User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:27:24 PM EDT
[#1]
[img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020711/i/1026399499.4160790606.jpg[/img]
Can anyone explain what is happening in this pic? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:31:01 PM EDT
[#2]
ya russia's peice of crap tank is trying to make a boom boom!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:33:08 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020711/i/1026399499.4160790606.jpg[/img] Can anyone explain what is happening in this pic? White phosphorous |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:34:42 PM EDT
[#4]
It looks like chaff but im not to sure.Anyhow the T90 is the export version of the T80 i do beleive.Same goes for the T72 is the export version of the T64.
I think we do the same thing with our M1's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:40:06 PM EDT
[#5]
Just another Hellfire magnet. Or Javelin. Or GAU/8. Or... you get the picture.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:40:56 PM EDT
[#6]
[img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020709/i/1026236091.3221250123.jpg[/img]
A Russian T-80 tank demonstrates its capabilities during an exhibition in the Urals town of Nizhny Tagil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:42:33 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Just another Hellfire magnet. Or Javelin. Or GAU/8. Or... you get the picture. Dont foget the Mavrick or the Vulcan 30mm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:43:18 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Quoted: [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020711/i/1026399499.4160790606.jpg[/img] Can anyone explain what is happening in this pic? White phosphorous That is a photo of one HUGE-ASS sea anenome that has crawled up onto land in search of tasty tanks. Or, it could be White Phosphorous, do they use that anymore? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 10:45:31 PM EDT
[#9]
Yes we still use Willy Pete,Mix a little HE and walla shake and bake.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 11:48:22 PM EDT
[#10]
The picture is of the WP launchers going off. There are WP grenade launchers on each side of the turret. You fire them off and you get an instant smoke screen that's hot. It doesn't last as long as smoke generated by a smoke generator, but it makes smoke instantly and will cover your butt fast. Most countries use a similar system, including the US.
Ross |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/14/2002 11:56:20 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: Just another Hellfire magnet. Or Javelin. Or GAU/8. Or... you get the picture. Dont foget the Mavrick or the Vulcan 30mm. I was going by memory... but I'm pretty sure the GAU/8 is the fancy name for the 30mm vulcan on the A10. God knows someone here will correct me if I'm wrong! [BD] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 12:04:38 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: It looks like chaff but im not to sure.Anyhow the T90 is the export version of the T80 i do beleive.Same goes for the T72 is the export version of the T64. I think we do the same thing with our M1's. The T-64 and T72 are two completely different tanks. They have a similar layout, and if anything you could say the T-72 is a decendant of the T-64. T-64 production ended as early as 1972, and the same plants then made T-72s. The T-64 used a different engine, suspension, turret, and firecontrol. The hulls are pretty much the same, along with the gun and NBC system. You can visually identify the two different tanks by just looking at them. The T-64 was to replace the T-62, but was found to be junk. They ceased production of the T-64 and began production of the T-72. The Russians use the T-72 and have sold it all over the place. While there is no doubt that there is a specific export version, the T-72 is not just the export version of the T-64. The T-64 was just junk that the USSR/Russia never bothered to export because they ceased all production and shifted to the T-72 for themselves and export. The T-72 basically was a follow-on design that addressed the problems with the T-64 and has been a successful design for them. Ross |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 12:19:29 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: The T-72 basically was a follow-on design that addressed the problems with the T-64 and has been a successful design for them. They certainly were successful from a sales standpoint, but I'm not sure if the Iraqis would agree from a performance perspective. [url]http://www.ztrashbuckle.com/desert_storm/BattleDamage11.jpg[/url] (warning, over 300kb in size) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 12:29:18 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Quoted: The T-72 basically was a follow-on design that addressed the problems with the T-64 and has been a successful design for them. They certainly were successful from a sales standpoint, but I'm not sure if the Iraqis would agree from a performance perspective. [url]http://www.ztrashbuckle.com/desert_storm/BattleDamage11.jpg[/url] (warning, over 300kb in size) As far as performance, the Israelis had shown long before that the T-72 wasn't a super tank. They pretty much took out every one they ran across in Lebanon about as fast as we did Iraqi T-72's. The T-72 was probably better than our old M60A1, but it probably wasn't as good as the M60A3, and far behind the M1, Centurion, Leopard generation. Ross |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 12:37:48 AM EDT
[#15]
There is also one other important reason why our tanks dominated the Iraqi's and the Israeli's dominated the Lebanese. The same reason that we dominate the air as well...the quality of the men operating these machines. Not only do we have great tanks and jets, but more importantly, we have the best trained men in the world manning them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 1:06:22 AM EDT
[#16]
Good luck Ivan.
