The West Plays Catch Up to Counter the Armata

Seeing as the PAK FA is shit
The Mig 31 was shit
The T72 was shit
The Mig29 was shit
The Flanker was shit

yet "all" were labeled as "un-deadable" I am going to go out on a whim and say a tank with no crew in the turret to manually operate the gun and optics in times of need is also a shit tank.

>>31599668
But if tank hit or damaged, tank just go and get new turret in 5 mins, rest of tank and crew well protected.

It's the way of the future

>>31599668

>no crew in the turret to manually operate the gun

There is an autoloader that does that.

File: armata bingo.jpg (773KB, 1363x1685px) Image search: [Google]

773KB, 1363x1685px

A tank thats 3 years old is still BTFO by a upgraded tank from 40 years ago. When is Russia going to release something that can compete at all?

File: american armata.jpg (119KB, 900x722px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 900x722px

>>31599613
More like the russkies are 30 years behind

>>31599713
I am sorry, I wasn't aware it was quantum powered and hydralic and electrical systems absolutely never fail. I guess you're right, and the last century of tank desing with manual traverse and manual aiming devices just were never needed. I'll delete my post I guess.

File: CTfdoUSUAAATfgq.jpg (43KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 700x700px

>>31599613
>OP posts a bait thread
>Immediately gets wrekt

IDK what's worse, OP's tired trolling (this thread was up yesterday) or the people who are feeding the troll, even if they are right.

>>31599716
>A tank thats 3 years old is still BTFO by a upgraded tank from 40 years ago

wat

File: 1472262034408.png (1MB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 960x720px

>>31599737

>I'll delete my post I guess.

Yeah, you probably should.

>>31599758
>gets wrekt

What gonna be next? The "Armata T-14 breaks down live on Red Square" or the article that says the Armata turret is just an empty mockup. Is that your definition of "wrekting" someone?

File: 14632303719631.jpg (566KB, 3240x546px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 3240x546px

>>31599725
>this meme again
remember something called T-95?

>>31599761
>>31599769
see pic >>31599716

The armata is doing nice things for Russia's future. But its only a 5th to 7th rate tank. "Armata is best" is some meme-tier mouth diarrhea slavaboo pinko fanboying. We know nothing about the armor, and its weapon system is hardly more impressive then whats already in service. Tack that to its list of performance shortcomings in other areas its hardly eligible for even the top 3 of MBTs. We factually know the Leopard, Abrams, and Challenger command those spots, and after a gap you get tanks like the Leclerc, Merkava, T90, Type96, K2, T14 etc etc.

Stop giving this thing more credit then what its worth.

>>31599613
>4th time posting this

delete this

>>31599811
having weaker armor, weaker gun, and half the operational capacity because you put the crew into a sealed and blindfolded potato in the hull instead of having them in the turret where they should be, yes the T14 is impressive as shit, if I am comparing it to non-modern tanks. Russia isn't the only country that has MBT's you retard.

File: 1474340651534.jpg (191KB, 960x849px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 960x849px

>>31599847
>and Challenger

>>31599883
The Challenger's only short comings is its in bad need of a retrofit program as they are all 15 years old or so. Also its kinetic penetrator is lacking. But its still better than tanks like the T90, Leclerc, and a few other ones.

File: 2015-02-12T102341Z_1817415256_LR2EB2C0SV7OI_RTRMADP_3_UKRAINE-CRISIS.jpg (47KB, 536x800px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 536x800px

>>31599716
someone is butthurt enough to actually make something this autistic.

and yet that is trumped by a bigger autist who reposts it...

File: Stalin.gif (2MB, 293x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 293x240px

>>31599847

>"Armata is best" is some meme-tier mouth diarrhea slavaboo pinko fanboying.

Strawman.

>We know nothing about the armor

At least you admit it.

>and its weapon system is hardly more impressive then whats already in service

I'm not sure why you think it needs a different gun in the first place. The 125 is quite capable of penetrating any armor that the T-14 would ever come up against.

>We factually know the Leopard, Abrams, and Challenger command those spots

Leopard and Abrams? Yeah, probably. Challenger? Lol, nope.

>>31599908
Finns did it. They think they can reach Moscow with their Leopard 2s, then T-14 appeared and now they keep making this silly stuff.

>>31599918
>he 125 is quite capable of penetrating any armor
The moon is also made of cheese. I can also make random ass shit up too.

>>31599847

>We factually know the Leopard, Abrams, and Challenger command those spots, and after a gap you get tanks like the Leclerc, Merkava, T90, Type96, K2, T14 etc etc.

>Implying that the K-2 isn't the best.

>Implying the challenger isn't shit.

File: e8e.png (84KB, 600x587px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 600x587px

>>31599972

File: Mighty Russia.png (23KB, 413x407px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 413x407px

FUCKING

ITALY

>>31599976
>Implying that the K-2 isn't the best.
it isnt, its got the armor of a champagne glass.
>>Implying the challenger isn't shit.
this is also false, its got more armor then the leclerc and leopard.

File: cqYFRfu.png (49KB, 1519x1000px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1519x1000px

>>31599984

>>31599997

>I don't understand weight/armor trade-offs at all

File: 23121333145.jpg (586KB, 1412x1612px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 1412x1612px

How come no one can back up the statement the Aramat is as good as they say it is?

"Its good because I said so" -the 5 people who think the Armata is that good.

>>31600015
>i can't refute your argument so I am just going to move words around all fancy

File: Was+that+a+real+fight+or+were+they+just++_fc3dd26498650ce36eecef377225f01f.jpg (5KB, 153x199px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 153x199px

>>31600031
> just going to move words around all fancy
>move words around all fancy
>words around all fancy

File: 12345.gif (2MB, 318x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 318x197px

>the west is playing catchup with the Armata
>while the Armata is playing catchup with the rest of the Vday parade after breaking down
par for the course, I'd say.

File: 1427508938704.jpg (52KB, 900x574px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 900x574px

>>31600015
red = armor

>>31599668
But all of those are wrong, whether you're a vatnik or no.

>>31599898
>>31599883
>>31599918
>>31599976
>>31599997

There is only 20mm penetration difference at 2000m between the challengers L30 and L55 smoothbore firing their best rounds.

But CR2s main gun is also more accurate and 30% less likely to tumble.

Upgrades are coming to make it lighter, and has proven armour.

Please end this meme by stop talking out of your arse.

anyone else noticed that when western countries bring out upgrades or new weapon systems theyre like "yeah its to fulfill x role in y or deal with the threat of x or y" but when the chinks and slavs bring out new toys or upgrades its "urr this is western killa, definetely kill ubrams one shot headshot better than west putin strong obama scared"

File: abrams armour.jpg (183KB, 1280x864px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1280x864px

>>31599997
So paper thin, just like any side armour on any MBT ever.

>>31600680
>There is only 20mm penetration difference at 2000m between the challengers L30 and L55 smoothbore firing their best rounds.

wrong

>But CR2s main gun is also more accurate and 30% less likely to tumble.

The Challenger 2 has the worst accurancy of all NATO tanks.

Its armor layout is also inferior to the Leopard and M1 and hasn't seen upgrades to improve protection against KP.

File: t34-85-tank-rear.jpg (59KB, 650x341px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 650x341px

>>31599716
>superior slavic engineering.

I guess your cars hood is welded shut. Pic related, notice those fucking hinges at bottom.

>3 person crew is better than 4

That guy is Finn, not Russian. Change the fucking picture.

The only true meme tank is the Challenger 2.

Anyone have the pic of the shitty looking stick welds on the exterior?

>>31599668
mig 29 was best than f-18

>>31599668
All of those are wrong except for the PAK FA.

File: 1473485407481.jpg (241KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1200x800px

>>31601314

>>31602693

Itis war machine not beauty contest.

