vehicles, I can provide some Ospreys.

>>31526607
Useless when you consider the amount of dirt and mud tanks get coated in when moving.
>>31526775
Its a CV-90 with fancy grey painted wood. The Swedish fumed when they saw what they did to the CV-90 the Polish borrowed and immediately told them to return it without the crap they put on, which they did.

>>31527532
Are these the Ospreys in OP's Dropbox?

>>31527532
Yeah, always a bit annoying when someone makes that mistake. What book is that from? Osprey Vanguard?

File: ripsaw.jpg (33KB, 468x231px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 468x231px

Would it ever be viable to produce a tank that's basically a slightly widened Ripsaw chassis with a nice, powerful V8 turbodiesel running it along with a generator to power a small, high velocity railgun?

Something like a modern AMX ELC, I guess

>>31528461
Maybe, if we un-fuck our current energy storage tech.

>>31528461
Biggest problem would be the battery might be larger and heavier than the actual vehicle chassis. Until >>31528521 happens, there's no real possibility of a light rail gun carrier being feasible.

>>31528461
Why not just skip the need for gas and use a small liquid flouride thorium salt reactor

>>31528536
>>31528461
For some context, with current capacitor technology, a railgun with the same energy as a 120mm would require a bank larger than the volume of the tank itself.

>>31528592
because super-compressed steam, even less so than gas, doesn't react too well to bullets.

>>31528603
Ah, fuck, I didn't realize it was still that bad.

What about if it had enough energy to throw HEAT and HE rounds at a fair speed, something in the 130-150mm flavor for maximum explosives.

File: general atomics 4.jpg (382KB, 1920x1268px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1920x1268px

>>31528461
A V8 turbodiesel hooked to a generator cannot provide the "dump" of electricity needed to fire a railgun of any meaningful size.

See all those blue objects in the racks behind this naval railgun? Those are capacitors.

>>31528644
You still got a really bulky energy storage that's more of a liability than anything else, especially in direct combat; plus it would be really expensive with little actual utility gained for the cost.

>>31528644
Oh, you meant instead of a capacitor bank? That's an unarguable necessity for a railgun, and the bit that we just don't have the tech for right now.
Imagine you're an idiot and trying to kill a fire ant nest or something with water. You could, obviously, just spray it with a garden hose, but now you just have a bunch of moistened, angry ants. So, instead, you fill your daughter's kiddie pool with the hose and dump it on the mound. Now you've drowned half your lawn but at least the ants are dead.
In that example, the hose is the power source, the pool is the capacitor bank, and the water is the energy. A railgun needs a required amount of energy, defined by the basic laws of physics. Sure we can get a bigger hose (Better power supply), but all that does is fill up our still not-big-enough pool (Our capacitors).

>>31528725
It meant to say "Fill up our still not-big-enough pool quicker.". I guess that got cut off.

>>31518987
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ-EOg38t1o

>>31528682
>>31528694
I would bet the US is already working on miniaturization as we speak.
http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/719222/dod-tech-transformation-holds-surprises-for-us-adversaries

Might be a weird question, but has anyone ever managed to put down the barrel of a tank a hand grenade or similar since WWII?

>>31529744
Happened in syria.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndIpj97PA08

>>31529273
Well, no shit. However, both for now and the forseeable future, railguns will only be tenable in static fortifications or ships.

>>31529843
I feel it's apt to coin a new saying:
"If it can happen to tanks, it's happened in Syria."
Might as well call it Assad's Law.

>>31529885
It's pretty true though. We've seen nades through the hatch, nades through the gun, molotovs on the exhaust and AT weapons on every single point of vulnerability you could think of from Syria alone.

>>31529885
Sounds like a good thing to point out when designing tanks.
"We're going to locate [x] component in here"
"But Assad's Law"
"Shit yeah, there was that one time an RPG/ATGM/RR/cannon/artillery/rock/stick hit the [x] during [y]"

File: usmc.jpg (9KB, 289x174px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 289x174px

DU engine blocks wouldn't need to be cooled, as the melting point is higher than the burn temperature of diesel.

Why isn't this a thing?

>>31530448
cost of DU, cost of manufacturing parts from DU, also did i mention that you'd be heating up DU? that in itself sounds like a bad idea

File: 1000684.jpg (47KB, 700x385px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 700x385px

>>31518960

>>31530448
>I have literally no knowledge of engineering, materials or HAZMAT: the post

>>31530546
one of these cannons isn't accurate out to 200 meters. lets stick two of them for different ammo types, like we'll be able to hit anything..

File: IMG_5373.jpg (199KB, 1040x908px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1040x908px

>>31530448
Uranium lets at 1405K, about the same as cast iron. So if an engine cast out of iron or steel needs cooling, then it'd stand to reason that uranium wouldn't fare any better.

As to why, one thing to keep in mind is that metals don't stay unaffected up until the melting (solidus for alloys) point. Instead they gradually soften and loose their strength, with the rule of thumb being that it's down to zero at 80% of the melting temperature in absolute terms. For uranium, that'd be 1124K, or about 1560°F. As that's the point of no strength to speak of at all, we naturally need to stay well below that.

