Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Tranche 7

[Laywenrania]

Up-armoured T-72M1 and T-55 AM2 could resist the 105mm of the Leopard 1, T-64 also offers protection against Leopards gun.

[Yukonastan]

Anyone know the protection of medium level MEXAS/AMAP? I can't seem to find it.

[EsToVnIa]

Approximately how much extra width would Leopard 2-esque applique armor add-ons add to the overall width of a roughly T-72 sized tank?

crying irl ; _ ;

[Questers]

"Zvika soon realized that he was alone, the other tank having lost its position in the dark. Moving over the crest of a hill,Zvika was confronted by three Syrian tanks moving towards them with their driving lights on. Three rapid shots from the Centurion’s 105mm gun left the enemy tanks blazing brightly, and the illumination of the area from the fire greatly aided Zvika’s movement. The intruders belonged to the 51st Independent Tank Brigade, and they were feeling their way into the Israeli rear, seeking to exploit the breakthrough. Apparently they had turned on their sidelights to see better, to gain speed.Zvika shifted into a new position and within minutes destroyed three more T55s. Zvika realized that the Tapline Road was a major avenue of approach,that he was frequently outnumbered and he was facing tanks with superior night fighting capabilities. Zvika chose to hold in his current position, take advantage of the defensible terrain, and wait for Syrian forces. Thirty minutes passed until they were alerted by the sound of heavy engines. A long column of T-55s appeared out of the darkness, followed by a procession of trucks.

It was as if the main body of Major Ismail’s 452nd Tank Battalion was on parade, so perfectly aligned and spaced was the column. Zvika waited until the lead tank was
only twenty meters from where he was hunkered down. The first shot stopped the first target and stalled the entire column Zvika was up against terrible odds, but he had the enemy fixed and was in position to destroy the entire column. Zvika withdrew into the darkness, taking advantage of the scrub and rocky outcrops, only to appear and fire before disappearing again. He kept this uneven match going for over an hour.The Syrians’ sole warning was a crash and a long jet of white flame shooting through the night to destroy another of their vehicles. The Syrians were extremely bewildered by the single shot that kept hitting their tanks from all along the roadway. Frustrated, several Syrian tankers switched on searchlights to try and locate what they thought was a sizeable enemy force. The illumination gave Zvika and his gunner more clear targets to engage. Ten armored vehicles were either destroyed or damaged before Major Ismail ordered the remnants of his battalion to withdraw."

[Imperializt Russia]

Up-armoured T-72M1 and T-55 AM2 could resist the 105mm of the Leopard 1, T-64 also offers protection against Leopards gun.

Critically, T-72M1 and T-55AM2 were not going to be numerous targets on the battlefield when the L7 was in its prime.

[Laywenrania]

Anyone know the protection of medium level MEXAS/AMAP? I can't seem to find it.

Well I found that it protects against RPG-7, without specifiying the warhead, so anything from 200-500mm for monobloc and up to 700mm-ish for Tandem?!

Up-armoured T-72M1 and T-55 AM2 could resist the 105mm of the Leopard 1, T-64 also offers protection against Leopards gun.

Critically, T-72M1 and T-55AM2 were not going to be numerous targets on the battlefield when the L7 was in its prime.

Answering to the statement that anything less then a T-80 offers no protection

[Questers]

Up-armoured T-72M1 and T-55 AM2 could resist the 105mm of the Leopard 1, T-64 also offers protection against Leopards gun.

Not really.

[Laywenrania]

Up-armoured T-72M1 and T-55 AM2 could resist the 105mm of the Leopard 1, T-64 also offers protection against Leopards gun.

Not really.

NVA/Bundeswehr firing tests say so.

[Immoren]

So which of the positions on AFVs would be good for one whom is being trained for the reserve armourd NCO? Because I was thinking doing so that in conscript based AFV units vehicle commanders would be career soldiers, while rest of crew are conscripts, but one of the conscripts would get training to act as commander of that type of vehicle, even if they won't be commanding that vehicle while as conscripts.

[Questers]

http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/armania/ar ... T72M1.html

T-72A aka T-72M1 entered service in the USSR in 1979 (remember I said into 80s.) as you can see from the link German ammo at that time was effective in penetrating this vehicle. And this test was not done with some of the better ammunition the L7 could fire, as Germans didn't always have best rounds.

Not really.

NVA/Bundeswehr firing tests say so.

The records I just posted show that the glacis was vulnerable to HEAT.

