Jump to content
12Alfa

T-90 takes a TOW and wins

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, 12Alfa said:

Typed Amour Basics in the SB Wiki and got nothing.

 

Its not in the Wiki.

 

As Ssnake said its in the documentation folder of every installation (i.e. on your computer).

 

Its a PDF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Its not in the Wiki.

 

As Ssnake said its in the documentation folder of every installation (i.e. on your computer).

 

Its a PDF.

I knew dat :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mpow66m said:

''Typed Amour Basics in the SB Wiki and got nothing.''

 

Its on the disc i believe.

 

It gets installed with a ton of other documents as a part of the Steel Beasts "offline documentation", a.k.a. the "Documents" folder in your Steel Beasts program folder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, 12Alfa said:

Typed Amour Basics in the SB Wiki and got nothing.

 

Well, if you want basics in Amour :x I doubt Steelbeasts will do much for you. :)

 

/KT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, 12Alfa said:

With so many experts here, LOL:o, I found it, around 600m for a heat.

 

Also found:

 

The official BGM-71D/E armour-piercing capability reaches 920 mm of steel behind ERA. Nevertheless, several foreign experts have challenged the aforementioned data. Previously, Major General of the US Armed Forces, P. Gorman published the article “U.S. Intelligence and Soviet Armour”, declassified in 2004. He pointed out, that the armour-piercing capabilities of the early TOW/ITOW missiles (BGM-71A/B and BGM-71C) were significantly overestimated. So, the real combat effectiveness of TOW 2/TOW 2A missiles may be less impressive, than declared by the developer.

 

Typed Amour Basics in the SB Wiki and got nothing.

 

it only has to penetrate about 400mm of cast steel. there are no mysteries here:
 

T72M1_turret_armour.jpg

t_72_int_small.jpg

skXSk4uRXt0.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-90 obr.1992 which is exactly the tank that was hit by that TOW-2A, uses exactly the same turret and armor as T-72B.
 And this armor is not secret for a very long time either.

 

1446590439-t-72b-armor-3.jpg

1446590448-t-72b-armor-4.jpg

1446590452-t-72b-armor-5.jpg

 

It is a simple NERA type array.

 

Hull front glacis is even simpler, just spaced steel array.

 

t-72b%2Bglacis%2Barmour.jpg

This is a T-72B3 damaged during this idiotic TV show called "Tank Biathlon", front idlers were ripped off when vehicle hit a concrete barrier on full speed. Means that hull is a no go for repair and they need to scrap it... but hey, at least we know how armor array looks like.

 

Here is also another photo from Chechnya.

 

T-72B%20Glacis%20Armor%20Exposed_Chechny

 

Nothing super fancy, and T-90 have exactly the same armor protection, because during it's development there was no requirement for increased armor protection over T-72B obr.1989 (T-72B with Kontakt-5 ERA).

 

T-90A (welded turret variant) also most likely uses exactly the same armor protection.

 

razrabotki_ok.jpg

 

This is a graphic from UKBTM, design bureau belonging to UralVagonZavod corporation, we can see there turret armor model in Dyna LS program used to simulate armor/projectile interaction during penetration process. As we can see this array is strikingly similiar to T-72B and T-90 turret armor array. And we can also safely assume, hull front glacis have also same armor. Especially considering that during T-90A development there was also no requirement for increased armor protection, and welded turret was only developed due to necessity as production plant for cast turrets was closed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Damian90 said:

T-90 obr.1992 which is exactly the tank that was hit by that TOW-2A, uses exactly the same turret and armor as T-72B.
 And this armor is not secret for a very long time either.

 

It is a simple NERA type array.

 

Hull front glacis is even simpler, just spaced steel array.

 

 

This is a T-72B3 damaged during this idiotic TV show called "Tank Biathlon", front idlers were ripped off when vehicle hit a concrete barrier on full speed. Means that hull is a no go for repair and they need to scrap it... but hey, at least we know how armor array looks like.

 

Here is also another photo from Chechnya.

 

 

 

Nothing super fancy, and T-90 have exactly the same armor protection, because during it's development there was no requirement for increased armor protection over T-72B obr.1989 (T-72B with Kontakt-5 ERA).