With the engine block being able to stand some amount of heat, we also need to look into how much heat valves and cylinders can take.

With a possible mix of materials involved, and different temperatures in different parts of the engine, we must also consider the effect of differing thermal expansion, as our engine should hopefully be able to run both during a cold start and when it's hot, or very very hot as our uncooled one will get. And then we need to find a lubricant that works at those temperatures, without behaving like asphalt when it's colder.

For uranium specifically we also appear to have two phase changes between 600 and 800 °C, where the properties of the material, including density, will change around a bit. So now all three f those phases will have to be acceptable for engine use.

With uranium's tendency to oxidize, combined with a lot of water soluble salts resulting from that, such an engine block may also suffer from some corrosion issues, especially at elevated temperatures. The corrosion products also have the potential for being quite toxic.

Now this burn temperature of diesel, is that how hot it actually gets within a diesel engine, or the adiabatic flame temperature? Because the latter isn't really applicable to this scenario, it's rather a basic energy in-energy out balance.

>>31530448
well, there are a bunch of reasons
let's set aside that DU is REALLY toxic, almost impossible to machine, expensive as hell and so on

the entire concept is of what you propose is absurd and proving you have no idea what are talking about (or trolling)
they don't cool it because it would melt, they do it because metal stretches out as it heats up, causing pistons and other parts not to seal

but let's say it works as you imagine it:
engine would be touching steel parts, melt right through tank and fall off in the middle of road

Briefing on the XM360 ETC 120 mm.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010armament/WednesdayReunionDavidSmith.pdf
We might see it on the M1A3.

>>31518960
M41. Last I checked the japs loved the lm to pieces

>>31518981
It's high time for the saffers to consider olifant replacement. It's basically a heavily upgraded centurion.

For all its upgrade, olifant still can't shoot on the move (let alone tank hunting capability), has antiquited drivetrain system and lack NBC protection (hell, not even a proper air conditioning).

>>31520148

The arrow reminds me the old steel 125 mm APFSDS.

>>31520373

152 mm sabot ?

>>31530744
They kinda did, with upgunned Badger. It would be cheaper and less complex to do than redesigning an entirely new tank

File: Would you like to know more.jpg (3KB, 120x96px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 120x96px

>>31519186

Demonstrating a New Series of Firepower: Land Systems’ lethal, medium-weight tracked vehicle demonstrator, the Griffin, combines the DNA of the Abrams turret and 120mm gun with innovations from the company’s full series of ground combat vehicles.

File: thermally insulated diesel engines.png (122KB, 500x601px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 500x601px

>>31530448
>>31530644

>>31530750
>152 mm sabot ?
Still 125; you confuse the retaining ring for the driving band.

>>31530728
so is that turret armoured at all or is it just like a SPG turret?

>>31530850
The Mounted Gun had really piss poor armor IIRC, comparable to like an M109.
But you're looking at the wrong thing: the FCS and Mounted Gun was cancelled due to budget cuts and design issues, it's the XM360 that's still a marketable weapon.

>>31530930
So how does this cannon differ and improve from the current 120mm on the Abram's?

Interesting how headlights are virtually unchanged since the 1960s. AAVs still use the same headlights as the M60 Patton did, and LAVs use the same headlights as the OP vehicle.

I guess if it ain't broke don't fix it.

>>31530979
Well the 120 mm XM360 is an ETC, which should tell you everything you need to know about its potential.

File: M60 ERA.jpg (3MB, 2576x1868px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2576x1868px

>>31528331
Dah. New vanguard No. 85.

>>31528054
What Dropbox?

Also, late reply with some m60.

>>31530754
Why wouldn't they design a new tank?

>>31531071
South Africa's economy is not exactly in tip-top shape; the Olifant was a long due overhaul of existing Centurions anyway.

>>31531071
Between deteriorating economy and brain drain (most of bright saffer engineers already fucked off to N. America, europe and even SE asia) and Denel living off mainly from overseas contract, there is just no way they could afford new mbt

There were rumors about the chinks pushing Type-99 mbt tho, so there's that

>>31531116
>Type-99 mbt
Actually curious as to what kind of marketing spin the Chinks will put on a Type 99 monkey model.

>>31531125
Nothing concrete so far, but I'd imagine that denel would be heavily involved in the localization of the tank design

Prolly they would only adopt the hull, turret and powertrain while the electronics, FCS and even the main gun would be of either western or domestic origin

>>31531152
I'd rather if they'd use K2 instead

>>31531177
K2 costs over $8 million USD each last time I checked.

>>31531193
Is the Altay a monkey model K2?

>>31531027
>Well the 120 mm XM360 is an ETC, which should tell you everything you need to know about its potential.
Care to explain how its that much better to say, the L/55 120 mm rheinmetall; the 2A82-1M; or the 130 mm rheinmetall? Plus wouldn't it necessitate the addition of bulky energy storage devices like cap banks to store the additive electrical energy.