[San-Silvacian]

pretty sure the last generation US APFSDS 105mm munitions could tear a hole though both of those.

[Yukonastan]

"Zvika soon realized that he was alone, the other tank having lost its position in the dark. Moving over the crest of a hill,Zvika was confronted by three Syrian tanks moving towards them with their driving lights on. Three rapid shots from the Centurion’s 105mm gun left the enemy tanks blazing brightly, and the illumination of the area from the fire greatly aided Zvika’s movement. The intruders belonged to the 51st Independent Tank Brigade, and they were feeling their way into the Israeli rear, seeking to exploit the breakthrough. Apparently they had turned on their sidelights to see better, to gain speed.Zvika shifted into a new position and within minutes destroyed three more T55s. Zvika realized that the Tapline Road was a major avenue of approach,that he was frequently outnumbered and he was facing tanks with superior night fighting capabilities. Zvika chose to hold in his current position, take advantage of the defensible terrain, and wait for Syrian forces. Thirty minutes passed until they were alerted by the sound of heavy engines. A long column of T-55s appeared out of the darkness, followed by a procession of trucks.

It was as if the main body of Major Ismail’s 452nd Tank Battalion was on parade, so perfectly aligned and spaced was the column. Zvika waited until the lead tank was
only twenty meters from where he was hunkered down. The first shot stopped the first target and stalled the entire column Zvika was up against terrible odds, but he had the enemy fixed and was in position to destroy the entire column. Zvika withdrew into the darkness, taking advantage of the scrub and rocky outcrops, only to appear and fire before disappearing again. He kept this uneven match going for over an hour.The Syrians’ sole warning was a crash and a long jet of white flame shooting through the night to destroy another of their vehicles. The Syrians were extremely bewildered by the single shot that kept hitting their tanks from all along the roadway. Frustrated, several Syrian tankers switched on searchlights to try and locate what they thought was a sizeable enemy force. The illumination gave Zvika and his gunner more clear targets to engage. Ten armored vehicles were either destroyed or damaged before Major Ismail ordered the remnants of his battalion to withdraw."

This does match my doctrine fairly closely, now that I think about it. So while I'd love an uparmored :not:Leo 1 as my '70s MBT, it doesn't really need a lot of armor. Does 100mm RHA on the side and 300mm RHA on the glacis sound realistic, assuming first generation ceramic armor kits, for an A1 variant?

[Questers]

"Zvika soon realized that he was alone, the other tank having lost its position in the dark. Moving over the crest of a hill,Zvika was confronted by three Syrian tanks moving towards them with their driving lights on. Three rapid shots from the Centurion’s 105mm gun left the enemy tanks blazing brightly, and the illumination of the area from the fire greatly aided Zvika’s movement. The intruders belonged to the 51st Independent Tank Brigade, and they were feeling their way into the Israeli rear, seeking to exploit the breakthrough. Apparently they had turned on their sidelights to see better, to gain speed.Zvika shifted into a new position and within minutes destroyed three more T55s. Zvika realized that the Tapline Road was a major avenue of approach,that he was frequently outnumbered and he was facing tanks with superior night fighting capabilities. Zvika chose to hold in his current position, take advantage of the defensible terrain, and wait for Syrian forces. Thirty minutes passed until they were alerted by the sound of heavy engines. A long column of T-55s appeared out of the darkness, followed by a procession of trucks.

It was as if the main body of Major Ismail’s 452nd Tank Battalion was on parade, so perfectly aligned and spaced was the column. Zvika waited until the lead tank was
only twenty meters from where he was hunkered down. The first shot stopped the first target and stalled the entire column Zvika was up against terrible odds, but he had the enemy fixed and was in position to destroy the entire column. Zvika withdrew into the darkness, taking advantage of the scrub and rocky outcrops, only to appear and fire before disappearing again. He kept this uneven match going for over an hour.The Syrians’ sole warning was a crash and a long jet of white flame shooting through the night to destroy another of their vehicles. The Syrians were extremely bewildered by the single shot that kept hitting their tanks from all along the roadway. Frustrated, several Syrian tankers switched on searchlights to try and locate what they thought was a sizeable enemy force. The illumination gave Zvika and his gunner more clear targets to engage. Ten armored vehicles were either destroyed or damaged before Major Ismail ordered the remnants of his battalion to withdraw."

