BUTT face to the pride of malaysia PT-91M?
-
Originally posted by kotay:
lol look the man did poke his head out!!!
[b]If you wanna talk about sniper proof commander's position for COIN ops, this would be the way to go ...
-
Originally posted by moca:
I'm not disagreeing with you on that ... nothing will beat the Mk 1 eyeball when it comes to FOV and peripheral vision.
But my point is, no matter what you put on top of a tank, the TC will still poke his head up to get a better view.
My point is that a superstructure like this will certainly reduce the need for the TC to go crew exposed when under fire ... wouldn't it? Unless you guys have a "death wish" that I'm not even beginning to comprehend ...
Originally posted by tankfanatic:
I'm sure there's a TSR somewhere that states that AFVs have to have at least 1 personnel/crew exposed when doing admin moves ...
lol look the man did poke his head out!!! -
TSR for admin moves?
Yeah Driver Head come out. If in camp lead by the VC who WALKS in front.
Must wear helmet.
Out field Admin
VC and Driver Heads out, helmets.
Minimum VC heads out driver hatch down, helmets.
Combat, VC heads out man weapon system, driver hatch down periscope,helmets.
You get the picture after awhile...boy how i envy the 2-man 25mm bionix turret.
Yeah M113 VC 40/50 especially get's the biggest >>shoot me i'm here<< sign.
(me sigh) -
that guy probably poking his head because its a secure area...
-
It doesn/t dig with its tracks but uses a sort of dozer blade. All T-72 tanks have this, its called a self-entrenching device.Originally posted by tankfanatic:PT91m can dig in on its own, ive seen the pic. It use its tracks
You can see a pic of this on deftech advertisment of the T-84. T-72 series tanks have similar device. -
yeah probably right, but it did look like it dig with its track. Lol
Pyerdoloni Taboret 91 Malaysian (PT91M) -
Did you say "tak boleh"? I tot Malaysia boleh?Originally posted by tankfanatic:yeah probably right, but it did look like it dig with its track. Lol
Pyerdoloni Taboret 91 Malaysian (PT91M)
-
Originally posted by moca:
Thanx for the Nice Piece done on M60 Tank Cupola ("extra Turret", let the lawyers (paper pushers) work out the naming, As Ops side, my purpose bring the ppl back alive)
If you have heard proposals about adding a cuppola to the commander's hatch, it probably meant the open top cupolas like the M113 for some added protection when the TC is top hatch, not the M60A1 type turret. 2 differrent things.[/b]
Sorry off the Thread, just general Armour Stuff
(Assuming normal coinditions, no smoke covering, well normal, writing this just in case the lawyer pop in, and dig on one word)
Visibility is ideal when viewing above the tank, (American called this Unbuton, SG call Open Hatch)
The Viewing point is higher than that of the Hull, can see beyond the hull. No Blockage by slab of armour (Important Point), no matter how good the Vision Port (or Periscope, the Thingy that help you look thru or above the armour protection, different Tracks use different system) that is, cannot compare with seeing without the Vision Block.
Skip this section, if not interested in the long writeup for extra Cupola/Turret.
Look for _________ for the conclusion
In Conflict situation
Open Terrain (The Usual Armour fighting situation)
Small arms getting the Tank Crew (Expose in Open Hatch) while the Tanks are moving, difficult.
By Right, Suppose to ZigZag. but there are alway afew Tankee crew that no matter what move in a straight line, Predicable , making the task of the Aggressor easier.
Closed Terrain Natural or Man made
Natural
Most areas around the region are fair Closed, apart from the coastline or on a High ground, it is not usual that large expand of ground are visiable on the ground level. Trees, small features block vision.
Tank Movement thru this type of terrain is fairly restricted, as the ground may hide small gullies/flash rivers/ soft grounds. Thus, movement tend to be on Tracks/roads, unless pre recced.
In a day, Armour can move through several tens of Km. It's challenging to find troops to secure the whole stretch of move. Aggressors, are able to be very close to the Tanks, and not be detected.
If Aggressor is armed with Anti-Armour weapons, believe that they will use it. But suspect, that most of their troops will be at least armed with a personal arms. Taking Pop shots?
Man made
This type area, is getting more important in Today's Warfare. City/Town are getting larger. Armour will operate more within these type of area. Aggressor are able to operate close to the Friendlies forces.
Operating in Open Hatch situation, when there is the possibilities of Aggressor abound, is not recommended.