>>31531177
>I'd rather if they'd use K2 instead
The best tanks around the bloc are what, T-72Bs and Type-96s, way overkill and inefficient if you go for K-2s. T-90S and Type-99s seem like very good options I think, especially since both Russia and China offer flexible payment plans or could even give out loans.

>>31531359

Pretty much.

It's Turkey effectively getting to the level that other nations have been at for a decade or more.

>>31531364
Norinco's mbt2000 seems the best option if not t-90 ms.

>>31531383
I don't know, Turco-Korean relations are pretty good, I think Hyundai might have been a lot more generous.

>>31531420
>I don't know, Turco-Korean relations are pretty good, I think Hyundai might have been a lot more generous.
Its not that. The Koreans are looking to offload some of the developmental costs incurred for the K-2 and the Turks happen to have the dough and the need for a JV.

>>31531384
>Norinco's mbt2000 seems the best option if not t-90 ms.
The MBT-2000 is woefully outdated as of today while the T-90MS is baller I doubt it would come cheap.

>>31531383
>>31531420

Yes and no. While the turks would get the same hull, gun and turret as K2, they would have to develop the FCS and electronics independently.

The tank itself, while pretty advanced, isn't what the korean are cautious about. It's the BMS unit,which is unique to south korea, something they would only share to US military (albeit reluctantly)

Afaik the chinks have a self destruct button inside the type-99/MBT-3000 that would essentially fry the entire system in case of capture

>>31531384
>>31531464
The Current Chinese export is the VT-4 (MBT3000).

The VT-4 and the ZTZ-99 are as different as the T-90 and T-80.

>>31530448
Why not make it out of solid diamond instead?

Friendly reminder that Arjun MBT is the best MBT in the history of MBTs

File: 004.jpg (241KB, 1600x871px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1600x871px

>>31533186
The Arjun MkII is pretty good for a country that doesn't have decades of industrial experience.

>>31533186
>>31533399

This thread is for serious, civilized discussion only.

bring yo shitposting and samefagging somewhere else

File: 1MOpiHJ.jpg (164KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1280x800px

>>31533426
Here is your (you).

>>31533443
>>31533399
I can swear I've seen that tank before
But not operated by Indians,looks familiar

File: idX5KqA.jpg (70KB, 1392x432px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1392x432px

Since we are talking about the Arjun have some 120mm thermobaric rounds.

>>31528682
It's the new american meme gun since F-35, Railguns are useless in our age like naval guns.

File: v68LJoW.jpg (47KB, 1411x451px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1411x451px

>>31533481

>>31533477
Probably the wedges on the turret face like on the Leopard 2 and ZTZ-96/ZTZ-99.

>>31533399
Memes aside, I suppose thats the important part. India have proven to themselves that they can design and build their own MBT, even if its nothing special by Western standards.

Similar to their new Arihant Class SSBNs. Completely meh compared to the Vanguard Class but indigenous.

File: Ctx8nIIW8AAzBOR.jpg (63KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 630x420px

>>31519186

>>31518960
I talked to a Air Defense officer who was in Vietnam. I remember him saying that Dusters only shot down one NVA aircraft in the entire war, a small observation plane.

>>31533481
Wow, so it barely managed to penetrate the side of a 60-year tank?

>>31534119
>HE
>penetrate

>>31534082
North Vietnam didn't really put launch air missions into the South. It was pretty much a defensive force until America left. I can't see them running into SPAAGs too often.

>>31528592
>liquid thorium salt reactor.

yes, lets put that on a battlefield

also, maybe we couls crew and maintain it with barely literate niggers from the worst ghettos in detroit.

oh, and dont forget make it out of proprietary parts from the lowest bidder who also happens to have their plant in backwater georgia and got the contract because their uncles neighbor is a senator.

File: are you fucking kidding me.jpg (90KB, 600x384px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 600x384px

what are the chances the M1a3's gonna go full t-90 and just strap NERA fucking everywhere?

>>31533186
This is bait, surely, or is the poo in loo internet defense force a thing now?

>>31535453
The Jordanians only went full retard with the Phoenix because they were compensating for the old M60 design.

>>31535453
>NERA
Do you mean ERA? Because most NERA is not externally bolted on.

>>31533481
The Arjun's 120 mm APFSDS is completely terrible by all accounts, it can barely pen 600 mm RHA in internal tests.

>>31537822
I'm surprised they made that public. If it were China or Russia they'd just call it ABRAM'S KILLER

>>31537908
I guess that India needs actual verifiable successes for the world market, since it has zero reputation for AFV building, unlike China and Russia, who at least have some (questionable quality) pedigree.

>>31538202
Thing is, the MoD basically lied through their teeth when they said the Arjun surpassed the T-90S in all categories.

I assume the MBT 2000 is faster, has more firepower and probably better stabilized than the Arjun, but the Arjun likely has the better armor.

File: arjun_03.jpg (42KB, 650x433px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 650x433px

>>31539064
It looks a lot like a Leopard 2A4 or Type 90 though.

File: 7xPZF3N6oDc.jpg (27KB, 490x500px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 490x500px

>>31519186
What are those boxes? ERA? Radar? Jammers?