This does match my doctrine fairly closely, now that I think about it. So while I'd love an uparmored :not:Leo 1 as my '70s MBT, it doesn't really need a lot of armor. Does 100mm RHA on the side and 300mm RHA on the glacis sound realistic, assuming first generation ceramic armor kits, for an A1 variant?

Yeah I guess, + the weight though

[Padnak]

I was wondering, speaking of the T-72A and whatnot, are the later model T-72s with ERA (armor wise) just T-72A with ERA? I ask because if I recall correctly the T-72A had allot of applique composite armor and it seems logical that they would just build on top of that

[Questers]

No, they also changed armour on T-72B.

[Yukonastan]

This will be bad. Someone tell me how bad, please.
NOTE MODDED STATS

Name: Northern Wolf MBT (Northern Wolf I after introduction of NW II in my MT canon)
Type: Main battle tank
Place of origin: Yukonastan/Germany (:not:Leo 1 ripoff variant)
Specifications
Weight: 42.5 tonnes base, ranging to 47.5 tonnes for up-armored variants.
Length: 9.50/8.25 m (gun forward/rearward)
Hull length: 7.00 m
Width: 3.20 m
Height: 2.35/2.65 m (turret roof/absolute)
Crew: 4 (commander, driver, gunner, radio operator/loader)
Armor: Steel + Gen 1 Composite 100 mm RHAe over all sides, 300mm RHAe frontal arc.
Main armament: 1 × 105 mm L7A3 L/52 rifled gun (15 rounds in turret, 40 rounds in hull)
Secondary armament: 2 × 10.4x64 mm MMG(co-axial and commander's hatch) (5500 rounds)
Engine: 12-cylinder, 37.4 litres, multi-fuel engine
978 PS (965 hp, 720 kW) at 2,200 RPM
Power/weight: 22.7 hp/t to 20.3 hp/t
Suspension: Torsion-bar
Operational range: 600 km (on road), 450 km (cross-country)
Top speed: 75 km/h (on road), 45km/h (cross-country)

Anything still blatantly hilariously wrong?

[Questers]

No, looks ok.

[Yukonastan]

Time for number 2. Anything wrong?

Type: Infantry fighting vehicle; family chassis
Place of origin: Yukonastan

In service: 1971-Present
Used by: Yukonastan Defense Force; Yukonastan Expeditionary Force

Designer: Northern Military Industries Land Vehicle Division
Designed: April 28, 1971
Manufacturer: Northern Military Industries Land Vehicle Division
Manufactured: 750+

Weight: 32.5 t
Length: 7.2 m
Width: 3.2 m
Height: 2.9 m (base IFV variant)
Crew: 2 (Base IFV variant, driver, commander/gunner)

Armor: 20mm point blank (25mm@200m)over frontal arc, 14.5mm (20mm@200m)point blank elsewhere. Steel, aluminium, and applique over the tracks
Main Armament: 32x142mm chain gun (current)
Secondary Armament: 10.4x64mm medium machine gun
Engine: 500 kW diesel (670 HP)
Power/weight: 20.6 HP/t
Suspension: Torsion bar
Ground clearance: 0.42 m
Fuel capacity: 640 L
Operational range: 580 km
Speed: 82 km/h on road without applique, 75 km/h on road with, 50 km/h off-road

[Laywenrania]

I was wondering, speaking of the T-72A and whatnot, are the later model T-72s with ERA (armor wise) just T-72A with ERA? I ask because if I recall correctly the T-72A had allot of applique composite armor and it seems logical that they would just build on top of that

T-72B introduced a thicker glacis and a different, thicker composite armour for the turret

http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/armania/armor/armour/t72/T72M1.html

T-72A aka T-72M1 entered service in the USSR in 1979 (remember I said into 80s.) as you can see from the link German ammo at that time was effective in penetrating this vehicle. And this test was not done with some of the better ammunition the L7 could fire, as Germans didn't always have best rounds.

NVA/Bundeswehr firing tests say so.

The records I just posted show that the glacis was vulnerable to HEAT.

You said more or less that the L7 could take out any soviet tank without any problem short of later T-80 versions, which your link proofs wrong, as the Turret of older export T-72M1 is able to resist it's HEAT-shells at all and it's AP shells at longer range. Not even speaking of T-64s.