>>31600680
Literally nothing in this post is factually correct beyond that the Challenger 2 has proven armor.

>>31602939
They why the fuck would they go through the trouble of stick welding up all of its holes?

You Military-Industrial Complex shills need to fuck back to /k/

>>31603037
Because those are not production models, they are in process of being redesigned.

>>31603176
>already has to be redesigned
you cant make this shit up

>>31603188
What? They did not even reach army trials and did not finish producer's trials when the first parade happened.

>>31599725

Nice meme. The Soviets had turret-less prototypes before the TTB.

>>31600247
are the green blocks supposed to be ERA?

File: object 287.jpg (144KB, 1022x736px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1022x736px

>>31603713
>turret-less prototypes

File: 1471464992297.jpg (302KB, 1454x993px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 1454x993px

>>31599613
>posting Putin shill channel
literally every video they make is full jerk off to russian arms. You might as well quote CNN for military analysis.

>>31601211
The Slavic engineering pic isn't a hatch. They're armored plates

File: 300px-Army-fgm148.jpg (18KB, 300x215px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x215px

>>31599613
KEK

>>31600247
That armor seems really thin around the engine bay. I'm guessing they put a lot of faith in their CIWS. This seems like it would make it extremely vulnerable to BRRRTing, no?

File: T-34 rear.jpg (227KB, 999x749px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 999x749px

>>31603821
No it is actually the rear of a T-34 showing the gap between the maintance hood and the tank itself.

Also some quality welding.

Then again, it is a T-34/76 1941 production model which had some severe quality issues due to the rapid advancing german forces getting to close for comfort.

File: Oh , here is the proofs.jpg (109KB, 783x463px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 783x463px

>>31604136
proofs

>>31599827
object 299 looks like the t-14 without the plastic makeup

File: object 299.jpg (40KB, 800x490px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 800x490px

>>31604157
It's not.

File: t-14 (2).jpg (150KB, 1000x649px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1000x649px

>>31603798
>full jerk off to russian arms
And? Should people stop linking what you don't like?

>>31602669

with it's pathetic radar, awful RWR, and awful situational awareness, the Mig-29 dies before it gets to use any of it's R-73's unless it's an exercise scenario that starts with both pilots WVR.

>>31599999

I witness your quints of vatnik truth

File: 1474093115709.jpg (357KB, 1415x640px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 1415x640px

>>31599613
How can we compete?

>>31602939

The prettier the weld, the more integrity it probably has.

>>31604016
But muh APS

>>31604136
>1941
>due to the rapid advancing german forces
>2016
Whose rapid advancing forces are you up against now so the quality is so shitty? Ukrainian?

>>31606387
>so the quality is so shitty?
Is it?

>>31606155
brrrrrt brrrrrt motherfuckers

File: 2k22 tunguska wargame v557.webm (2MB, 352x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 352x288px

>>31606155
By outbrrting the brrt.

>>31605466
Actual combat records back this up, too.

MiG-29 would still be fun as fuck to fly, though.

>>31599986
What the fuck even is this shit?
No label, just random stats. Get the fuck out.

File: 1475470676927.jpg (31KB, 622x626px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 622x626px

>>31600842
>"Chinks and slavs"
>urr hurr durr

>>31606424
Tanks breaking down on parades. Missiles falling midflight. Planes crashing at a rate up to one-two a week. Yeah, it is.

>>31606467
>mfw ADATS + Patriot

But yeah, the A-10 is obsolete.

>>31606624
>he doesn't recognize GDP and have all the numbers memorized

normie pls die

File: TOW.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

It's time

>>31606694
>Doesn't memorize idiotic economics stats
>I'm so much better
>Look at me I know economics

I really don't care about average GDP of unimportant countries

It's alive! Armata is cute!
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2iANCObfHs
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQLG0bOy7SY
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDCPxV0KZmo

>>31606751
>doesn't memorize idiotic semantic distinctions
>I'm so much better
>look at me I know weapons

I don't really care about the difference between magazines and clips

Anyone that's not a russiaboo wanna tell me how many they actually built? I remember it being less than a dozen. Which is a joke, just like everything the Russian government is doing lately.

>>31606915
That's pretty bad logic. How not "russiaboo" can know shit? They actually start building them. It's doesn't looks like failed project like FA

File: 1471026742081.png (678KB, 850x464px) Image search: [Google]

678KB, 850x464px

>>31602939
>Itis war machine not beauty contest.

leaking liquids are a sign for damage, you cant deny that pjotr

>>31606915
20 already buit. Those ones from parade. They use them for tests. According to Oleg Sienko, main boy of Uralvagonzavod, at 8 september they already started perform first part of contract - 100 cute tanks. Final number is 2300. And looks like they devloping new shell but don't use it for tests for now. According to last videos I can suggest ~30+- tanks were built

>>31606871

Strange how they never show the T-14 with stabilizer working....

>>31606871
Can it run DOTA2?

>>31607060

That's just unburnt oil or gas. It's a turbocharged engine, they all bleed a little bit of lubricant from the turbine shafts into the motor.

The EPA might be mad, but no one gives a shit.

>>31607193
Be interesting to note that the outer shell and sensors didn't survive the testing they did

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

47KB, 529x502px

>>31599613

It's always fun watching Americans get so incredibly butt-hurt about the Armata.

File: t34modcombatready-014.jpg (80KB, 800x670px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 800x670px

>>31603821
>The Slavic engineering pic isn't a hatch. They're armored plates

Entire upper rear hull armor plate of T-34 is a fucking hatch, it is armor plate at same time. There is a smaller hatch in said hatch, but that is kinda irrelevant, the reason why there is a hatch in a hatch is simple, opening the big hatch is takes a lot of work, small hatch for smaller maintenance.

Pic related.

>>31599613

Then why aren't you sending it into combat?

File: mig-29_lol.png (126KB, 612x278px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 612x278px

>>31602669

MiG-29 is inferior to F/A-18 in pretty much everything that isn't top speed. Cheaper to purchase, but way more expensive to maintain and avionics were couple decades behind western fighters in early 90's.

>>31607758
Whose getting butthurt? The Armata is an inferior tank. Everyone who isn't some retarded vatnick knows this already.

>>31607758
>refuting laughable slav claims

>butthurt

stop projecting

File: giphy.gif (83KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 200x200px

>>31606155
Brrrrt autist incoming

>>31609151
Triggered

>>31608537
this

>>31607277
I think they will be able to de-rank people in CSGO aswell.

>>31606751
So why are you shilling for slavshit.

>>31603714
APS sensors

>>31604063
That is just the turret in the picture.

>>31607259
http://hlamer.ru/video/666214-Tank_T-14_Armata
2:06

>>31608579
Maybe if you compare 9.12 to superbug.

>>31606715
>ERA does job perfectly and crew are fine
>HURRR bad Russia design

>>31612604
>crew is fine
>gunner bails holding his head

>tank is fine
>just a mission kill

>>31612641
His hatch was open, dumbass.

File: t_907.jpg (140KB, 807x605px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 807x605px

>>31612641
He's pretty fine.

>>31607282
>they all bleed a little bit of lubricant from the turbine shafts into the motor
Not if it's not designed by a third rate drunkard.

>>31612744
>that MySpace angle hiding the impact area
>fine
It got penetrated a russian whore in dubai but keeping the ammo on the floor in the carousel saved the crew.

>>31612681
>be in tank
>awful sound outside the tank
>inside of tank is safe and sound
>better shamble out of my safe tank into the danger, stumbling and clutching my face
Only a vatnik would believe something that retarded

File: DEJA VU.webm (981KB, 856x480px) Image search: [Google]

981KB, 856x480px

>>31612815
Nah, I don't think so. You sure have grudge against slav tanks, not objective reasons. I should post "that" webm where Abrams got rekt by TOW. Just to make discussion more lively.
>>31612823
He was deafened.

