GW-1

• tankee1981

  3 Dec 06, 12:42

  Originally posted by Fatum:

  The Twardies of our northern friends ain't your father's T-72 ....
  
  so we mustn't get too complacent eh ...

  Yes, Fatum is right. The PT-91M though isn't one of the best MBTs in the market, but its still an effective fighting vehicle.
• wonderamazement

  3 Dec 06, 15:48

  Originally posted by Seth35:

  The T-72 Was a Crew Killer...Normally Once Hit... It had a Tendency to Catch Fire... I believe The T-72 Has a Crew of Three...And has an Auto Loader for its Rounds... And has good NThe autoBC protection

  The autoloader of the T-72 sheared off arms of it's crew.
• SingaporeTyrannosaur

  4 Dec 06, 01:02

  Originally posted by tankee1981:

  Reactive armour or not i can't say because even though the SM1 is clearly on its way out of service some things are not meant for the public forum.
  
  However, i may add that external add-ons can be done.

  Aiyah no need to pao tor any secret lah, use some common sense can liao.
  
  Obviously add-on is a very good idea, but then when you think about it... really how effectively can you up-armour a 15-ton WW2 gun on tracks? Enough to take on a 125mm round? I highly doubt it. The maximum protection level package of the M-8 AGS is more in the ballpark but even I doubt that might stand up to an MBT hit.
  
  So you do the math for the SM1... even with add on, you are probably looking at increased protection against RPGs and stuff maybe, but I doubt any major improvements in armour are going to be made. We need a radically new design... man, I might even hazard a guess that the protection of our BX series is probably the heaviest in our armoured units.
  
  Anyway, there's also another issue to consider... how survivable is the SM1? Does it have all the redundancy systems we see in modern (western at least) MBTs like protected ammo storage, blow our panels, automatic fire supression systems? I doubt it.