_________
Open Terrain, the Extra Cupola/Turret deos not help, and may interfer with Ops.
Close Terrain, The Turret/Cupola is physically higher than the Tank (See further) Offers some protection, and a offensive weapon.
lawyer, although the example is a Hummer, instead of a Tank, the concept of Protecting Ppl is still the same.
iraq Situation
When the Iraq Situation started. The Americans operated in HArms way, with Gunner on top of a Hummer Open Hatch. Visibility, is Good, Ease of Movenment Fantastic.
After afew months, They realised that it does not work, IED/gun shots , although may not take out the vehicle, take out the gunner. Protection level improved, Not the latest veriosn of the Protection for the Hummer
-
Kotay, you mentioned MR before, in other threads within militarynuts.com, cannot recall/locate when, think it's sometime around your return to the forum, after the birth of your 1st child.Originally posted by kotay:Right ... then how did you know I MR'ed if you didn't see the thread?
Nope. 2 GDS.
Air con Barracks.
Nothing Irony
One Country decide to acquire one type of tank, another different brand. Just because the two brands were competiting in the past, does not imply the further will be the same.
T-72 Tank Design History
As this topic is very big, will progress bit at a time.
This document talks about (Pre-2000) why the Russian produces three type of MBT, how T-72 is the middle range of the tanks they had, pre-2000.
http://www.knox.army.mil/center/ocoa/ArmorMag/ja98/4sewell98.pdf
Russian Tank design not only covers the tradtional Protection, Firepower and Mobility. They also require that the vehicles be simple, reliable, and capable of
moving long distances under their own power.
If no obbjections/questions
The Next part will deal with the Russians Tank quality/quantities, thinking behind it (Russian were very open after the Wall fell, Germans are still abit tight lipped about their stuff)
And the Men operating the T-72.
Bonus, Old Video, to help to understand the T-72 less than 4 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHWHjK2VsUo
Sorry, Monday alot of stuff, pop up need to settle. -
Pyerdoloni Taboret 91 Malaysian
payah le la ni.. tak boleh nan ti malaysia? ....... LOL
you guys understand? LOL -
add a movable bullet proof glass lor.... if got time i make basic picture like a dome over the original hatch so nid see outside jus open and u got a piece of glass offering 360 degree view.. although little protection its slightly better than sticking ur head out....cos if its thick enuff might protect against pistol rounds/shrapnel and low tree branches
-
Wah lao eh...Originally posted by M551Sheridian:if got time i make basic picture like a dome
If u make a dome, why not paint it gold and then put Islamic star and crescent to make it look like a mosque. Guarantee no insurgents shoot at you ah. -
dome or rectangle which one taller? if not jus make like a box over ur head system lor.... then u say liddat then i don put picture liao lor
-
Originally posted by CM06:
like this ... ?
Yeah M113 VC 40/50 especially get's the biggest >>shoot me i'm here<< sign.
(me sigh)
-
Originally posted by nowfox_my
That's what I "like" about you snowie ...always evasive, like your name sake. Look, if you get caught out in a mistake, just accept the correction and move on ... don't try to flim flam around by offering counter-accusations. (as it is I already admitted that it was somewhat pedantic).
"extra Turret", let the lawyers (paper pushers) work out the naming, As Ops side, my purpose bring the ppl back alive
M60 Cupola
Look, we're mostly military people here. We shouldn't fall into all too common foible of the lay person for whom every rifle is a machine gun and every AFV is a Tank. Even more so, if your background is armour, you shouldn't be getting your terminology wrong ... it can lead to misunderstandings that may be really bad in an operational context. Imagine telling the driver to move the tank into a turret down position and he goes "which turret" ...
MRKotay, you mentioned MR before, in other threads within militarynuts.com, cannot recall/locate when, think it's sometime around your return to the forum, after the birth of your 1st child.
How do I say this ... pants on fire :p
I had a quick check through my postings on milnuts and I'm quite sure I did not mention it anywhere else except within that thread. This is typical of your methods ... when you get caught out, you throw smoke.
Look ... since you claim that I mentioned my MR in some other thread, post a link. If, on the other hand, you read the MR thread and forgot the picture then have the good grace to just say you forgot ... stop trying to "save face" like all your discussion threads when you run out of things to say.
To the rest of the forummers ... my apologies for letting the chip (snowie) on my shoulder carry over to this forum. He does push my buttons ...