>>31612853
>He was deafened
In tanks you wear a tankers helmet which includes ear-pro and he was inside the tank.
The helmet allows you to fire the main gun while unbuttoned without even flinching.
That is not to mention all western tanks struck by IEDs and RPGs with no ill effect or stupid reactions. That and he was stumbling grasping his face like it was peppered by shrapnel.

>>31612853
>You sure have grudge against slav tanks
Nah, my grudge is with vatniks who spout the T-90 undedable myth doing all kinds of mental gymnastics to justify it.

File: M1A2S vs Fagot.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>31612903
This story actually is very hot topic. The main statement of UVZ - unprepared crew. Hatch was open. That's why Shtora 1 was not activated
>>31612907
>T-90 undedable
I don't even think so.

File: Canada strong.jpg (196KB, 327x408px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 327x408px

>>31599986
>Canada is higher than Russia

Top kek.

File: LeoC2 MEXAS's.jpg (209KB, 920x778px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 920x778px

>>31599613
A bloody Leopard 1A5 on roids is better than the Armata.

>>31612955
>One of the most developed and advanced economies is larger than a post super economic collapse and constant recession economy from the 1970's
>Surprised.jpeg
>????????

>>31612954
What is getting hit here?

>>31613004
saudi M1a2 Abrams

File: 1452813316003.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>31613004
Can't find same webm but from different camera, but one guy actually escaped from tank like on this one

>>31612853
>>31612954
Rekt? The crew walks away. Watch the moving pixels rear of the tank. Also if an export tank with shit armor offers more protection then a Russian tank with modern armor, a modern Abrams literally shits all over the T90

File: senpai is disappointed in you.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>31613065
Anon, only one is alive. In T90 case everyone is daijoubu at least. Only one got wounded/shoked/whatever

>>31612954
hey look Americans are heavily funding moderate beheaders thanks for supporting these heroic admiral snackbars

>>31606387
Are you making up problems?

>>31606682
>Tanks breaking down on parades
If you mean the T-14 armata then it is false, but we have seen other vehicles having leakeges and some even having a small fire and engine problems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK8XkVBLbn0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kWrx9Ce9ic

>Missiles
True

>Planes
True

>>31612823
>Implying implications
Only a fatnik would shitpost this hard.

>>31612815
If it was penetrated the gunner would've been dead, imbecile clown.

>>31612965
Don't you have some tanned german cock to prep Hans?

>>31599986
B U B B L E
U
B
B
L
E

>>31613414
>point out the flaw in T-90 fanboys reasoning
>b-but y-you are a fatnik!!!1
I feel sad for the fucker paying your wage at the Web brigades, you are shit at this.

>>31613435
Not unless he got hit by the jet you retard.
There is one case where an Abrams took an RPG-29 to the side and the jet passed so close to the drivers back that it tore his uniform to shreds. He escaped with no injuries and the tank remained operational.
There is a case in the first indo-china war where a Chaffee took seven bazooka hits and kept on fighting.

>>31612954
>That's why Shtora 1 was not activated
The Shtora 1 is obsolete against the TOW-2 which is what they are using in the sandbox.

>>31613440
Even if the T-14 was everything the propaganda claims, it won't change the fact that it's ugly as fuck.

>>31613045

>One guy

Cant speak for the other abrams, but that one is fine, and so is the crew

Well maybe not fine, but it is functioning, and still moving.

Guy who bailed just got spooked.

>>31613082
That's false. The crew evacuates before total cool off. It's hypothesized the crew actually scuttles the tank.

>>31612954
>Hatch was open. That's why Shtora 1 was not activated
No. Only screen laying system can be blocked by opened driver's hatch - to prevent his injuring. TOW has no laser emitter so smoke screen can't be automatically deployed against it, so Shtora has lamps to defeat such missiles. TOW-2 is invulnerable to it though.
>>31613045
Driver escaped too - his hatch was opened on the full video. Maybe all crew is alive.

File: 1452672740_21.jpg (108KB, 800x440px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 800x440px

>>31613814
right.
even facts cant harm abrams because america

>>31613747
The hit was right in front of gunner's face, though. Abrams has a tiny bit more space inside.

File: crewman.jpg (99KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1280x720px

>>31613004
A Saudi M1A2 taking an ATGM to the rear of the turret, which sets off the ammunition storage. The pyrotechnics show is being vented out of the blow out panels and in longer versions of the video you see crew outside the tank when the fire dies down.

>>31612954
>This story actually is very hot topic. The main statement of UVZ - unprepared crew. Hatch was open. That's why Shtora 1 was not activated

UVZ's initial statement was that Shtora deflected the missile.

>>31615699
It hit above the gunners head, which fits his subsequent bailing while holding his head.

>>31615674
The facts being the video showing the tank moving while the blow out panels are doing their thing after the Metis hit?

File: AV1907dKNtY.jpg (56KB, 604x402px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 604x402px

>>31616349
>It hit above the gunners head
It did not, since above gunner's head is the hatch. As i mentioned earlier, there is not much space in T-72.

File: 71601vca7b5d.jpg (120KB, 600x461px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 600x461px

>>31616368
>it moved a bit after it got hit!!! its still in perfect condition!!
that happens to every vehicle on a steep hill after it explodes from the inside destroying among others the engine, the driver, and braking mechanisms.
dont tell me the driver decided to "tactically withdraw" the tank for one meter to "cover not visible because of the camera angle"

File: 183212_900.jpg (136KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 900x506px

>>31616368
Fire clearly comes out of the hatches, man, and there are craptons of smoke coming out of the barrel, but the tank did not shoot.

File: 1.png (326KB, 424x441px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 424x441px

>>31616449
>>31613045
If you talking about this video, you wrong. There is no visible smoke or fire from hatches or gun. Both TC and driver certainly escaped, and most possible remaining crew members too.

>>31616694
Obviously i am talking about the video pics of which i am fucking posting.

>>31616722
You reply to post that mentions Metis hit and blow out panels. And you posted pictures of tank allegedly destroyed by grenade throwed into hatch. There is no video of this.

File: m1a2-abrams-battle-tank-10.jpg (179KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1200x800px

>>31616403
still better than Abrams gunner

>>31616771
Man, it does not matter what hit the tank, if the whole blowout panels stuff works then grenade thrown into the hatch should not ignite the ammo, and the ammo was definitely ignited.

>>31616803
Dunno, it looks like there is plenty of space there.

File: IMG_20161006_022725.jpg (26KB, 400x304px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x304px

>>31599716
>back up sites
>sites

>>31616822
Too many factors that affects if it works. Was ammo door opened? Was it damaged by grenade? Or maybe it is deflagrating round inside crew compartment. Even IS could just fire empty tank for good photoset.
Video with Metis as well as battle reports from ODS shows that this panels saves the crew sometimes.

>>31604016
>>31606277
Then use more missile.

>>31616965
shit youre literally trying hard to make everyone beleive that this perticular abrams is still OK, to uphold the beleif that abrams is somekind of a magic supertank.
its just a tank, even if a good one, still just a tank. tanks tend to be destroyed when hit with antitank ordenance

>>31613050
I think the guy who jumped out got toasted.

>>31617048
I don't say that this perticular abrams is ok, it is you trying to make everyone believe that blowout panels stuff don't work. You're not good at it though.

>>31616965
>Too many factors that affects if it works.
This is not an argument when we speak about T-90 vs TOW, it is always hit and penetrated, no options.

>>31617144
I didn't say it was penetrated. It was hit for sure, but most possible was not penetrated.

>>31616722
There was no video of >>31616449 just a handful of stills of a guy throwing a satchel charge into an open hatch and the flames of the charge going off >>31615674

File: PROOF PROOF.webm (889KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 320x240px

>>31599999
add this to your collection

>>31599713
Glad to hear that, now only one component in that tank needs to break in order to render in COMPLETELY INOPERABLE. Fucking Slavs

>>31606624
>Whad ebin is dis shiet :-DDD
How long have you been here? Six minutes?