[Dostanuot Loj]

You said more or less that the L7 could take out any soviet tank without any problem short of later T-80 versions, which your link proofs wrong, as the Turret of older export T-72M1 is able to resist it's HEAT-shells at all and it's AP shells at longer range. Not even speaking of T-64s.[/size]

The link says DM33 could penetrate T-72M1 turret front and glacias up to 1.5km reliably. References pictures of 2km penetrations by DM33 on the hull glacias as well.
DM33 is a 105mm APFSDS.
Ergo, 105mm can penetrate frontally at reasonable combat ranges for the European plains.

Let's take DM33's introduction into widespread service (1984) as a good starting point. That leaves us T-72A, T-64B without the updated armour (Remember only introduced to both T-72 and T-64 in 1985) and original T-80B, also not uparmoured. In 1985 when these start appearing, then you have to change. But even then you are not likely to see any of these tanks in numbers.

But then the US M883 comes out, and you catch up.

The biggest problem to the RO L7 was fire control. Until digital fire control comes into play for the Leopard 1 (EMES 18) you really only have a small number of munitions options, and whatever can ballisticly match them. You have APDS, HEAT, and HESH. Anything else has to ballisticly match one of those (Often APDS for APFSDS) or you have a sharp drop in accuracy. This wasn't a problem for the US, who dropped APDS as an option wholly when they brought in APFSDS that were superior, but the Germans, Brits, and others didn't have the cash to replace their huge APDS stocks so they couldn't do that.

Someone asked about Leopard 1 MEXAS, here's the short of it as I know.
C1 MEXAS was heavier, and more effective, then the later C2 MEXAS. It was only adopted to 10 vehicles though. Four in 1991, and another 6 in 1995. In 1995 it was supposed to be able to stop anything that could be fired at it in Eastern Europe at 500m, including top-line Russian stuff.

C2 MEXAS, that went to A'Stan, I have been told would stop anything they might have seen in A'Stan, or Kosovo. But it was not as good as the C1's pack. This is partially because the C2 turret is inferior to the C1 turret in terms of absolute protection and relative protection.

Base armour of the Leopard 1 is actually really good for a vehicle in its weight and for its mobility. Glacias is 70mm, plus spacing, at a good slope. The A3 and A4 turrets are excellent in terms of protection. And the A4 fire control is great in the early digital age even. The reasons the Germans updated A1s to A5 standard and not A3 or A4 was because the A3 and A4 were already more capable then the A1-based A5 could get, and they had more A1s then A3s and A4s. They needed numbers.

Best Leopard 1 is the Leopard 1A5DK. Which is an A3 with EMES 18.
The original C2 plan for the Canadian Army in 1992 was to be an A3 turret, fitting IWS, MEXAS, and EMES 18. Various components were tested individually, and the whole vehicle was expected to be equal to anything in the world.

Then nobody could justify funding it (Cheaper then new-buys in 1995 mind you). Then C1 was "good enough" in Kosovo.The Canadian Leopard history is absolutely fascinating.

[Questers]

DM33 is 120mm tho. DM-23 is the 105mm.

[Padnak]

I'm drawing a tank transporter and I was wondering, should I make it armored/mine resistant?

[Laywenrania]

The link says DM33 could penetrate T-72M1 turret front and glacias up to 1.5km reliably. References pictures of 2km penetrations by DM33 on the hull glacias as well.

it says "could achieve some degree of penetration"


Also: T-64B has upgraded armour compared to T-64, Same for T-80.

[Dostanuot Loj]

DM33 is 120mm tho. DM-23 is the 105mm.

DM33 is both, actually.
It's the DM33 penetrator listed, and was used between both cartridges. Same with DM13 and DM23. It's part of what makes German munitions so hard to keep track of, but also makes comparison easy.

Take DM33 105mm for example. We can take an estimate, say 470mm, and compare it to DM33 120mm of say 590mm. Both RHAe figures from Bob Mackenzie if you want to look into it. They are the exact same dart, all that changes is their muzzle energy. So we can make interesting comparisons between them.

I will say that RHAe really doesn't mean a whole lot in real engagements (As you know). Penetrator design means a lot. And there is a reason DM33 has become the most prolific German LRP, it has excellent penetration characteristics. There are better rounds, but they have only recently (last 10-15 years) started to see widespread use (DM53 primarily).

Edit:

Also: T-64B has upgraded armour compared to T-64, Same for T-80.

T-64B got upgraded armour in 1985.
T-64B introduced in 1979 with armour scheme improved for production, but no protective increase.
Ergo, all T-64B in 1984 had same armour protection as T-64A.

[Questers]

I had no idea that DM-33 was a dart for both 105 and 120.