-
Sorry Off Topic
Did a light search. Cannot find where you did your "Show Off" posting again. But as it is not this thread Topic, Don't care.Originally posted by kotay:How do I say this ... pants on fire :p
I had a quick check through my postings on milnuts and I'm quite sure I did not mention it anywhere else except within that thread. This is typical of your methods ... when you get caught out, you throw smoke.
Look ... since you claim that I mentioned my MR in some other thread, post a link. If, on the other hand, you read the MR thread and forgot the picture then have the good grace to just say you forgot ... stop trying to "save face" like all your discussion threads when you run out of things to say.
To the rest of the forummers ... my apologies for letting the chip (snowie) on my shoulder carry over to this forum. He does push my buttons ...
Self Appointed egoisticOriginally posted by kotay:
When did you become the Offical Spokeperson of anything?
To the rest of the forummers ... my apologies for letting the chip (snowie) on my shoulder carry over to this forum. He does push my buttons ... Embarassed
If you calim to respect others, add to the content of the Thread, not such "wisdoms". -
Continuation on T-72, understand this Tank, and abit more light can be cast on the T-91
For those whom want to go to the conclusion, without the bried writeup, goto ______
Russians Tank quality/quantities, thinking behind it, and the Men whom operate the Tanks.
People in the Soviet Army
During the Cold War preod, Russian Army composed mostly of conscripts, serving three years (Pre 1987) to two years 1987 (onwards) reference : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_army#_note-49
During the Cold War, the Soviet Army, has vast numbers of troops, Depending on which year the data was taken from, Soviet out Numbers the NATO ground force by several times. (No Details as it distract from the Thread, for those whom want to pick up on it, please do so)
Quantities of T-72 Manufactured
Depending on which sources sited, and the time period, Numbers varies from low of Ten Thousands, to Fifty Thousands.
Why the variation of numbers. Apart from Soviet (Cold War period) manufacturer, there were others countries whom also made their own T-72.
For Comparison
- American M1 Abrams, production numbers is close to 10,000. +/- few K (More likely on the lower side)
- Leopard 2 series , is less than 3K (Recall from memory)
Quality of the T-72
How good is the Russian/satellite State workmanship is debatable. Siting examples of AK-47. Progress spacecraft, does not cover the way the T-72 were manufactured, but does indicate One Key Aspect.
If the Design Works, Russian Will Not Change it.
Infamous Thing about T-72
It has a unfortunate distinction of being, among the most destroyed Tank in the world.
Small Countries conflicts, Middle East (Lebanon region) Iraqi-Iranian conflict, Gulf War series.
For some, this looks like a bad thing, indicate that the design is bad. From Lessons learned by the American WWII, every destroyed/damage Sherman, made the design better, as the American learned from the mistakes, and improve on the Design.
Can ppl assume that the T-91 is not build on lessons learned?
______
Summary T-72/91
Conscript Army
As the Tanks have to be operated by the majority of the conscript Army. Guessing, that the Tank is easy to upkeep.
Numbers of T-72/91
These large numbers of manufactured Tanks, indicate some key issues. T-72 Cheap to made, and spares are available from alot of sources. Whether if they will fit is another question.
Lessons Learn from Past Mistakes
Among the Most shot at Tank in the World (Post WWII)
But This Tank is not without it;s flaws. Stay tune to this Thread. -
WTF?Originally posted by tankfanatic:yeah probably right, but it did look like it dig with its track. Lol
Pyerdoloni Taboret 91 Malaysian (PT91M)
"Pyerdoloni taboret" is exact fonetical version of Polish "pierdolony taboret" which means "fvcked stool". -
Armour Self-Entrenching Device
There maybe a system that assist to "Bury" a Tank into the Ground, Tank Trench.
But most system are similar to this
Ignore the post like object acroiss the Tank.
A Blade (Dozer) is fitted onto the Hull, and the Tank move/push the mound of earth, to create a barrier. A cheap, effective method to quickly get a earth barrier in place.
This next example is abit strange, as it does not covers across the Track of the Tank. And the blade appear to be movable.
This is a rare example, as the Tracks are not covered by the blade, when pushing the earth to create a mound.
The Tracks, might (usually does) dig the earth under the Tracks. Reducing the size of the earth mound.
Example of start of digging in, note, this a simulate start, not an actual dig.
Asia does not have snow issue, but these blades, assist to push soft snow aside, to assist the mobility of other behind the Tank.
Bonus, Provide a Video to show how it's done,
Link: ftp://ftp.battlefront.com/pub/misc/T72/T72%20Trench%20Demo.wmv
Sorry Link does not seem to work.