 

T-90A (welded turret variant) also most likely uses exactly the same armor protection.

 

 

 

This is a graphic from UKBTM, design bureau belonging to UralVagonZavod corporation, we can see there turret armor model in Dyna LS program used to simulate armor/projectile interaction during penetration process. As we can see this array is strikingly similiar to T-72B and T-90 turret armor array. And we can also safely assume, hull front glacis have also same armor. Especially considering that during T-90A development there was also no requirement for increased armor protection, and welded turret was only developed due to necessity as production plant for cast turrets was closed.

 

 

the only issue i have with claiming T-90A having the exact same array is T-72B and T-90 is T-90A protection would actually be inferior to T-90. so there's probably some improvement in composition. russians would have to be insanely stupid to "upgrade" a tank, by making it heavier, and reducing front protection. 

so protection is probably the same style, but different composition. could even be something as simple as increasing angle of the NERA elements.

there's also a critical flaw in the armour arrangement, where at the exact 0 degree angle to the armour array, protection drastically drops, as you have a 50% chance of bypassing the NERA elements.

 

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, turret welded from rolled armor plates per Russian sources offers from 5 to 15 % more protection than cast armor. Besides this indeed angle of turret front armor is different.

 

image013.jpg

T-72B/T-90, T-80U, T-80UD.

 

image016.jpg

T-90A, T-84.

 

So we can rather safely assume, angle of NERA arrays in T-90A changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to how it was ascertained that what was fired was a TOW-2A and not some older version like the legacy TOW-2 or BGM-71A/B or ITOW. Was there anything from the footage that distinguished it as that? Had the people who filmed it had a close look at the missile at some point? Was the TOW-2A known to have been supplied to this group of rebels? 

Edited by Agiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 12Alfa said:

See a bit of smoke, but thats it.

 

crew might all be dead. TC and drivers hatch is closed. overpressure from missile probably knocked them out, then Co2 from fire suppression and smoke slowly choked them to death while unconcious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 12Alfa said:

speculation:ph34r:

 

turret is not moving in the footage. 

and if they were alive, TC and drivers hatch would definitely be open, as TC would be frantically trying to get the hell out and try to save driver/gunner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't even know IF there were a crew in the tank, so any TC trying to save a crew member is a bit of a reach.We see a tank and a hit, thats it.Not even a flying turret.Should wait for more details to come around, But hey, speculate if it make you happyO.o

Edited by 12Alfa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what do the rebels have to take aerial photography like that- first time i've seen what might be a rebel drone camera, but you see troops casually walking in the upper right hand corner of the film with respect to the tank as if the film was taken some time later after the hit (and they seem unaware or unconcerned with rebel aerial vehicles flying overhead). maybe they are splicing different film sources together, the tow gunner sitting down at the beginning doesn't necessarily establish continuity with the rest of the film, it may be the case, but it doesn't show with certainty.

 

here is something that came up related to that clip- saudi tanks under attack by houthi rebels in yemen.

 

 

Edited by Captain_Colossus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 12Alfa said:

We don't even know IF there were a crew in the tank, so any TC trying to save a crew member is a bit of a reach.We see a tank and a hit, thats it.Not even a flying turret.Should wait for more details to come around, But hey, speculate if it make you happyO.o

 

And what are you? A supporter of Russia that you defend so much this coffin? The crew is most likely dead, and not in very nice way, heck ammo cook off would be probably much more pleasant than choking to death as dejawolf pointed out. There was no cook of because most likely Russians instructed Syrians to load ammunition only to autoloader where ammo is much more difficult to hit than in ammo racks in crew compartment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

 

I think both sides are correct.  While it cannot be labelled irrefutable fact, enough evidence can be inferred to make some conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2016 at 4:08 PM, 12Alfa said:

speculation:ph34r:

 

this coming from a guy who believes 9/11 was an inside job..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2016 at 3:53 PM, dejawolf said:

 

it only has to penetrate about 400mm of cast steel. there are no mysteries here:
 

 

 

skXSk4uRXt0.jpg

 

Someone's been having fun with a gas axe.....

Edited by Hedgehog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2016 at 2:43 PM, dejawolf said:

another T-90 takes a TOW hit. this time it's not so lucky:

 

Tis a dead link now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×