>>31539080
I am cringing at the thought of being in a cramped sweaty smelly crew compartment with two other poo in loos.

File: Picture-Of-Al-Khalid-Tank.jpg (178KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1280x853px

>>31539064

>>31539064
An Arjun MkII is likely superior to a Al-Khalid/VT-1/MBT2000 while being inferior to a VT-4/MBT3000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPlOekOW3bM

>>31540002
Keep the shitposting out of /thg/.

File: vt-4-image24.jpg (114KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1024x768px

>>31540457
The VT-4 is a lot more aesthetically pleasing than the monstrosity that is the Arjun Mk 2.

File: 1463990975192.jpg (245KB, 570x845px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 570x845px

>>31540417
>That ERA coverage on the turret.

>>31540811
Might as well not be there tbqh.
Reminds me of one Syrian tank that had single ERA bricks latched on like a patchwork quilt at random intervals. Guess they had to make do with what limited supplies they could scavenge.

>>31533591
The suspense is killing me. Looks like a new MGS though.

>>31541417
MPF candidate, calling it now

>>31535453
T-90 only have ERA on the roof of the turret and the frontal part of the tank

>>31533591
Alright, so here's me attempting to divine the features of what's underneath there.

First thing first, it's got a turret with a cannon in it. Shocking, I know, but of note is that it's got a proper cupola up there.

Also of note on the gun is the apparent lack of a prominent bore evacuator. This means that it is either a REALLY bad mockup, or that the gun cannot be the 120mm M256 gun used on the Abrams or the M68A2 used on the Stryker MGS. Of note is that neither of the M8 AGS's guns, the 105 mm XM35 or the 120 mm XM291 used in the Thunderbolt demonstrator, possessed a prominent bore evacuator.

Frontal hull is rather angled, comes to a "<" shape.

Side hull is kind of strange. Flat side, which rules out the M8, as the engine deck was raised. Cheek piece connects it to the upper glacis plate.

And that's all I can divine with my measly knowledge.

File: combatlessons.jpg (57KB, 600x396px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x396px

Few interesting tips from WW2 'Combat Lessons' publications routinely issued to troops;

>Ricochet Fire
Comment from the Commanding Officer, 746th Tank Battalion, ETO: "An effective use of HE in villages is to fire with delay fuze, 'skipping' the rounds 50 to 75 yards in front of tank and infantry. This method was particularly effective at crossings of streets and alleys."

>Within the Village
Hand grenades were found to be of great value; without leaving the tank, the tank commander can throw them through windows to force enemy evacuation of buildings. Use of grenades also conserves tank ammunition and is less dangerous to our infantry than use of tank weapons.

>Use of 60-mm Mortar Shell
The 60-mm mortar shell was extensively used for direct fire through windows. The shells were launched from rifles by wiring them to the grenade projector adapter, M1.

>Locating Enemy Tanks at Night
Suggested by the Assistant G-2, 101st Airborne Division, FRANCE: "At night, we placed a machinegun on both sides of a tank destroyer. When hostile tanks were heard approaching, the machine guns fired tracers until ricochets indicated that a tank was being hit. Both guns would then fire at the tank and the tank destroyer would fire at the point of the "V" formed by the converging machine-gun tracers.

>>31541574
and the panels covering the frontal sides

>>31541911
>Suggested by the Assistant G-2, 101st Airborne Division, FRANCE: "At night, we placed a machinegun on both sides of a tank destroyer. When hostile tanks were heard approaching, the machine guns fired tracers until ricochets indicated that a tank was being hit. Both guns would then fire at the tank and the tank destroyer would fire at the point of the "V" formed by the converging machine-gun tracers.
That one's real fucking neat. Probably somewhat suicidal for the gunners.

>>31541947
they are removeable

>>31533591
>>31541892
im thinking either like a scout SV with a cannon of some sort or the ASCOD 105 LRF

>>31541988
Silhouette looks radically different from any ASCOD/Scout I've seen.

>>31541911
That sad tank is giving me conflicting emotions.

>>31542288
It's pretty cute. Didn't expect that out of a WWII manual.

>>31541436
This, it's gotta be.

>>31541892
The XM360 gun also lacks a bore evacuator.

>>31541911
>Hand grenades were found to be of great value; without leaving the tank, the tank commander can throw them through windows to force enemy evacuation of buildings. Use of grenades also conserves tank ammunition and is less dangerous to our infantry than use of tank weapons.
I'm just picturing a Sherman trundling along the road with a disembodied hand out the commander's cupolas slinging grenades left and right into houses.

File: combatlessons3.jpg (108KB, 711x804px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 711x804px

>>31541911

File: combatlessons2.jpg (86KB, 787x518px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 787x518px

>>31542288

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5k30qNybbcZbm1UdVJSMk5iaTQ/view

File: combatlessons4.jpg (104KB, 659x549px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 659x549px

>>31542757

>>31540749
The turret looks surprisingly narrow, wonder how much armor and/or internal space it has.

