BUTT face to the pride of malaysia PT-91M?
-
Originally posted by moca:
snowfox is from armour ...
[b]Or can gary1910 or someone from armour please clarify this?
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
ZIG ZAG? As in "blindly" zig and zagging?
Or a more generalised "zig zag" ... as in moving from depression to depression using the folds in the terrain? As the panzer truppen call it "moving with the flow of the water" -
Originally posted by snowfox_my:
I'm not good with details either but I do google or check my facts before I post them ... and if I get them still wrong well :shrug: I'll stand corrected not bluster.
No Offends moca. Like some self proclaimed spoke person. I am not good with very detail stuff, like who does what exactly
Although I do remember snowfox telling off another forum member (in the other milnut) for getting his facts wrong. I believe you, snowfox, told him to use google and not rely on memory/impressions. I guess everyone deserves some slack ... even when they don't follow the same rules they set for others ... -
Sorry, Suppose to present the part about T-72 Flaws. Got a few meetings stack for today.
Present only the headers.
Pro Or Cons
Low Profile
Pro
- Harder to see, Aim, and lower probability of hitting.
Con
- Gun Depression is discussed alot already, thus, will not cover it.
- Small Tank, hard to upgrade/add new equipment. Barely room to move within the Tank.
- Depot Maintance also pose another issue, The Russian Forces had alot of T-72 to play around with, Guessing on my part.thus difficult to repair items, can be held for a long time, as another Tank from the depot can be used to replaced it.
Ammo
Pros
- Binary Ammo system, is now being studied by Western Armies. The Single Round, is getting heavier, with marginal improvements. Binary round, allow the possibilities of more ammo carried. High Explosive parts better protected, Current system protect everything as a single package, and the level of protection can be improved.
- AutoLoader, reduce the workload, allow reliable reloading. (Especially when New)
Cons
- Autoloader. Reliability and ease of Upkeeping.
This system require alot of care and attention, parts failure can occurs anything, as the system is subjected to alot of vibration and sudden shocks.
Guess on my part Part of the reason, why the Iraqi RG Tank, blew up so speculatively, was due to the placement of ready to use Ammo outside the Ammo carousel.
Either just in case the Autoloader fails in a fight, or the Autoloader has failed and yet to be repaired.
SABOT/HEAT ammo penetrating the Tank, ignites the Ready to use Ammo, and the Tank explode dramatically
Sorry have to go now.
Sorry Side Track
Challenger Firing and throwing engine smoke;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XYvmTnIFlU -
Are we talking about track digging on purpose or are we talking about tracks getting stuck in mud and digging itself in?Originally posted by snowfox_my: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.
Digging on purpose would mean preparing a firing position. How does a tank dig a firing position with its tracks?
A tank's tracks getting stuck is not the same thing. -
I have the same question as moca ...Originally posted by snowfox_my: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.
I'm not from armour ... I'm basing my questions on a layman's perspective of traction vis 2WD/4WD vehicles. 2WDs can dig themselves in by standing on the brakes and spinning the wheels. 4WDs can't ... well they could by revving the engine and dropping the clutch but this only works on soil that is on the borderline of being trafficable. Not to mention doing your tranny and threads a world of hurt ...
IINM, tracks operate on similar principles ... as such using the tracks to dig is more a matter of happenstance rather than a deliberate action.
Can anyone clarify that tanks (or any tracked vehicle) can deliberate "dig" into hard ground that has a high VCI shear index?
The other thing that comes to mind is that like moca mentioned, tracks are designed for floatation. Your description of mud flying and tanks spinning their tracks kinda implies that the soil is no longer trafficable ... if that is the case, is that tank going to be able to exit the position under it's own power? Or will it require a tow to get out? I would think that implied into digging a fighting position is an implicit understand that one should be able to evacuate the position when required ... -
I command m113 only. I have no *beep* clue to half the stuff Snowfox is saying. He knows more i suppose.
Regarding traverse turret, yeah you are right about point the turret at danger areas. I forgot about that. Danger areas. Aim as you move, gpmg gunner also.
Kinda hard to Zigzag when you move along a track though.
Even the taiwanese armour company (tank heavy) they do a Tanks in front, m113 behind. They move in a broad formation, tanks spaced apart and m113s in the gaps but behind. The tanks do the swivelling left to right but they were moving in a straight line no zigzag:
Front is facing downwards ah.