The site is here, the video is at the lower middle section. T-72 Tank employing dozer blade attachment.
http://www.battlefront.com/products/t72/movies.html -
aha so the track did have some use in digging!
-
I dont know about armoured vehicles having to ZIGZAG on the tactical move. I know we have to constantly rotate our turret -left to right to left- that's about it. I forgot why it's to increase the Firing angle coverage or looking "menacing/alert". In reality it helps to keep the VC awake at least
Observing the self digging device, i have the following logical conclusions:
1) The Vehicle has to have a front lowering suspension. Notice the front sprocket wheel is almost nonexistent in the last picture.
2) I dont know how high that thing can dig but you either have to forward and backward 50 times to get that much soil or drive forward 100 - 200 metres.
There's no side holder, the soil when dug up and pushed forward, will fall to the side ...no?
It's like putting your shovel on the ground and pushing it forward only to try and build a sand wall...quite hard. -
Originally posted by snowfox_my:
Reaction as expected ... I rest my case.
Did a light search. Cannot find where you did your "Show Off" posting again. But as it is not this thread Topic, Don't care.add to the content of the Thread
Okay I'll bite ...
"Why Three Tanks?" from Tanknet
"History of Soviet Tanks" from Tanknet
long and winding thread aside, I find the gem here are these 2 graphics.
As for Leopard 2, here's a fairly good write up on the development of the Leo 2
M1 ... "close to 10,000. +/- few K" try just under 10,000 ... something closer to 9.5k
American M1 Abrams, production numbers is close to 10,000. +/- few K (More likely on the lower side)
Leopard 2 series , is less than 3K (Recall from memory)
Leo 2 ... "less than 3K". try more than 3k ... something closer to 3.5k -
Clear up a few misconceptions here:
Tracks do not dig, period.
Tracks are meant to do the exact opposite which is to prevent the tank from sinking into mud. Now whoever came up with this notion that tracks are used for digging, please find the reference for that info otherwise please stop propagating this info.
Or can gary1910 or someone from armour please clarify this?
Secondly, the Swiss "S" tank is shown here demonstrating its unique gun elevation/depression using its suspension. The main gun is fixed to the hull with only minimal movement possible so this is the only way to raise or lower the gun. I thought everyone knew this already.
Dozerblades dig, tracks traverse. -
Originally posted by CM06:
CM06, you point out one thing that afew people don't realize. Most of local training, are in Close Terrain. There is barely room for Armour horizontal Movement.
I dont know about armoured vehicles having to ZIGZAG on the tactical move. I know we have to constantly rotate our turret -left to right to left- that's about it. I forgot why it's to increase the Firing angle coverage or looking "menacing/alert". In reality it helps to keep the VC awake at least
Move in a Straight path/route. Artillery FO will be able to call for fire onto the on coming Tanks. Zig Zags are intend to make the life of the FO difficult.
Give me time, I try to locate a video of Tank movement, and Sector keeping (Moving the turret left right) Impressive.
Sector Keeping
Threats on a Route varies, some left, some right.
Break away roads, open spaces, possible ambush site, need to pay attention too. Thus requiring the Main Gun to be Faced towards that sector.
Thus the Turret turning Left and Right while on move.
This technic is more complicated when operating in Open terrain, as all sector moves need to be co-ordinated among the various Tracks in the Pl/Coy. Some resort to VC doing all the turret turning, via Commander over rider(Fun too), Some don't care. -
Originally posted by moca:
No Offends moca. Like some self proclaimed spoke person. I am not good with very detail stuff, like who does what exactly
Clear up a few misconceptions here:
Tracks do not dig, period.
Tracks are meant to do the exact opposite which is to prevent the tank from sinking into mud. Now whoever came up with this notion that tracks are used for digging, please find the reference for that info otherwise please stop propagating this info.
Or can gary1910 or someone from armour please clarify this?
Secondly, the Swiss "S" tank is shown here demonstrating its unique gun elevation/depression using its suspension. The main gun is fixed to the hull with only minimal movement possible so this is the only way to raise or lower the gun. I thought everyone knew this already.
Dozerblades dig, tracks traverse.
But Tracks Dig.
Anything that move digs, When a vehicle is struck in training area, running the wheels, dirts flies.
Have seen SM-1, struck on something, running the Tracks, only help the Tank to dig deeper into the earth. The Tracks holds onto the earth, but as the Tank is held fast, the weaker of the two moves, and earth flies.