File: image.jpg (165KB, 1200x820px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 1200x820px

>>31543924

>>31543924
>>31543945
its literally a modernised LT105

>>31543924

>Ajax hull
>New 120mm

Us over in Bongland need to get in on this, it's literally just a new turret for a vehicle we already make (with Spain).

But hey, it's like the inverse version of the Vickers Mk5 (which had a US hull and a British turret).

I like it. Pick it up US, nice allied commonality.

>>31545087
>trying to cover shit with gold to renew their contract to sell the army more shit

please tell me theres only a small handful of people that would even remotely consider a futher modernized bradley and a reconaissance IFV

>>31545202
>pentagon wars

>>31544939
It's an Ajax hull with a stripped down Abrams turret and the XM360 gun from the FCS.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/ausa-2016-griffin-tempt-army/

>>31545251
no, just 5 years of trying to keep these pieces of shit from falling apart, all day every day.

i'm sure they were fine when they were new, but they have zero longevity and the army clearly doesnt give a fuck about upgrading them or ensuring they stay combat ready. BAE clearly designed them with planned obsolescence in mind, and theyre lining right back up to shill for their next contract

>>31545298
>planned obsolescence
I doubt they plan it. New EO/IR and comm shit comes out every 8 months. If you want all the latest shit integrated you're going to have to pay for it.

>>31545339
>I doubt they plan it. New EO/IR and comm shit comes out every 8 months. If you want all the latest shit integrated you're going to have to pay for it.

I don't think this anon was talking about the latest shit.
>>31545298
When you say "falling apart", you mean the physical systems like engine and drive?

>>31545298
>25+ year old base vehicles
>planned obsolescence

You really didn't put much thought into this did you?

At best you reinforced the notion that the ECP being done currently is needed.

>>31518960

Theres an old duster sitting out infront of the VFW near my house. Perty cool

>>31545014
>>31543924
>>31545703

> DAT WELD LINE ON DRIVERS HATCH
pls kill me nao

>>31546717
At the bottom of the periscopes? Those are wipers.

>>31545703
Real Armata vibes.

>>31545674
Any pics?

>>31545068
Are those rubber tracks, or just black tracks with rubber pads?

>>31548445
Looks like the latter to me.

>>31548827
>xm8 bufford thunderbolt AGS FCS MPF
why do I like this stupid thing so much

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8m6Tdnvx64c

File: Ct2mUgqVYAE_DWG.jpg (186KB, 1200x971px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1200x971px

>>31539155
The item on the upper right is a laser.

File: Ct2mUgtUEAAsgMM.jpg (130KB, 1200x646px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1200x646px

>>31549792

File: 4proPng616o.jpg (121KB, 900x614px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 900x614px

>>31549792
not that but the boxes with the mini holes on them on the front of the APC.

I actually didn't notice the laser at first glance. This is just armature speculation but if that isn't ERA that might be radar or EW to find and counter drones.

>>31548808
Umm... why is an armed vehicle painted with red cross markings?

>>31550573
Cause that cross is just a target to insurgents

>>31550573
Its an ambulance.

>>31550573
The staff likely threw everything on the vehicle that was sent with it.

File: BMM-4S_8x8_Armored_Medical_Vehicle_based_on_BTR-4_chassis_Ukraine_Ukrainian_army_defense_industry_640_001.jpg (62KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 640x480px

>>31550573
Unarmed, armored ambulances are marked with the red cross.

>>31551078
Read "armed' as 'armored', I am a retard.

>>31524956
Why would you build an APC that fucking big?

>>31551547
Have you seen what it's replacing? It carries shitloads of guys over long stretches of water and land. That requires space.

File: 1455094545_9.jpg (241KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1280x853px

>>31551547
>2016
>Not having a HUEG IFV

>>31550817
>Cause that cross is just a target to insurgents
Then don't put the red cross on there.
You can't claim the protection of an ambulance and then stick a gun on the vehicle.
We're supposed to be the good guys.

File: AAV_7_Amphibious_Assault_Vehicule_Armored_Personnel_carrier_United_States_US_American_Marines_Corps_640_001.jpg (46KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 640x427px

>>31551547

>Why would you build an APC that fucking big?

Why is Solomon's SNAFU blog the most cancerous thing on the internet about armored vehicles?

In some ways its even worse than Sparky's Combat Reform

>>31551863
Solomon is like gliderfag with a blog.

>>31531027
The XM360 is NOT ETC. It's a conventional cannon. Some of the material science behind the original ETC test gun from the 80's is used in it giving it a longer barrel life than the current L44.

>Care to explain how its that much better to say, the L/55 120 mm rheinmetall;

Lighter, higher chamber pressure allowances, ADL as a standard feature.

>the 2A82-1M; or the 130 mm rheinmetall?

We'll have to find out more about them before anything can really be said. Naturally the XM360 would be lighter than both though as it's credited to be substantially lighter than the L44

>>31551863

I used to post on his blog ALL THE TIME just to annoy him.

Then I got a real job.

But yeah, he's nuts. Sometimes I'd be talking to him normally and I think we're getting along and then suddenly he just flips out and starts calling me a lockmart shill. He stubbornly refuses to believe that any aircraft other than the A-10 has ever performed CAS.