>>31616403
How about posting a picture of the gunners position instead of the TC?

>>31616437
>US policy
>british AFV

Is this supposed to be like that murrica fuck yeah picture with a Leopard 2 and Russian fighter in the background?

>>31617144
The argument that the T-90 was penetrated is supported by the location of the impact, the fact that the "tank is fine" picture hid the impact sight, and the fact that the tank itself was mission killed.

>>31617530
How about you will accept the fact that they are identical space-wise.

>>31617577
>The argument that the T-90 was penetrated is supported by the location of the impact
No.
> the fact that the "tank is fine" picture hid the impact sight,
How the fuck you claim
>supported by the location of the impact
And then
>the fact that the "tank is fine" picture hid the impact sight
in the same fucking sentence? And it is not even evidence, ffs.
>and the fact that the tank itself was mission killed.
Mission kill =/= penetration, retard.

>>31617122
>you trying to make everyone believe that blowout panels stuff don't work
and when did i say anything like that?
dont put your words in my mouth they taste desparate

>>31617698
>if the whole blowout panels stuff works then grenade thrown into the hatch should not ignite the ammo, and the ammo was definitely ignited.
What implication you implied there?

>>31617710
would you kindly note the post number where i said that? or are you just retarded

>>31617739
>>31616822

File: e5798a0ea507a.png (149KB, 1390x618px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1390x618px

>>31617615
>How about you will accept the fact that they are identical space-wise.

They aren't?

>The argument that the T-90 was penetrated is supported by the location of the impact
>No.

The location of the impact had no ERA, and the armor there was well within the penetration ca[ability of a TOW-2A

>How the fuck you claim
>And then
>in the same fucking sentence? And it is not even evidence, ffs.

I know logic is hard for you, but we know where the missile hit because of the video, and the aftermath impact sight was intentionally hidden in the "tank is fine" picture.

>Mission kill =/= penetration, retard.

You apparently think penetration = flying turret.

File: lel.png (17KB, 639x351px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 639x351px

>>31617760
congratiulations youre a retard

>>31617797
Actually you are both retarded >>31617407

>>31617797
So it is not yours post? Then why you argued with me? You even doesn't support claim that I refuted. Turns out you're retard, it is confirmed by your posting.

File: 13260268_1063295910375832_5033732959197282683_n.jpg (13KB, 444x444px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 444x444px

>>31617829
>you said this, i am never wrong!
>oh shit it was someone else, how retarded of me!
>youre a retard because im wrong!
ghahaahahhah

>>>31617788
>They aren't?
They are, actually gunner has a little bit less space than commander.
>The location of the impact had no ERA, and the armor there was well within the penetration ca[ability of a TOW-2A
And such a hit would have killed the gunner with either shaped charge itself or secondary shrapnel.
>I know logic is hard for you, but we know where the missile hit because of the video
No, you dont, since hitting down portion of the circle you drew would indeed mean a hit, while hitting the upper portion simply cant cause penetration because it is the fucking side surface of the roof. And you cant fucking tell which part of the circle it did hit.
>and the aftermath impact sight was intentionally hidden in the "tank is fine" picture.
You cant distinguish a penetration from hit on and outside picture anyway, idiot.
>You apparently think penetration = flying turret.
No, i apparently think that mission kill =/= penetration, learn to fucking read.

File: ADHD.jpg (24KB, 508x296px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 508x296px

>>31617857
>everyone who disagrees with me is one single evil entity!
>if its right then its actually wrong and its retarded too!

>>31599613
with clear air superiority

>>31617872
I refuted claim about "blow out stuff doesn't work". Then there is you state that I "trying to make everyone believe that perticular abrams is still ok". It is your post, right?
I didn't rejected that tank "is not ok" in post you replied. What you implied then? That I am not right? Do you just restarted your router, or are you actually has mind issues?
>>31617829
I know that there is no video. We are arguing about other things.

File: 1446199275723.jpg (69KB, 620x620px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 620x620px

>>31617990
>restarting my reuter makes my IP and shit change
>matrix n shiet

>>31613440
>Leopard C2
>German

>>31616949
A marine tanker tripfag made that picture so dont be upset.

>>31601211

File: t34-feels.jpg (19KB, 309x211px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 309x211px

>>31601211
>mfw

File: t34-turret-feels.jpg (10KB, 142x117px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 142x117px

>>31601211
>also mfw

>>31617869
>And such a hit would have killed the gunner with either shaped charge itself or secondary shrapnel.
This is false since the gunners head is not directly in the path of the jet stream and the T-90 have spall liners meaning secondary shrapnel is greatly reduced.

>while hitting the upper portion simply cant cause penetration because it is the fucking side surface of the roof.
What era are you from? Are you not aware that modern ATGM have absolutely no problem penetrating cast turrets even with its step angle?

>And you cant fucking tell which part of the circle it did hit.
You could if they showed a picture of the impacted area.

>You cant distinguish a penetration from hit on and outside picture anyway, idiot.
Then why did they not show the impacted area?

>>31618718
>This is false since the gunners head is not directly in the path of the jet stream and the T-90 have spall liners meaning secondary shrapnel is greatly reduced.
You do not know where the jet stream was. And secondary spall is one of the primary threats of HEAT with or without liner, otherwise no one would use a weapon that just makes small holes in the enemy armor.
>Are you not aware that modern ATGM have absolutely no problem penetrating cast turrets even with its step angle?
There is no volume behind it, retard. Actually some area in the circle does not have tank in it.
>You could if they showed a picture of the impacted area.
They did not. As they did not show pictures of Abram's crew earlier in the discussion, but no one claims they are all dead because of that.
>Then why did they not show the impacted area?
Then why did they not show the insides of the engine compartment, maybe there are ayy lmaos there?

File: 13925166_1049495018453392_846868466125220138_n.jpg (76KB, 625x781px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 625x781px

>>31618766
So are you going to give a logical explanation to why Face fetish man was caressing himself when he ex-filtrated the damage vehicle? Non of these autistic rants have answered the question yet.

>>31599613
and it matters cause?
ww1 was fought by Machineguns
ww2 was fought by Tanks
Iraq and other wars clearly shows that all the future wars belong to rockets and planes. Even the end of ww2. Germans had far better tanks (in terms of armarment and armor) but almost always knocked out by planes or running out of fuel thanks to planes harrasing supply lines.

>>31618958
Yes, blast wave + open hatch = concussion.

>>31618999
That's not how that works at all. Energy transfer through the air, or a 20 some ton metal turret wouldn't cause any amount of "concussion". Also the last time I had a concussion i wasn't holding my face. You're free to try again though.

>>31618766
>You do not know where the jet stream was.
We actually do. See >>31617788

>And secondary spall is one of the primary threats of HEAT with or without liner
Which is why spall liners exist, to reduce that threat.

>otherwise no one would use a weapon that just makes small holes in the enemy armor.
No you dont seem to understand what the spall liner actually do. Its job is to absorb fragments which otherwise would bounce around the tank doing horrible things. It cannot stop the jet itself since it usually goes to fast and is still able to damage things if it is in its path.


Which means that tanks even with the spall liner are still vulnerable to HEAT warheads. But the spall liner have been greatly helpful for tanks survival on the battlefield. With it, T-72B's in chechnya and M1 abrams in Iraq had its crew survive.

And now we have the T-90 in syria but with a wounded syrian gunner.

But because of this, multiple HEAT warheads are needed to make a certain kill.

>There is no volume behind it, retard. Actually some area in the circle does not have tank in it.
Is there something wrong with your eye? Do you have brain problems?


>They did not.
Because it showed something which would not be that great for sales.

