The Armored Vehicle Thread

I typed in "Russian tanks evil eye".

This is the first image I got.

You mean the red circles you see in this◊? It's part of the Shtora system.

edited 10th Dec '14 8:10:24 PM by entropy13

I was going to make a joke about your search habits, but I got the same.

That's the one!

edited 10th Dec '14 8:10:29 PM by Parable

Those are IR dazzlers. They are meant to confuse TOW missile systems and laser guided missiles like hell fires by spamming coded pulses creating basically a junk guidance picture from the missiles point of view. The idea is to either get a bad hit or a clean miss of the missile. The US Abrams has a "Golden Eye" version for Abrams.

Taira: You had to mention the Armored Soda can. The armored vehicle common infantry arms can penetrate never mind heavy weapons which wreck its shit.

We had a pretty lengthy discussion about Shtora in the Gun Porn thread. It's not just a set of dazzlers, it's also hooked up to smoke dispensers, early warning systems and autonomous turret control if needed. Usually works in conjunction with Arena.

Also it's angry eyes.

edited 10th Dec '14 8:20:31 PM by LeGarcon

So if an Abrams and T-90 go head to head, they can literally glare at each other?

What he said. The Smoke is a FLIR/IIR Opaque type obscurant.

Parable: yes yes they could.

edited 10th Dec '14 8:25:51 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Abrams: .....

T-90: ....

Abrams: ....

T-90: ....

Abrams: ....GOT YOUR NOSE! -fires-

At which point Arena blocks the shot and the T-90 returns fire and gets a hit. Because we haven't deployed out active protection system. Because reasons.

I doubt Arena can realistically intercept APFSDSDU rounds.

Well it'd probably do something to it. Likely wouldn't destroy it completely though.

Relikt is rated to stop those things and if it's flight path and velocity get fucked up by an explosion from an Arena projectile it'll have an even harder time getting through.

Hmm, Arena isn't rated to catch objects that fast though. It's possible but not to be expected.

edited 10th Dec '14 8:40:42 PM by LeGarcon

Arena no, reactive armor maybe. Although supposedly the latest iteration of the sabot round is supposed to be able to deal with it.

I refuse to believe this actually stands for anything. That is more abbreviations than is decent in any society.

I presume the latest sabot round means to destroy the reactive armor rather than get destroyed while it self-destructs.

LOL it actually means something actually. It also has several dashes. Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding-Sabot Depleted Uranium.

edited 10th Dec '14 9:02:03 PM by entropy13

Armor Piercing Fin Stabilzed Discarding Sabot Depleted Uranium shells.

Why can't it be more simple like MOAB, Mother Of All Bastards.

That's not what it actually mean, as you all know, but let me indulge in it, damn it.

My problem with these fancy new acronyms for missiles and tank shells is that we're very quickly approaching the threshold where it's actually easier to say the the full name of the munition than to say the acronym

Arena uses a spray of small projectiles to knock out or disable an approaching projectile and is geared towards things like missiles and even shells to a point. The DU Penetrator rounds are a lot smaller in diameter pretty much every angle to missiles and shells and is a very high velocity round.

As for the reactive armor Kontackt 5 might provide the protection. But given the DU rounds from MBT's in general can penetrate a large amount of armor it might not be enough without using armor angle and maneuvering to keep the hit from being a clean hit.

Sometime in the 90's a former Russian Client State handed over a fully kitted out T-72. This thing was not your Export Model but a frontline model. When it was tested the first gen DU rounds had notably reduced effectiveness as did some HEAT warheads. This lead to a change in rounds design. M 829 A 2 was designed specifically to pen Kontakt 5 Reactive armor. The US also started using more tandem and top down attack munitions as well as EFP munitions.

The M829 is in version A3 now as of now with the E4 Upgrade coming down the line in one to two years tops. They apparently notably altered the design for version 3 and likely will do the same for version 4.

On the opposite end the Russian DU rounds are likely just as nasty.

edited 10th Dec '14 9:10:17 PM by TuefelHundenIV

True but Relikt was designed to surpass Kontakt-5 specifically because we could punch through it with the newer shells. And now it's successor, Kaktus is starting to take the stage.

It's gonna be another eternal back and forth isn't it?

edited 10th Dec '14 9:11:36 PM by LeGarcon

How big are the APFSDS rounds?

Thats just how war rolls.

Eh size of your forearm normally? Thats just the projectile itself though.

edited 10th Dec '14 9:20:50 PM by Canid117

World of Tanks's military specialist The Chieftain goes over the mighty Soviet prototype heavy tank, the IS-7, or Obyekt 260. The IS-7 was perhaps the ultimate example of the heavy tank concept, although it never saw full production despite several extremely advanced features for its time. First of a two part series; this part covers the exterior - armor, suspension, etc.

EDIT: Depending on the quality of equipment being sent, the evidence would seem to suggest that the Ukrainians are capable of killing Russian tanks. Especially if the higher end estimates of 3500-4000 RGF casualties from the Union of Soldiers’ Mothers Committees are correct.

edited 10th Dec '14 11:08:17 PM by Achaemenid

Though these appear to have been T-72s, not T-90s.

Hmm, seems even with all those upgrades and retrofittings the T-72 really is at the end of it's useful life. It lived a good one I suppose. That has to be one of the more iconic tanks out there.

Russians really need to phase their stock of them out soon though. Supposedly their Armata platform is going to be released next year and will enter service shortly after. That'll leave the T-80 as the oldest thing in their arsenal.

Also the IS-7 needs more machine guns.

edited 10th Dec '14 11:15:35 PM by LeGarcon

You sound like Patton, who used to annoy the life out of the Ordnance branch with his unsolicited opinions, almost all of which involved putting machineguns in places they didn't belong.