But at the end of the day he's really not that bad, and I mean that with complete sincerity. He's stupid and he has anger issues, but he's still one of the more reasonable people there. Some of the other people who hang on his blog are a completely new level of autism. And they all upvote each other and downvote anybody else. They're not as fun to argue with because they don't autistically flip out, they just keep making up more bullshit.

>>31552104
Oh so he's an F-35 hater? What autism does have about AFVs though?

Why the fuck couldnt the brits make decent looking tanks
Most of them look like a bunch of cans and tubes welded ontop of a box or some mutated alien shit turret

>>31519257
>>31519267
>>31519276
>That immaculate condition

>>31552611
such as?

File: 1475205232783.jpg (47KB, 529x502px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 529x502px

>>31552550

>Oh so he's an F-35 hater?

He seems to have a serious problem with aviation in general but ESPECIALLY the F-35.

>What autism does have about AFVs though?

He really doesn't, and that's why I say he's not that bad overall. He just thinks that the aviation aspect of the USMC is getting too much money and not leaving enough for the ground element. His opinions about ground vehicles are generally pretty tame, he just wants them to get more money compared to the planes.

His autism really shines when you talk about anything aviation-related, because that's where he genuinely knows nothing but still strongly believes he knows better than both the Air Force and USMC aviation. The only newer piece of aviation tech he seems genuinely happy about is the Osprey, and that's not really new anymore I guess.

>>31552550
Money spent on marine aviation is money not spent on Normandy style amphibious assaults.

File: T72VsM60.jpg (490KB, 1393x1075px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 1393x1075px

>>31529885
>>31530209
>>31530404
>pic kinda related

>>31552660
Comet Caernarvon centurion and the horrible citadels that are most of their TD
Most of their cold war and newer tanks like the cheiftain look like some sort of deformed monstrosity

File: opdAb7s[1].jpg (128KB, 1024x684px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1024x684px

>>31518960

Thoughts?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=tLbiKIe3Dlc

>>31553085
centurion is a deliciously sexy beast.
what tanks DO you consider good looking?

>>31553109
ATK really really wants to sell its light 30mm.

>>31553109
30mm is a big gun for the size, but considering its an RWS, ammo is solely stored externally, where space is extremely limited. That means it's got fuck all for ammunition. This is bad. Further, if you want to switch belts, you gotta literally climb on top of the vehicle to do it. This is even worse.

>>31553145
inb4
>Panther
>Tiger
>Bismarck

>>31553145
T44 is2 tiger 2 porcshe t32 t29

>>31533481
Don't you mean the Penetration-cum-Blast round?
http://defense-update.com/20160111_thermobaric-round.html

File: 952e5f72c938e534a10715b3e615264d.jpg (357KB, 1024x675px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1024x675px

>>31553085
I don't know, I think the Chieftain is the sexiest Cold War MBT.

File: 1413408186640.jpg (403KB, 1024x685px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 1024x685px

>>31553658
chieftain with stillbrew is hot

>>31553658
>>31553694
I always wondered why they retired the Chieftain and Chalky 1

Too outdated/not worth the upgrades or was the Chally 2 simply the best option?

>>31553796
chally 1 wasnt outdated by any means but the chieftain was as outdated as leo1's without the reliability of them

>>31553804
Why retire the Chally 1 then? I mean fuck theres less than 500 Chally 2's, why not keep the tanks? I mean tiny ass Gulf States field more tanks than the Brits now, wouldnt hurt to have more tanks

>>31553310
>bismark
wut
>panther
implying it is not a good looking tank, wheraboo or not

>>31553310
lol ameriboo so tired of german tanks being listed as sexier

File: M1A2_M256E1.jpg (11KB, 274x184px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 274x184px

The L/55 M256E1 tested out on a M1A2. The was so long and heavy it screwed up the stabilization on the Abrams, which can't be replaced easily since it's a complex interlocking system of springs and pulleys.

>>31553818
Those tiny Gulf States don't have a fun time trying to keep them all in functional states.
And not to mention a Challenger 2 could probably paste all the T-55s, T-62s and vanilla T-72s that the Arabs are fielding as the bulk of their tank fleet.

File: DSC_0725.jpg (171KB, 1600x1064px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1600x1064px

This is the new Russian upgrade for the T-90A. Would someone mind translating?

>>31554295
This is pretty much T-90A to T-90AM(MS) upgrade. Only useful information on your pic is 50 tons of mass and 1130hp engine.

>>31554295
>>31554306
Apparently the designation is different to the T-90AM that was shown a few years back.

>>31548827
din't this thing get canned, now they brought it bakc from the warehouse and expect it to be bought?

>>31554785
It wasn't canned for a defect though, the entire programme was cancelled, so it wasn't hard to just dig it back out and put some quick fixes on it.

File: P1330652.jpg (266KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1600x1200px

>>31554718
because the tank in that pic is the early T-90SM from 2010

>>31543924
Reminds me of a early panther turret

>>31553906
Almost thought that was a CATTB.