>As they did not show pictures of Abram's crew earlier in the discussion, but no one claims they are all dead because of that.
We are not talking about the Abrams

>Then why did they not show the insides of the engine compartment, maybe there are ayy lmaos there?
Accepting your defeat already? Well I will tip my hat to you my dear vatnik friend.

Have a nice day :^)

>>31619057
>That's not how that works at all. Energy transfer through the air, or a 20 some ton metal turret wouldn't cause any amount of "concussion".
Except that blast wave behaves according to fluid dynamics, not common sense of an uninformed person. Blast wave is a function of pressure, it goes around corners.
>Also the last time I had a concussion i wasn't holding my face.
He was not holding his face, he was holding his head. Which is pretty normal when you have a concussion. And it is totally not normal when you are hit with shaped charge or spall, in this case you dont hold anything because you are dead.

>>31618958
That image screams asshurt from the person who made it

>>31619113
>We actually do.
No, you dont, since that area is about 1000 times bigger than the jet stream, retard.
>Which is why spall liners exist, to reduce that threat.
Reduce is the key word.
>Its job is to absorb fragments which otherwise would bounce around the tank doing horrible things.
It prevents bouncing, it cant prevent primary spall.
>Is there something wrong with your eye? Do you have brain problems?
No, i dont.
>Because it showed something which would not be that great for sales.
Which does not prove anything and contains no useful information.
>We are not talking about the Abrams
So we reached the agreement that we can say whatever fits our worldview about anything that is not shown on the picture?
>Accepting your defeat already?
No, just pointing out that this is not an argument.

>>31619114
>it goes around corners
And bleeds off energy in the process, and forcing itself in a hole in a hole that's not only perpendicular, but extremely small. The amount of over-pressure you're describing is a gross exaggeration. You're theory makes less sense then the turret penetration.

>>31619205
>And bleeds off energy in the process
TOW is not a hand grenade.
>and forcing itself in a hole in a hole that's not only perpendicular, but extremely small
It does not need to force itself anywhere much, driver's head is right here, centimeters away.
>The amount of over-pressure you're describing is a gross exaggeration.
No, its not.
>You're theory makes less sense then the turret penetration.
No, its not, since the gunner is alive.

>>31619176
>No, you dont, since that area is about 1000 times bigger than the jet stream, retard.
So you do have eye problems.


>Which does not prove anything and contains no useful information.
And brain problems.

The rest of your posts are just making shit up since your are blind and lack a brain.

>>31619318
Ad hominem much?

>>31619318
>The rest of your posts are just making shit up since your are blind and lack a brain.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a209509.pdf
Abrams tested against HEAT warhead. 45.1% chance that only gunner dies, 23.7% chance both gunner and commander die, 19% that all of the crew members in the turret die. Muh spall liner, yeah.

>>31619318
>call people names
>cry about ad hominem afterwards

Vatniks truly have a victim complex.

>>31619451
abrams=/=T-90

Now redo the test with no spall liners at all

>>31619525
You imply that spall liners in Abrams are so much shittier that there is enough shrapnel to kill all of the crew in Abrams, but not enough to kill the gunner right in front of the penetration in T-90?

>>31619553
Nope.

Why do you keep saying that the gunner was right infront of the penetration?

File: 10506360.jpg (392KB, 700x1054px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 700x1054px

>>31619584
Because he was. More than half of his body/half of his head was in the penetration area. Considering during Abrams test penetration was pretty much through the gunner, and it still managed to kill commander and loader that is quite sufficiently close enough.

>>31619611
>posts T-90A as if it proves anything
>dont know how the gunner is located
>dont know the interior
>somehow know exactly where the shaped charge hit
>insist that the cast turret roof is completely immune to shaped charges since "there is no volume behind it"
>yet at the same time say that the gunner would die if it hit that region since magic spall will kill the gunner who is not even in direct line of path.

Nah im done with you vatnik.

>>31619775
>>posts T-90A as if it proves anything
Yes, they are so incredibly different, crew in cast turret sits, like, ten meters away.
>>dont know how the gunner is located
I do.
>>dont know the interior
I do.
>>somehow know exactly where the shaped charge hit
Holy shit, moron, thats what YOU claimed it hit!
>>insist that the cast turret roof is completely immune to shaped charges since "there is no volume behind it"
Its not immune and i never claimed that.
>yet at the same time say that the gunner would die if it hit that region since magic spall will kill the gunner who is not even in direct line of path.
Yeah, and Abrams turret is so small that both commander, gunner and loader literally sit on each others heads.
Weak.

>>31619451
>Muh spall liner, yeah.
But Abrams tank doesn't have spall liner.

>>31619858
M1A1 had a spall liner, and that is the tank that was tested.

>>31606751
GDP is one of the main thingstrategic that determine whether a country is important

>>31619818
One day you will learn to see the faults of your way vatnik.

>>31611491
Had no clue what was going on
Not shilling, just think that it's shit to say one is better when they haven't fought one another and there's no experience with modern MBT combat

File: abrams-muzzlew.jpg (118KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1680x1050px

>>31599613
>HOW THE FUCK CAN BURGER EVEN COMPETE!?

Being able to build functional tanks in strategically significant quantities seems like a good start.

The US has *at least* 5 armored brigades of about 90 Abrams each. How many Armatas are in the field right now? 10? 11?

>>31617407
This. I saw the video. This still is actually just the split second the charge went off. It was hardly even viable to the human eye as it happened.

>>31619611
>Because he was. More than half of his body/half of his head was in the penetration area.

He sits below the penetration area.

>>31612823
Learn about reasons behind closed hatches

>>31613440
The C2 is Canadian.

>>31613781
Needs carpets and era

>>31623339
And you should learn about blast wave propagation and the effects of a blast wave entering through a small hole.
[spoiler]it is GREATLY diminished[/spoiler]

>>31625160
>hatch
>small hole
It is not small if a human can fit through.

>>31621551
Yes, sure, he sits much further from penetration area than loader and commander in Abrams from the gunner. Ffs, spall propagates in a cone, he is quite sufficiently close enough to be fucking ripped apart by it.

>>31621551
Besides, no, the gunner's hatch is in the roof, there are a couple of centimeters between the hatch and his head.

>>31619909
>M1A1 had a spall liner
It doesn't.

File: mossFig3 (1).jpg (213KB, 551x417px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 551x417px

>>31625160
Is the distance between your head and the helmet on your head considered small hole? Last time i checked it was 1.3 centimeters. And it is definitely not small enough, since according to studies a charge not big enough to kill you at ~5 meters will create a blast wave that will fit in those 1.3 centimeters and cause TBI.

>>31625240
It does.

>>31625181
>It is not small if a human can fit through
>russian
>human
Russians are small malnourished goblins.
But seriously, the hatches on the T-90A are not very generous in size and more importantly open up forwards, forming a shield for the gunner and commander. Since the hatch was open i would have formed an additional barrier for the blast wave to overcome, protecting the crew.
It is possible that the gunner had his head outside the the turret, obscured by the hatch in which case he would have had his sinuses cleared quite thoroughly by the blast, if he was inside it's more likely he got a face full of secondary shrapnel from a close miss by the jet.

File: 0_850e3_8f6c4b69_L.jpg (30KB, 400x306px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 400x306px

>>31625250
No, an open hatch will not shield you from 6kg of TNT going off less than two meters away and secondary shrapnel in the face means death or extreme injury.

>>31625248
For your pic to be relevant you'd have to measure the pressure that leaves at the other end of the helmet.
In the case of the T-90 getting hit it is what happens when a blast passes from the environment through a small hole into the relatively spacious interior of the tank.
It's like a bunker where a large artillery shell hits close to the firing port.
While the experience is hardly pleasant, the bunker will keep the occupants safe.
Your picture shows a dude in the direct path of the blast wave.

>>31625248
No it is not. Only Bradleys have spall liners.