[url]http://rbad.ar15.com/JavelinLiveFireVsT72.mpg[/url] have a nice day.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 7:58:20 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020709/i/1026236091.3221250123.jpg[/img] A Russian T-80 tank demonstrates its capabilities during an exhibition in the Urals town of Nizhny Tagil. capabilities? of what making large firworks? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:09:32 AM EDT
[#18]
...unfortunately, Russia can only afford to make eight T-90s.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:18:06 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: There is also one other important reason why our tanks dominated the Iraqi's and the Israeli's dominated the Lebanese. The same reason that we dominate the air as well...the quality of the men operating these machines. Not only do we have great tanks and jets, but more importantly, we have the best trained men in the world manning them. Amen, Right now they are defending our freedom |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:21:39 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: ...unfortunately, Russia can only afford to make eight T-90s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:25:41 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: ...unfortunately, Russia can only afford to make eight T-90s. Huh, they must've increased their production recently. [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:32:39 AM EDT
[#22]
[img]http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/MolonLabe/yeehaww.jpg[/img]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:36:07 AM EDT
[#23]
That four or five foot drop must be nasty on the kidneys.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:48:44 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: [img]http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/MolonLabe/yeehaww.jpg[/img] Haha! [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 9:12:50 AM EDT
[#25]
OK I couldn't resist:
[img]http://greghavener.com/images/yeehaww.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 10:56:33 AM EDT
[#26]
[img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020711/i/1026398698.3691012165.jpg[/img]
That four or five foot drop must be nasty on the kidneys. Like you wouldn’t believe. You [b]DO NOT[/b] want to be in that tank when it lands [B)] I would also bet that jump wrecked most of the suspension, from the torsion bars down to the road wheels. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 11:46:14 AM EDT
[#27]
I would also bet that jump wrecked most of the suspension, from the torsion bars down to the road wheels. No I don't think so. They wouldn't have done the stunt if that was the case, it would have invited too much embarrassment in front of the potential buyers. Makes little difference since it cant outrun a missile. As long as they keep building such tiny tanks, and insist on placing all the amunition in one place under the turret floor, they will continue to go kaboom when we hit them. I don't see anything on this tank that looks like a improvement in protection. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 6:29:19 PM EDT
[#28]
I believe the theory is that since they obviously can't afford to build any thing near as survivable as an Abrams type,they go for Lightweight,speed and affordability.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:02:37 PM EDT
[#29]
They substituted a human loader with an auto loader, in addition to being slower it has a dead give away with the tube elevated while being auto loaded (gun emtpy=shoot me now). IMHO any conventional rolled homogeneous armor is obsolete, regardless of the slope angle and thickness practical on an MBT. Israelis had no problem penetrating the T72 with 105mm sabot rounds 20 years ago, the depleted uranium silver bullet can do much more. Its reactive armor is no match for the newer generation of AT missiles with tandem warheads, not to mention useless against kinetic energy shots. Composite armor like Chobham is the only way to go. The Abram seems to have reached the best of all the compromises, armor, fire power and mobility, it has all three.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:17:13 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: It looks like chaff but im not to sure.Anyhow the T90 is the export version of the T80 i do beleive.Same goes for the T72 is the export version of the T64. I think we do the same thing with our M1's. What countries are we exporting the m1's to? I assume the export models dont have Chobham armor on them |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 8:19:26 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: I would also bet that jump wrecked most of the suspension, from the torsion bars down to the road wheels. No I don't think so. They wouldn't have done the stunt if that was the case, it would have invited too much embarrassment in front of the potential buyers. Makes little difference since it cant outrun a missile. As long as they keep building such tiny tanks, and insist on placing all the amunition in one place under the turret floor, they will continue to go kaboom when we hit them. I don't see anything on this tank that looks like a improvement in protection. [url=]http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?s=5b0c5de074f69ff3ba2c761be07098be&threadid=68815[/url] I couldn't get a link to just the video to work right so this is the link to the thread at ak47 where the video is posted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 9:06:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Ah Ha ! Moving M1A Abrahams targets !