File: image.jpg (122KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 800x600px

https://youtu.be/wUKVgxxUcps

>>31554947
it was canned as part of the armored gun system program, but they dug it back out for the future combat systems program, which was canned, and now they're seeing if they can get it approved as part of the mobile protected firepower program
this fucking thing's almost a doctor with how many 3 letter words it can tack to its name

>>31555467
The DoD TRADOC file on it is probably all dog eared and shit by now.

>>31553620
>woarld of tenks is best game evar

>>31553818
To keep the production line open and workers happy

MoD needed to make some room for the tanks. Afaik even the Chally 2 isn't meant as 1:1 replacement for Chally 1

To keep both of them would require the MoD to increase the size of the army, something that isn't eally popular within the military and politicians alike

>>31555396
Are those fuel tanks hanging on the back?

File: XM1069.jpg (228KB, 1001x753px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1001x753px

>>31534278

>>31557457
Can it penetrate front turret though?

File: 1465035669746.jpg (2MB, 1920x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x2560px

>>31557574
the frontal armor could stop it but the tank will be mission kill

>>31557457
an entire 30 man platoon?
either it's bullshit, or war will forever be changed

>>31557755
before anyone mentions "artillery can already take out a whole platoon", or "airstrikes can already take out a whole platoon"

This is not an artillery or airstrike that might or might not hit and will take several minutes to call in and complete, and even then it might not kill everyone.
This should be more reliable, right?

>>31557791
It's why programmable airburst munitions have become the new hotness in the last decade.

File: 1474293077956.jpg (60KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 615x409px

>>31553145
Tiger and t-90

>>31557755
>either it's bullshit, or war will forever be changed

You can already kill 30 people with a tank. It's called "you use the weapons that tanks already have, which are already capable of killing people".

Been this way for close to a hundred years.

File: Sherman-m4a1e8-76mm-hvss-tank.jpg (93KB, 650x451px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 650x451px

>>31553145
M4A1E8, Sherman

Literally turns my dick to diamonds

>>31558135
>liking the cast hull
disgusting

File: 37th_Infantry_Division_BAR_Gunner_and_M4_Sherman_on_Luzon_1945.jpg (95KB, 800x639px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 800x639px

>>31558135

could at least have posted a composite hull version

File: 9sswse.jpg (27KB, 512x345px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 512x345px

>>31558165
>>31558228
>Not liking dem curves
It's like your a fag or something

File: Type74_2.jpg (114KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 800x600px

This is a long shot, but does anyone have that picture of the Japanese tank (I think it was a Type 10) with a hydraulic leak, where there's just a massive red puddle underneath?

>>31559792
Where'd you see it in the first place? On /k/?

>>31559960

Yeah, I'm not sure what thread it was in but I don't think it was a /thg/.

I'm sure it was from around the time that a Type 10 threw a track and had to be towed away from a public demo. It was quite a while ago, I just still find it funny and wish I'd saved it or could find it again.

>>31553145
Skoda T-38
Centurion
S-tank
T-80BV
Leopard 2 (mainly 2A4, 2A4M and 2A6/7)

File: 1437813212912.jpg (178KB, 1354x653px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1354x653px

>>31559792
No picture like that exists, it never happened, delete this post immediately

>>31549883
>>31539155
>there is an electronic warfare system used to scramble signals to UAV's

>>31559792
It pops up from time to time, the last time I recall seeing it was a .50 cent shitposting Japanese equipment.

File: image.jpg (91KB, 460x1180px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 460x1180px

>>31559792
Have a Leopard 2

>>31561497
Wait never mind I'm drunk it's the one your looking for

>>31561497
That's a Type 90 though.

>>31561497
>inb4 tonk is on period

>>31561497
>mfw i have no face for this kind of situation

>>31561497
I've never thought about tanks having catastrophic mechanical failures like this, I only considered damage taken from combat.
Is that transmission fluid? lol

>>31563028
I'm pretty sure tanks have always had mechanical failures, and will continue to have them even into the future.
like no small amount of Shermans rolled off the assembly line with a bad case of simply not working, and more Ferdinands were lost due to mechanical failure than enemy action, but that might be because the Porsche tiger is an over complicated piece of shit.
I'm sure that newer technology has allowed better quality control, but I'm also sure that there's no real way to completely eliminate mechanical failures.

>>31563028
It happens a lot more often to modern AFVs than you might think

File: T-72A (1979), T-72A late series production (1983), T-72B (1983 - transitional model between T-72A and T-72B), T-72B Kontakts (1984) and of course T-72B Kontakts-V (1989)..jpg (121KB, 1300x451px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1300x451px

>>31553145
T-72B

>>31564901
What's the actual aesthetic difference between the T-72B3 and T-72B Kontakt-V if there are any? Looking at the models, they look identical.

File: TB2015ExhibitionP2-20.jpg (2MB, 2250x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2250x1500px

>>31565185
>>31565185
>What's the actual aesthetic difference between the T-72B3 and T-72B Kontakt-V if there are any?
the huge IR search light on the T-72B 1989 turret and the single pin track

personally i prefer the 1K13-49 night sight over the Sosna-Y for aesthetic value

>>31564034
>Porsche tiger is an over complicated piece of shit.
needless to say a 70 tonne tank is normal now

>>31557658
Source on image?