>>31625289
>For your pic to be relevant you'd have to measure the pressure that leaves at the other end of the helmet.
Nope, it is sufficient enough to cause TBI.
>In the case of the T-90 getting hit it is what happens when a blast passes from the environment through a small hole into the relatively spacious interior of the tank.
It does not, last time i checked it does not need to fill the tank completely to cause concussion, we are speaking about a couple of cubic meters near the hatch, where gunner's head is fucking located.

File: o8JHQBX.jpg (613KB, 1600x840px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 1600x840px

>>31625271
>secondary shrapnel in the face means death or extreme injury.
Not with good spall liners it don't. Russian spall liners where designed to deal with HESH rounds which knocks loose a shard the size of a dinner plate, the relatively small spalling from a shaped charge is less of a problem.
Besides, any blast wave sufficient to concuss the occupants would have blown the hatch closed as it is directly in the path of the blastwave.
You are greatly exaggerating the effects of secondary blast pressure.

>>31625298
It is unimaginable what great lenghts people here will go to to prove T-90 is shit, they will even agree Abrams is shit. No, M1A1 has a kevlar spall liner.
Besides, i have a funny question for you. Does T-90 have a spall liner?

>>31625329
>Not with good spall liners it don't. Russian spall liners where designed to deal with HESH rounds
No they did not, they had composite armor which pretty much prevents stuff like HESH effects happening anyway. And T-72 most definitely does not have spall liner.

>>31599716
It's always the butthurt Finns that go out of their way to make autistic shit like this. Fucking kek

>>31625345
First post in thread but
>And T-72 most definitely does not have spall liner.
[citation needed]
As far as I was aware literally every tank post T-55 had a spall liner because they're extremely simple to implement and increase crew survivability exponentially. It would be fucking retarded to not include one period.

>>31625303
>Nope, it is sufficient enough to cause TBI
>missing the point
The point is that you cannot take the pressure that forms between a head and the helmet and compare it to a blast entering a tank.
Blast over pressure needs to be extremely powerful to cause injury and given that the blast had to travel over the front of the turret, around the open gunners hatch and into the tank, it would no longer be harmful.

>>31621373
>>sinks in mud
>functional

>>31625329
>Besides, any blast wave sufficient to concuss the occupants would have blown the hatch closed as it is directly in the path of the blastwave.
It is fixed in place fucking retard otherwise it will fall on crew's fucking head every time the tank moves, and it weights a fucking crapton. Should i even explain such simple things to people here?
>You are greatly exaggerating the effects of secondary blast pressure.
See>>31625248

>>31625329
>Russian spall liners where designed to deal with HESH rounds

No, they were not. All spall liners work the same, they're designed to protect against all spalling, otherwise they'd be worthless. HESH is defeated moreso by composite armor than a spall liner as the shockwave loses a shitload of its energy moving through different materials.

>>31625345
>T-72
It's a T-90A that got hit you mong, it most certainly have a spall liner.

>>31625363

It would help your credibility a lot if you would be so kind as to post your Cav or Maintainer's coin.

thx in advance bromigo

>>31625358
Nope, just NBC protection, not a single mention of spall liner anywhere.

>>31625361
>The point is that you cannot take the pressure that forms between a head and the helmet and compare it to a blast entering a tank.
I can. You told me it does not fit in small holes, but it does.
>Blast over pressure needs to be extremely powerful to cause injury
I think 6kg of TNT a meter away creates plenty of overpressure. And as we dicsovered earlier it fits in small holes and travels around corners pretty easily.

>>31625374
You can easily prove it, i assume.

>>31625364
>It is fixed in place
It s spring loaded you cumrag.
>See>>31625248
Posts a picture of the effect of a soldier in the direct path of a primary blast wave
kys, you don't know the slightest shit about what you are trying to debate.

>>31625337
Neither M1A1 nor T-90 have spall liners. T-90 has anti-radiation liner.

File: 95.jpg (101KB, 796x597px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 796x597px

>>31625382

>>31625392
>It s spring loaded you cumrag.
No its not, you imbecile. The spring is there to make it open and close easily, there is a lever that completely stops it from moving.
>Posts a picture of the effect of a soldier in the direct path of a primary blast wave
Blast waves go around corners.

>>31625395
Cool, but it does not change anything in discussion context.

>>31625392
>It s spring loaded you cumrag.
Sure, it is done in such a way to make sure that in the event of ATGM striking the tank the hatch will instantly close, and possibly kill the gunner. Makes all sense in the world.

File: blastprop2.gif (125KB, 266x176px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 266x176px

>>31625383
>You told me it does not fit in small holes
>russian reading comprehension
It's no the size of the hole, it's what happens when a blast enters into a space through a smaller hole. The space between the skull and a helmet is effectively a corridor acting like a wave guide.
>I think 6kg of TNT a meter away creates plenty of overpressure
That blasts into the atmosphere only a small fraction reaches he hatch, where most of it is reflected, and only a small fraction enters through the hole into the tank.
See pic related how the blast is greatly diminished as it travels down the corridor and into the rooms. Only the room opposite got any real amount of blast.

>>31625453
>It's no the size of the hole, it's what happens when a blast enters into a space through a smaller hole.
It does not need to fill the whole compartment, retard, it needs to travel 20cm to gunner's head.
>Only the room opposite got any real amount of blast.
And thats exactly what are we discussing here.

>>31625389
>>31625383
Wait, are we seriously argumenting that spall liners, something that has been around since the 70s have been dropped from modern tanks?

>>31625453
>>31625467
See the end of the corridor where the two most affected rooms are? Thats the gunner's position.

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/t-72-soviet-progeny.html

>>31625383
>Nope, just NBC protection, not a single mention of spall liner anywhere.
Interesting but you're still not linking the citation that "doesn't mention a spall liner". A link or picture would be fantastic, thanks.

>>31625475
Dicussion about spall liners were here in the context of Abrams tests that proved that there is a significant chance that all crew in the turret will be injured or dead in event of HEAT penetration. Which is here to prove that being 20cm away from the point of penetration will get you killed or injured.
>>31625494
A picture or link of what? Nonexistence of mentions of T-72's spall liners?

>>31625467
>It does not need to fill the whole compartment, retard, it needs to travel 20cm to gunner's head.
But the amount of energy that would reach his head is next to nothing you shit
>And thats exactly what are we discussing here
>The missile exploded directly over the turret, above the head of the gunner.
Kill yourself, you are only embarrassing yourself at this point.
The gunner would be in the room further down the corridor, the one which go next to no blast pressure.

>>31625510
>But the amount of energy that would reach his head is next to nothing you shit
Thats your claim. Its funny, but i am the only one here bringing actual tests and studies, everyone else is just hurpderp nope you dumb.
>The gunner would be in the room further down the corridor, the one which go next to no blast pressure.
No it wont, he is fucking 1m from the explosion, retard.

>>31625476
The gunner would be in the adjacent room down the corridor you tard. Not the opposite.

>>31625524
Nope, he will be in the end of the corridor between the rooms.

>>31625508
A link to anything you're reading detailing the T-72...

You made the claim that T-72's don't have spall liners so the burden of proof is on you. If you're just claiming that they don't and then expecting everyone to just believe you, then you really need to learn how this works.

So yes a picture or a link to somewhere that details the T-72's layered protection but doesn't mention that it has or does not have a spall liner (since a detailed diagram wouldn't leave out something as important as a spall liner if it had one) would be awesome, thanks.

This is why I really hate arguing with /k/tards, it's almost like all of you expect everyone to assume that you're the authority on the topic and to instantly believe you.

>>31625395
>Neither M1A1 nor T-90 have spall liners.

The original M1 has a spall liner, its Kevlar lining.

>>31602680

I can confirm this, I flew the PAK-FA in Ace Combat: Assault Horizons and it absolutely destroys any stupid American plane.