Trust me it's damn scary to see them do that and you are in front of them.
M113--------> =====|_|======|_|========|_|==========|_|
M60---->===|___|======|___|======|___|=======|___|======|___|==
P.S. not sure what tank they have but it's one huge M.F.Tank. There's a turret on top of the Main turret for the commander. Not plating but real miniturret. -
That must be the M48 or M60. Both have the HMG turret on top of the main gun turret. Look at the pics I posted.Originally posted by CM06:There's a turret on top of the Main turret for the commander. Not plating but real miniturret.
And Taiwan operates bothh the M48 and M60.
They also have a twin AA gun on a chassis very similar to the M41 series. When I was in ROC in the 80s I saw a convoy of these AA tanks - very retro 1950s. The TC saluted us when we - lowly infantry types - waved to them. -
For a tank to zig zag, it would need a lot of space. Again, not somethig very usual for a tank to do - especially big MBTs.
-
Dont remember what the tank look like it's been so long. I suppose it could be an M60..albeit...modified?
What i can say is, the tank is so tall, the barrel is about the height of the VC of m113. I remember that cause i was v-commanding in training and passing by one of them and thought...wth! the barrel is pointing at me.... -
Sorry Yesterday was a last min thingy, didn't want to go, the top direct me to just popby and see somethings.Originally posted by CM06:I command m113 only. I have no *beep* clue to half the stuff Snowfox is saying. He knows more i suppose.
Regarding traverse turret, yeah you are right about point the turret at danger areas. I forgot about that. Danger areas. Aim as you move, gpmg gunner also.
Kinda hard to Zigzag when you move along a track though.
Even the taiwanese armour company (tank heavy) they do a Tanks in front, m113 behind. They move in a broad formation, tanks spaced apart and m113s in the gaps but behind. The tanks do the swivelling left to right but they were moving in a straight line no zigzag:
Front is facing downwards ah.
Trust me it's damn scary to see them do that and you are in front of them.
M113--------> =====|_|======|_|========|_|==========|_|
M60---->===|___|======|___|======|___|=======|___|======|___|==
P.S. not sure what tank they have but it's one huge M.F.Tank. There's a turret on top of the Main turret for the commander. Not plating but real miniturret.
CM06 Command a M113, that's nice, not only the VC have a HMG, something, there are left right GPMG(s) or AIs keeping sector, right. Some exerise even have nearly 360 coverage, but the poor chaps sure look depressed, the dirt kick up by the movement is enough to down moral.
Tankee, only have VC and Gunner, one take the CMG, and the other coaxial and Main Gun. Playing point/lead no choice, have to keep sector, if not Aggressor come and knock us off.
Movement along a Track
CM06, you are Right, Moving along Tracks, barely have enough room to Zig Zag, even in the some parts of Taiwan (Don't know the place well, have not been to every part.) Movement is restricted within Tracks.
In Asia, using large Tanks, is very restrictived in manoeuver space. Moving along a track, provide the Aggressor with a predicable/easy way to monitor the Armour movement.
Zig Zagging
Used in open terrain, not only for avoiding Artillery avoidance. But a host of others purposes, e.g but not restricted too:
1) Gunnery Survival
- Open terrain, Gunnery engagement, can be anywhere from 0.8 to 4 KM (Current Gunnery record, held by the UK Forces on a Challenger2)
The sudden changing of directions, is in theory, should make the life of the Aggressor attempting to shoot at the Tanks difficult.
Firing sequence
Based on the course that the Aggressor assume that the Tank was moving, compute a Fire solution (can't think of a better term off hand).
Pull the Trigger, and the round goes down range, flight time varies from 1-3 sec for Sabot, longer for a HEAT ammo.
The round will hit a guess point that the Tank will be at after the flight time, but if a Tank change direction suddenly (Moving at a speed of 36km/hr, chose for ease of calculation) every 1 sec difference is 10 metres movement.
Faster movement, bigger the error of aim, better chance of survival for the Tank.
2) Throws up alot of dust, very useful feature.
Question CM06 or moca or any other Writer why the constant questions about Self Entrenching?