>>31565302
i got it from one of /thg/ thread

>>31565356
Ah shame, i would have liked to know what knocked that massive hole. Thanks anyway anon.

>>31565434
152 AP?

>>31565444
I don't think so, it seems like the turret of a T-55, with much better steel quality and a better slope than say a king tiger in ww2.

If that is an 152mm AP, i think warthunder needs to up the penetration of that shit by 60mm or more.

>>31565453
it'd be a cold war era t-55 turret. the actual steel may have been painted to stop it rusting to preserve the details.

>>31565466
Probably, I wanted to say a tow did this but it doesn't look like a shaped charge hole.

>>31565505
well theres spalling from a shaped charge but thats a damn big hole

File: M114A1 AFV.jpg (2MB, 2565x1510px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2565x1510px

>>31553145
Not a tank, I know, but it looks so angry.

>>31565528
Maybe it is a TOW afterall. Aren't tows 155mm HEAT anyway.

File: IWM-E-18461-Crusader-camouflaged-19421026.jpg (70KB, 800x792px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x792px

>>31553145

File: m10 wolverine.jpg (42KB, 320x199px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 320x199px

>>31565828
He said tanks, not trucks.

>>31565970
its a disguise doofus

File: 6c0c494f52cd9942cda78d7f8ef062ea.jpg (149KB, 736x537px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 736x537px

>>31565970
kek

File: 46d26a268a61fecab8bdcdaf13dad9da.jpg (135KB, 736x465px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 736x465px

>>31565970
Jawohl, no Jerries here!

>>31565559
152mm

>>31566224
This chart is missing detail.

>>31566224

A lot of mistakes.

>>31557814
Is that what it is? What kind of hardware does it use, is it electronically controlled or is it just like an MPAT?

>>31519257
whats the point of that front hatch on the duster?

>>31566248
>>31566258
Tell me the mistakes, it's a work in progress. I am not trying to troll, it's hard to keep track of everything at the same time.

>>31518960
>>31518969
>>31518981
>>31518987

Fun Fact: For anyone who routinely goes to the Delmarva Beaches down Coastal Highway, the Delaware NG training site in Bethany (?) has a Duster.

>>31566224
>lists LAHAT as being current, despite the fact that nobody's seen the thing for over ten years.

Just ask anyone in the IDF who's around tanks. LAHAT is a meme round that basically doesn't exist.

File: DM-SC-92-03658.jpg (3MB, 2810x1820px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2810x1820px

>>31566224
>USA never invented ERA until 2001

What is the point of being so transparently false?

Anyone can just check this stuff. Here's an M60 with ERA in 1991.

Also

>listing the Drozd as being operational during the years that was it was being designed.

I don't understand how someone can make so many obvious mistakes. I could go on but I'm bored with it now.

>>31566826
What ERA is that.

>>31566224
>merkava implementing NBC 35 years after the soviets
and I thought the Jews would be a little more concerned about gas attacks

>>31565434
you can use viewsame in the archive to find the answer

the anon who upload that pic said it is from a Finnish war museum, the round that made the hole was fired from another T-55

>>31566984
I think it's just a copy of the old Blazer ERA the IDF came up with in the 80's. I think the Soviets got ahold of some of it in the 80's and copied it too

File: Type-64.jpg (36KB, 410x307px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 410x307px

>>31518981
What are your thoughts on the Type 64?

>>31566224
>Leopard 2 not having composite until A7.

>>31567148
kontakt 1 isn't the same as blazer, blazer is the same as blazer and not made in the USA.

>>31533399
>>31533443
It looks like the bastard child of a T-90A and a Leo 2. You mixed two (somewhat, considering how outclassed the T-90A is) great things together and got shit. That's like putting a good bratwurst in a bowel of ice cream.

>>31568161
There were reports a while back that India was looking at buying T-90MS, which would seem a logical choice given the deficiencies of T-90A and existing logical structure.

>>31556705
No, AC and Sponson boxes.

Someone please redpill me on the advantages and disadvantages of Wheels and Tracks.

>>31569606
wheels are good at sand and roads, tracks are good at everything else

>>31569606

Tracks better mobility across mud and other shitty ground and generally greater cross country mobility than things that ride on tires.

Wheels. Less maintenance on the suspension components and often less vehicle maintenance in general. Smoother ride over asphalt and faster on the hardball. That and tires don't create fucking Illinois sized potholes unlike treads.

You need both. Your support/supply trains are going to be trucks. And medium type infantry riding around 8x8s gets them into an urban environment quicker and easier than loading them all up in 113s.

Your tracked platforms are going to be heavier and more protected and are often going to be operating away from the established road/highway network. So they need to go over mud, broken bodies, piles of rubble, the remains of forests, dunes and dune coons.

>>31560916
I have no idea that's why I am asking. I know they exist but don't know if they can fit on an APC