>>31625531
>post shitton of links on the subject
>get hurpadurp bring proof on the subject that is not even relevant to the discussion
>This is why I really hate arguing with /k/tards, it's almost like all of you expect everyone to assume that you're the authority on the topic and to instantly believe you.

>>31625532
>The original M1 has a spall liner, its Kevlar lining.
Nope.

>>31625488

>The lining and cladding not only function as neutron absorbers, but they perform admirably as a form of spall liner as well. According to Swedish trials of purchased ex-East German T-72M1s, it was concluded that the anti-radiation liner was perfectly capable of absorbing secondary fragments of penetrating cumulative jets, not only spall. Spall liners, depending on their efficacy, may reduce the spray cone angle of secondary fragments from a HEAT warhead by up to 50% or more if armour is greatly overmatched on the basis of their presence alone, and it is possible reduce secondary fragments by up to 80% or even to absorb all secondary fragments if the armour is not significantly overmatched. The T-72's lining and cladding should have good performance due to its substantial thickness both inside and outside.

>>31625544
I came into the thread late and really don't feel like wading through dozens of links, if it's
>implying that easy to find and read
then it should be
>That easy to re post a relevant link

Mang, I'm literally not saying you're wrong in the slightest, just that you haven't posted any relevant links yet seeing as I don't know which are "your" links previous in the thread anyways.

>get hurpadurp bring proof on the subject that is not even relevant to the discussion
Discussion at this point in the thread is literally about M1 and T-90 spall liners and pressure waves and reflective cavities in tanks and enclosed spaces. It's pretty safe to assume that it's VERY relevant to the discussion.

Now post up.

>>31625610
Swedish test
https://translate.google.se/translate?hl=sv&sl=sv&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ointres.se%2Fryska_strf_till_sverige.htm

>>31625521
>actual tests and studies
>posts a completely unrelated picture of a different scenario
sure
>No it wont, he is fucking 1m from the explosion
But he is in a small space and have the front of the turret, his hatch and a small opening between himself and he blast you cumstain.
The blast has to do a 180 degree turn to get o him and it GREATLY reduces the blast as it travels outward and is reflected from hard surfaces.

>>31625614
>I came into the thread late and really don't feel like wading through dozens of links, if it's
So, you come up into the thread, refuse to read it but still believe to be in position to demand anything?

>>31625640
>posts a completely unrelated picture of a different scenario
>sure
Several KG of explosives are blown up 5 meters from the subject. I think it is very relevant to more explosives blown up less than a meter from the subject. You are free to prove it is not.
>The blast has to do a 180 degree turn to get o him
Which it evidently does, according to your own gif.
> it GREATLY reduces
Only thing left is to prove it is reduced enough not to cause a concussion.

>>31625508
>being 20cm away from the point of penetration will get you killed or injured
The test also showed a good chance that all survived and there are a great many examples where penetration has occurred with no death.

>>31625644
>>still believe to be in position to demand anything?
>T. I don't understand the difference between an axiom or a thesis
>T. I have literally never onceGoogled what burden of proof is

Yes. Yes I do. If you cannot reproduce such a link when specifically requested it suspiciously looks like you don't actually have any relevant information proving your claim that "The T-72 does not have a Spall liner", and so literally no one has any reason to take your claim seriously much less regard it whatsoever.

>>31625583
Yep.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=m1+abrams+wiki&l=1

>>31625675
>[citation needed]

>>31625663
>The test also showed a good chance that all survived and there are a great many examples where penetration has occurred with no death.
In all of those cases it means that the shrapnel did not hit the crew members, because if it does it wounds and kills. The inital claim was that TOW penetrated and the shrapned did hit gunner's face. Being hit in the face with shrapnel that is proven to wound and kill means that you are wounded or killed, not jump out of the tank.

>>31625528
The blast had to do a 180 to hit him and travel past a hatch acting as a bast shield.
That and the blast occurred in open air and there is no corridor to act as a wave guide.

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.ca/2015/05/t-72-soviet-progeny.html

>The dissimilar hardnesses of the steel plate and the cast steel behind it could also be beneficial owing to differences in deformation dynamics. The rolled steel plate, being much harder, could become a shock absorber of sorts, since it will not flex as much and will distribute the the kinetic energy of the offending projectile over a very wide area of the cast steel backing, which is softer and will lightly deform and will not spall or crack. This, in addition to the anti-radiation lining acting as a spall liner, meant that after-armour effects would be greatly diminished even in the event of full armour perforation.

>The fibrous construction of the sheets and the lamination process also makes it a suitable spall liner not dissimilar to early flak vests that used woven nylon plates. In the photo below, a T-64 sporting the same type of anti-radiation cladding displays the damage dealt by a 122mm HE-F artillery shell. Note the charred chunks of fabric.


>The lining and cladding not only function as neutron absorbers, but they perform admirably as a form of spall liner as well. According to Swedish trials of purchased ex-East German T-72M1s, it was concluded that the anti-radiation liner was perfectly capable of absorbing secondary fragments of penetrating cumulative jets, not only spall.

Looks overwhelmingly like the T-72 HAD a Spall liner. It may not have been a dedicated spall liner but the material acted as one anyways. Still waiting on a counter citation. I'm not claiming the T-72 has a spall liner, just that according to all provided citations so far that it does have one.

>>31625705
>wounded
Which is the case everyone is arguing here, the gunner suffered facial injures from shrapnel, hence the grasping his face.
You can suffer pretty horrific facial injuries and still remain mobile.

>>31625705
So wounded people cant move?

>>31612641

>arab flees after contact

more on this groundbreaking breaking story at 11

>>31625715
>The blast had to do a 180 to hit him
And you yourself proved it can do that.
>past a hatch acting as a bast shield.
And you yourself proved it can do that.
>That and the blast occurred in open air and there is no corridor to act as a wave guide.
Which means it maybe can or maybe cant diminish the blast wave enough. By the charge is bigger than 6kg, add up ERA that went off.

>>31625731
>>31625733
People wounded by shrapnel that kills dont move, in most cases they are dead.

>>31625720
This is anti-radiation liner. Not only it is made from non-ballistic material it is also located accordingly (aka no liner on the thick frontal parts of armor they provide enough radiation protection by themselves)

>>31625741
>And you yourself proved it can do that.
He proved it can do that in a room.

Not in the open air.

>>31625749
>People wounded by shrapnel that kills dont move
Then it is not wounded but killed. Gunner was wounded.

Not killed.

>>31625363
Wow, just like every other tank.

What a surprise.

>>31625704

https://books.google.com/books?id=_9IVBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&dq=m1+abrams+anti+spall&source=bl&ots=a2jjqA2tmZ&sig=VREgulaGdwh4gUzoQJkwePQArGA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQgZiB0dDPAhXCxYMKHU-1BGc4FBDoAQhNMAg#v=onepage&q=kevlar&f=false

>2 seconds in google

>>31625769
>He proved it can do that in a room.
>Not in the open air.
Nope, fluid dynamics rules are the same in the room and in the open air, in both cases blast wave goes around corners.
>Then it is not wounded but killed. Gunner was wounded.
You have been shot in the head with 9mm. In most cases you are dead. But you have chances to survive, right? It is small, but it exists. You roll that chance and survive. What are the chances you will be running around like a retard?

>>31625781
>[unreliable source]

>>31625797

>ask for source
>receive source
>bitch about source

Ahh, the vatnik way.

Man, what a shitfest of a thread that I've seen 7 times now in 6 months on this board.

Get a life people. We all know it doesn't matter since one AT4 round would just take it out anyways.

>>31625812
>post comic like source
>excepts to be taken seriously
>burger underage detected

>>31625768
>This is anti-radiation liner.
It mentions it's an NBC protection liner but that it functioned just fine as a spall liner when the steel and composite layers were compromised.