Not counter points to the Flaws of T-72, did I cover most of them? -
Yes, the M60 series of tank were very tall, just look at out own M-60 CEV - talk about dozer blades...Originally posted by CM06:Dont remember what the tank look like it's been so long. I suppose it could be an M60..albeit...modified?
What i can say is, the tank is so tall, the barrel is about the height of the VC of m113. I remember that cause i was v-commanding in training and passing by one of them and thought...wth! the barrel is pointing at me....
I used to have a pic of ROC M-60 at the beach. They are likely the M60A1 with no modifications other than ERA on the hull and turret, I think...
The addition of the VC HMG turret make it even more.
THis was during the 70's. The Soviets went the opposite wat and decided that a tank that is as low as possible is better, though sacrificing comfort and gun elevation/depression. THey came up with the T-72. -
[URL=http://img263.imageshack.us/my.php?image=8069bi1.jpg][IMG]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/6050/8069bi1.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
not even an ERA just old plain M-60 armour , they plan to repel an invasion by lining up the tank on the beach ....
-
Actually thinking about,
i'm only concern about news in the region and what stuff they bring in. All these will change the way the RCP is calculated and can cause us much headaches. IMHO, you can never have high enough RCP to be comfortable. -
Very Insightful view.Originally posted by CM06:Actually thinking about,
i'm only concern about news in the region and what stuff they bring in. All these will change the way the RCP is calculated and can cause us much headaches. IMHO, you can never have high enough RCP to be comfortable.
Not many are aware of the degree that Anti-Armour means had improve both in capabilities and drop in cost.
Some believe that throwing more technologies onto the system is the answer. Time for a rethink of old assumptions, beliefs and ideas. -
Something for the weekend.
Taiwan army's main force tank M60A3 video 3:36mins
Note alot of coastal defense training is emphasised.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-X-szL5z10
Leopard II Sales Video 5:54mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhF7cq1bduE -
Reading a few green cover books helps.Originally posted by snowfox_my:Very Insightful view.
Not many are aware of the degree that Anti-Armour means had improve both in capabilities and drop in cost.
Some believe that throwing more technologies onto the system is the answer. Time for a rethink of old assumptions, beliefs and ideas.
-
any more pic of the PT91M? for recognition guide
-
T-91 under Trials, note the Camo Netting.
-
Ps is there any other photos? -
from www.militaryphotos.net
-
I thought the pic of the camo draped PT-91M is a delivered vehicle as opposed to trial vehicle? But wadda I know, I'm no armour expert ...
Anyhoo ...
http://news.163.com/05/1011/13/1VPNH9OP00011235.html
http://www.serwis-militarny.net/foto/index2.php
http://www.knse.pl/main.php?rodzaj=news&go=76
http://www.bumar.gliwice.pl/pdf/malaj.pdf
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1693260&postcount=13
http://www.wpeu.net/web/family/family_rus_tank.htm ... scroll about halfway down
http://armyreco.ifrance.com/europe/pologne/vehicules_lourds/pt-91/pt-91_pologne_description.htm
Also do not that PT-91Z represents the prototype that was submitted for the M'sian trials and resulted in the PT-91M.
PT-91E is an export variant similar to and derived from PT-91M offered for export from 2006 -.
BTW Would anyone care to offer up the VDMs for the PT-91M that distinguishes it from other PT-91s? -
Wants some Interior Photos of T-72 and T-91?Originally posted by tankfanatic:any more pic of the PT91M? for recognition guide
If I share 1 idea, and You share another idea, we walk off each with Two ideas. -
Wants some Interior Photos of T-72 and T-91?
is it same? -
See for yourself.Originally posted by tankfanatic:is it same?
Commander Position
T-72
Iraqi
Czech, from www.1rota.com More Advance from the one before.
Sorry have only a small pic from the official sources
T-91 Even More Advance from the one before.
During the Cold War Period(Long Time Ago), Warsaw Pact Tanks were fairly standardized. Now, Countries usually customized their own Tracks, adding various communication , Fire Control, Optics. Thus the interior Differs.
Old Picture of the Driver Position
Notice the cluster, the new Tanks is better.
-
sorry hor, a bit out of topic ....
but Chao Chee Byeeee !!!! .... what kind of soldier is this ? ...
notice the lit cigeratte in his hand ? ...