0000837: Very usefull information about T-72

Notes
(0001763) Bad Tankman (viewer) 2015-07-16 18:25	Here you go about BMP-3 http://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/bmp-3-underappreciated-prodigy.html [^] All this information is real, no fanboys was writing those articles, all have its references, all information is real. Feel free to share to rest of the team.

(0001764) Damian (reporter) 2015-07-16 18:33 edited on: 2015-07-16 18:38	We know this. We have our own values tough, based on photos of the real armor, knowledge how it works, weight, density and so on, so our values are very accurate. If you feel that T-72B's protection is too weak then... well welcome in XXI century, this tank protection is completely obsolete by today standards, even with 4S22 Kontakt-5 ERA added. T-80U and T-90A (which is WIP) are better, but still not that good as in most claims in internet, which are hilarious. Sorry, you can't cheat a difference between weight, volume and thickness of composite armors of different tanks, and here newest M1 variants have just huge advantage. And seriously there is huge difference in armor surfaces weight itself, a T-72B and basic T-90 front armor weights around 1 metric ton, 500kg's for each turret front armor cavity, on newest Abrams variants weights much more, I don't remember how much but definately more than 1 metric ton each, that's colosal difference.

(0001766) Bad Tankman (viewer) 2015-07-16 20:09 edited on: 2015-07-16 20:19	But weight cannot match armor strongness. There is much lighter but same (or even more)resistant new materials used in composite armor. Russian Tanks are overall lighter, beacuse of size. Also armor itself its not all - Look what T-72 familly have under frontall armor - fuel tanks, now how its build? It just like additional armor. And i dont say you need to change something in armor, but consider this.... T-90 and T-80 armor is very good, you may not believe, bot look on this site, and on bottom yo've got how their armor works, how its builded etc. For now you made Kontakt 5 as one piece armor, but it isnt: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y80USDqf1hY/VK5xoTvTEkI/AAAAAAAABE0/sdHmhBt4geI/s1600/kontakt-5%2Bfor%2Bt-72b.jpg [^] http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6CkUZMybiAg/VOCGcEajwPI/AAAAAAAABMQ/d5kO-mGHLHM/s1600/inserting%2Bexplosive%2Btiles.png [^] it should remain after RPG hit, instead of disapear, and tank should be almost intact. M136 havent such power to take down T-72 B3, or B'89 with one hit from front or with hit in the ERA.

(0001768) Damian (reporter) 2015-07-16 22:40 edited on: 2015-07-16 22:42	I will put it that way, T-72B armor is primitive as hell. And fuel tanks in Russian tanks do not act as addon armor, they were never designed as such, and are not isolated from crew. In general believe me, me or Olds sacrificed not only hours, but years of educating ourselfs about tank armors. When it comes to weight, did I was writing about general weight of tanks ue to their size? No? I was talking about armor modules weight, armor alone, do you understand this? Oh and one more thing, we didn't made Kontakt-5 as one piece of armor, don't comment on things you have not even smallest idea about. Not to mention it seems you have completely no idea how ERA actually works, every ERA, including Kontakt-5, disintegrates after hit, so it disappears. I will give you one question, how many times, people like me, who actually spent years, do you understand this? Years, educating themselfs about such stuff, building contacts inside armored fighting vehicles enthusiasts communities, talking with real tankers, being inside tanks, will need to explain to people, that we know what we are doing, regarding this mod or our other work? Did you even seen Kontakt-5 after hit? Do I really need to show you photos proving how wrong you are about K-5 not disappearing after hits? Well then, you have what you wish: http://s13.radikal.ru/i186/1102/5b/d8fb3b294b60.jpg [^] Oh look, K-5 disappeared where it was hit. I will show you more, how far more advanced ERA, Duplet, reacts in real time when hit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TCJIpUjW2M [^] Well it disintegrates, just like any kind of explosive reactive armor. I think I know where comes that information that K-5 remains intact after hit, it's from Vasily Fofanov old site, I actually know Vasily Fofanov, and he once admitted that this information is false, that he was wrong, but he lost interest in his old site and he won't fix that. As for: "M136 havent such power to take down T-72 B3, or B'89 with one hit from front or with hit in the ERA." It means some mod is conflicting with RHS causing this.