Unless you ACTUALLY have a source that states it doesn't work as detailed or that it hardly worked then stop posting.

>Not only it is made from non-ballistic material
Define "non-ballistic material", this is literally just a buzzword.

>also located accordingly
Accordingly to what? Your grammar is terrible.

>(aka no liner on the thick frontal parts of armor they provide enough radiation protection by themselves)
[Citation needed]

Can you see now why I hate arguing with /k/? Everyone fucking expects everyone else to "take their word for it". The source I found detailed all of the information that was disputed accordingly and all of your previous statements seemed to be false, and it's apparently clear you DON'T have a source citing that the T-72 had no present Spall liner.

Try a little harder next time, maybe.

>>31625822
>~200 page overview

>"comic like"

Heres more

https://books.google.com/books?id=H0yt17cHgeQC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&dq=m1+abrams+spall+lineing&source=bl&ots=ccDX5HR8On&sig=mq9Rw7DhwgNDjpvu-ak0EvMEpEc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjwuKDo09DPAhUm6oMKHW3_DfMQ6AEIWzAI#v=onepage&q=lineing&f=false

>inb4 more bitching

like pottery

File: 1g46_950.jpg (139KB, 950x633px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 950x633px

>>31625768
The anti-radiation liner works as a spall liner.

It is claded everywhere and the roof is not thick.

>>31625793
>You have been shot in the head with 9mm. In most cases you are dead. But you have chances to survive, right?
Depend on angle of impact, range, energy and other factors

People have been shot in the head and survived, also impaled and survived.

In this case the gunner was wounded by shrapnel created during perforation of the T-90's armor. The anti radiation liner absorbed most of it and the gunner was most likely looking into his main sight (since he is the gunner and gunner need to gunner) so the sight itself also absorbed the shrapnel.

But he was wounded and fled the vehicle.


>What are the chances you will be running around like a retard?
High since I am from syria, wounded and arab.

But not a vatnik like you.

>>31625864
Vatniks will go really far sometimes

>>31625793

>That blasts into the atmosphere only a small fraction reaches he hatch, where most of it is reflected, and only a small fraction enters through the hole into the tank.
See pic related how the blast is greatly diminished as it travels down the corridor and into the rooms. Only the room opposite got any real amount of blast.

>>31625877
>Depend on angle of impact, range, energy and other factors
We know he was well withing range and in the cone. We know that that shrapnel has enough energy to kill.

>People have been shot in the head and survived, also impaled and survived.
How much chances?

>The anti radiation liner absorbed most of it and the gunner was most likely looking into his main sight (since he is the gunner and gunner need to gunner) so the sight itself also absorbed the shrapnel.
How much chances?

>High since I am from syria, wounded and arab.
None, you have a fucking massive brain trauma.

>But not a vatnik like you.
I am not even a vatnik, not all people who disagree with you are.

>>31625885
You only need 2-3psi for the concussion.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/archive/pdfs/NIOSH-125/125-ExplosionsandRefugeChambers.pdf

>>31625741
>proved it can do that
Despite being in an enclosed space, the blast reaching the adjacent room was minimal. As a rule of thumb, you have to be in the direct line of blast to suffer serious injury unless it is a major fucking blast such as a large artillery shell, aerial bomb or some thermobaric munition.
The warhead in a TOW is designed to produce maximum mechanical force in the copper jet, not excessive blast wave.
There are footage of TOWs hitting a group of people and only the dude and maybe the the guy next to him dies, the rest just gets up and jogs off.

>>31625908
>Despite being in an enclosed space, the blast reaching the adjacent room was minimal.
The gunner is not in adjacent room, he is much, much closer.
> As a rule of thumb, you have to be in the direct line of blast to suffer serious injury
You dont to feel the effects of the blast.

>>31625864
>Their Arrows Will Darken the Sun: The Evolution and Science of Ballistics
Wew, kid, underage are not allowed to post here

>>31625906
>I am not even a vatnik, not all people who disagree with you are.

No, you're not supposed to disagree with the /k/ echo chamber. Obviously there are all the rational posters, vatniks, and chicoms. You are one of the three. Obviously disagreeing with the echo chamber means you are now a Vatnik or a Chicom no questions asked.

>>31625918

>titles of books trigger me

PLZ IGNORE ITS WRITTEN BY A GUY WITH A PHD IN THEORETICAL PHYSICS.

>>31625927

Seems reasonable, to be honest. You can add retards to the vatniks and chicom group.

File: 6tag-1724177207-1171694687617187895_1724177207.jpg (58KB, 496x502px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 496x502px

>not posting the true tank god

>>31625974

Shame it does not seem to work.

>>31625749
There are people walking into ERs with their faces blown off due to failed suicide with shotguns.
You can walk around with all kinds of horrific facial injuries.

File: 1420353485094.png (269KB, 589x559px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 589x559px

>>31625906
>We know he was well withing range and in the cone.
Thank god for anti radiation liners and large gun sights that is capable to absorb and decrease the cone.

>We know that that shrapnel has enough energy to kill.
:^)

Yet we have people survive shrapnel. Even to the head. Maybe this was one of those cases?

>How much chances?
Enough that it happens. Now dont try to shoot yourself in the head and impale yourself. But you are free to try to prove me wrong.

>How much chances?
Enough that the gunner left the vehicle.

>None, you have a fucking massive brain trauma.
Oh so the gunner never left the vehicle since he died due to his severe injuries that YOU KNOW he would get?

I guess you saw something different.
But where is your proof that he was well within the cone? That he "ran around like a retard"? Do you have footage of him running around after leaving the tank?

>>31625989
Chances please. Last time i checked overwhelming majority of people who shot themselves in the face with a shotgun are dead. Also keep in mind that retards that shot themselves with a bird shot do not apply, armor spall is not bird shot.

File: WP_20161007_17_34_00_Pro.jpg (3MB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x1840px

>Shame it does not seem to work.
You really hit home there eh NATO?

>>31626037
wat

>>31625917
>The gunner is not in adjacent room, he is much, much closer
And in a much much better protected area.
>You dont to feel the effects of the blast
Let me assure you, you know perfectly well if you are in the vicinity of a harmful blast.

>>31626008
>Thank god for anti radiation liners and large gun sights that is capable to absorb and decrease the cone.
Did not help Abrams crew a lot, the gunner i pretty much always dead.
>Yet we have people survive shrapnel. Even to the head. Maybe this was one of those cases?
Maybe. Maybe is not enough to make a claim.
>Oh so the gunner never left the vehicle since he died due to his severe injuries that YOU KNOW he would get?
Yes, in most cases armor spall kills. He has chances to survive, but those are chances. A small chance is not enough yo make a claim.
Initial claim was that T-90 was penetrated because gunner jumped out (he has small chances to survive shrapnel, and there is a valid option of him being concussed with the blast wave), that photos do not show the hit area (which is not even an argument) and... what else? Kinda weak.

>>31626053
The vatnik is falling apart.

So you start seeing posts like that.

>>31626057
>And in a much much better protected area.
No, not really. Best protection is distance, and he was really really close.
>Let me assure you, you know perfectly well if you are in the vicinity of a harmful blast.
Yes, its 2-3 psi.

>>31626021
>armor spall is not bird shot
No, armor spall is generally much smaller if you look at the median particle size. Spall liners these days are pretty damn good.

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_Windows Phone_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_d3e23831f85d0b9609d14df4dfcd05ae.jpg (180KB, 1280x872px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1280x872px

I dream about panzers

File: 1445355879021.jpg (199KB, 867x989px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 867x989px

>>31626062
>Did not help Abrams crew a lot, the gunner i pretty much always dead.
How about we ask engie about that in the actual field?


>shitposts
>spall liner dont work
>bad english
>still dont understand the importance of hit area
>magical blastwaves
>magical shrapnel
Weak

Have a nice day vatnik