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2002 10:12:40 PM EDT
[#33]
Aimless is right,that jump is legit.I watched a show that had different armor driving threw obstacles,probably the same thing shown here.You gotta remember that these tanks are alot lighter than an Abrams and the Russians are as expert as anyone at designing a tank suspension.these things are real agile and mobile.I believe they are actually designed and built in the Ukrain.
I read the Saudi's have 300+ Abrams.If these are top line or not I don't know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 3:06:26 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: [img]http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20020711/i/1026398698.3691012165.jpg[/img] A Russian T-90 tank demonstrates its capabilities during an exhibition on July 11, 2002, just before it breaks down, needing a special part only produced in one factory, that is coincidentally out of power because the sub-standard nuclear plant just went kablooey; no big deal though, considering that this tank will never be fielded by an army that can actually fight for a shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 3:16:52 PM EDT
[#35]
I think we still would have kicked ass if we had T72s and the Iraqis had M1s.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 3:26:49 PM EDT
[#36]
Actually the T90 has alot of cool stuff on it. That smoke picture is likely (though I'm not perfectly sure) to be the ARENA or VRISS system in action. It consists of a electro optical missile jammer which reduces the effectivness of ATGM's and it also automagically fires someke in the direction of the ATGM. The Armor on the T90 is a composite material such as chombham armor (though likely not as advanced as western stuff) and the advanced ERA is belived by US sources to be capable of helping defeat APFSDSDU rounds...
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/t90/ http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t-90.htm There a ton more sources but I can't remember them right now... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 3:47:10 PM EDT
[#37]
Never underestimate your enemy.
remember, we were pretty much out gunned in WWII as far as tanks were concerned, and still figured out a way to take them out. just my .02 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/16/2002 3:51:02 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Never underestimate your enemy. remember, we were pretty much out gunned in WWII as far as tanks were concerned, and still figured out a way to take them out. just my .02 just before it breaks down, needing a special part only produced in one factory, that is coincidentally out of power because the sub-standard nuclear plant just went kablooey; [red]no big deal though, considering that this tank will never be fielded by an army that can actually fight for a shit.[/red] I think that's been covered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2002 7:24:28 PM EDT
[#39]
Since it is apparently just a big POS who's gonna volunteer to sit in a fighting position as one rumbles toward you and all you got is an AT4?lol .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2002 7:34:16 PM EDT
[#40]
ERA defeating APFSDS round? The basic reactive armor can't begin to deal with a long rod penetrator, its impact on the APFSDS round is neglegible. The newer kind of ERA attempts to snap the penetrator in half, but it's not as effective against HEAT rounds.
The T72 already has some composite armor, it didn't help them against TOWs and APFSDS rounds. The new Chobham is about 2.5 times more effective than the first gen, with that kind of performance the M1A1, Challenger II and Leopard II don't even need reactive armor, so the fact the T90 still sports them should tell ya something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2002 8:40:54 PM EDT
[#41]
A) on aircraft gatling gun designations:
7.62mm = 'Minigun' ('cause it's a miniature version of the Vulcan) (GAU/2) Used in helos and small planes 20mm = 'Vulcan' (GAU/4) 'standard' fighter gun 25mm = 'Equalizer' (GAU/12), Harrier/Spectre gun 30mm = 'Avenger' (GAU/8) A-10 gun And it seems that the WP launcher could mess up a recent (C or newer) Maverick, since they are 'imaging IR' guided... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/17/2002 9:36:28 PM EDT
[#42]
[size=4][b][red]... We'll gladly kick its ass[/red][/b][/size=4]
[img]http://pao.hood.army.mil/21CAV/21cav-photo/ah64d/d17.jpg[/img] ... My baby! |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