(0001771) Bad Tankman (viewer) 2015-07-17 11:14 edited on: 2015-07-17 12:21	OK first of all i know how ERA works and in T-72 B3 ( i know its WIP armor) its simply disapear after hit with M136. Now look at photos attached in links in my previous post. Also Fuel tanks actualy works as armor: Fuel tanks as armour Two fuel cells are located on the two front corners of the hull (flanking the driver), which extend from the nose of the glacis to almost up to the turret ring. Diesel fuel is very capable as a form of liquid armour. Entering an enclosed liquid medium at high velocities creates shock waves, which reflect from the walls of the fuel tank and back into the penetrator entering it. This can collapse a cumulative jet or absorb the kinetic energy of a penetrator rod after passing through the main armour array. It wouldn't be wrong to consider armoured areas with fuel tanks underneath them to be essentially immune unless the penetrator overmatches the armour by a factor of 1.2 to 1.5, though those same fuel tanks might also be a fire hazard if punctured or compromised. The fuel tanks do not have thick sides, and they are not foam-filled. According to ex-tankers in Chechnya, they will visibly bulge and swell if penetrated by a HEAT warhead, though they did not burst or leak. In that incident, the T-72 was struck from the side by an RPG or SPG warhead in the driver's station. The fuel tank managed to completely absorb the damage. Therefore, we can quite confidently say that the armour over the driver's station from the side is equivalent to more than 400mm RHAe (with side hull armour and side skirt), which should account for its ability to resist a fairly typical PG-7VS rocket grenade. I was serve on T-72M1 6 years! Now while i'm too old to serve in army i'm in reserve and have lot of time to read and travel, and as tanks are my love, i'm actually doing this all the time.I also talked with Soviet/Russian/US tank crews, some experts, military testers - as I'm 54 years old man, they didnt make a trobule to share with such information as some ERA is working. Last moths i spent on games (my new hobby) and read how they works. I play only RHS i Original game and M136 is destroying T-72 too easly. As of disapearing ERA - Side ERA on T-72B3, T-90 cannot disapear, its filled with smaller explosion charges and THEY are explosing only in place where was hit, not the whole Part of armor - that beacuse there are partitions inside. I was working with PT-91 Twardy and BWP-1, So pleased ont tell me i havent smallest idea, beacuse i saw how it works on my eyes, not on some videos. Photos you attached T-90, have removed armor, so "testers" can see, where basic armor have taken much damage. I have tons of photos from tests like that. Contact-1 ERA was disapearing after hit, as it was one charge in one brick without partitions Duplet ERA is simply multiple charge-one brick idea so it is disapearing as well (beacuse no solid no partition between them). Kontact-5 is diferent idea. And maybe some more respect to older man? I didnt say you are not enough learned, but there is some things that cannot be learned by theory (as you were learned), and believe me, those fuel tanks are very usefull like armor - why they surrounded driver from sides then? They could give thos fuel tanks somewhere else, or just remove tanks on front, and remain only those, on the middle of tank. As any tank crew served in chechenya, afghanistan (Russian/Soviet tank crew) if you not believe me. I believe your teachers were from USA or from england, and they were talking about Russian tanks as their "experts". Only Russians can tell you about Russian tanks, same as American can say about Abrams, or English can say about Challenger. They produce and use it = have biggest knowledge about it.

(0001777) Damian (reporter) 2015-07-17 13:57 edited on: 2015-07-17 14:08	Actually we might found a cause why there are some problems and inconsistency, not necessary related to your concerns, it might be a hitpoints issue. Will report later.

(0001779) Damian (reporter) 2015-07-17 19:11	Ok one more thing, I done some tests with our latest internal version, it seems that front hull of T-72B's of any version is immune to M136, not matters with or without ERA. It's also immune to PG-7VL. Hull sides are immune when projectile hits ERA, without ERA shaped charge jet goes through as intended. Still probably there is some inconsistency due to problems with hitpoints placement within firegeometry, it will be solved at some point.

(0001788) Bad Tankman (viewer) 2015-07-18 12:01	Great to hear. I love your work, as far as i started to play games, i was playing Hidden & Dangerous 2 (WWII), ArmA 2, Men of War Assault Squad and Arma 3 with your mod and VTN mod (i hate futurealistic times) and your job have done biggest impression on me. Keep doing great art, as mods for game are.

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2015-07-16 18:11	Bad Tankman	New Issue
2015-07-16 18:25	Bad Tankman	Note Added: 0001763
2015-07-16 18:33	Damian	Note Added: 0001764
2015-07-16 18:38	Damian	Note Edited: 0001764	View Revisions
2015-07-16 20:09	Bad Tankman	Note Added: 0001766
2015-07-16 20:10	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001766	View Revisions
2015-07-16 20:11	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001766	View Revisions
2015-07-16 20:14	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001766	View Revisions
2015-07-16 20:15	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001766	View Revisions
2015-07-16 20:19	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001766	View Revisions
2015-07-16 22:40	Damian	Note Added: 0001768
2015-07-16 22:42	Damian	Note Edited: 0001768	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:14	Bad Tankman	Note Added: 0001771
2015-07-17 11:16	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:20	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:22	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:25	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:27	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:28	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:29	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:34	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:35	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 11:39	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 12:17	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 12:21	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 12:21	Bad Tankman	Note Edited: 0001771	View Revisions
2015-07-17 13:57	Damian	Note Added: 0001777
2015-07-17 14:08	Damian	Note Edited: 0001777	View Revisions
2015-07-17 19:11	Damian	Note Added: 0001779
2015-07-18 12:01	Bad Tankman	Note Added: 0001788
2015-11-23 19:05	RedPhoenix	Status	new => closed
2015-11-23 19:05	RedPhoenix	Assigned To	=> RedPhoenix
2015-11-23 19:05	RedPhoenix	Resolution	open => won't fix

Relationships