Jump to content

Greek Tank Trials


Recommended Posts

Does any of you have any additional reliable data concerning the performance of the individual contenders in the Hellenic Tank Trials ? Any information would be appreciated! Thank you !

This is known:

The tanks compared included the M1A2 Abrams, Leopard 2A5, Leclerc, T-80UE and T-84.

Of these six vehicles, out of a maximum possible operational and technical score of 100%, best performing were: Leopard 2A5, 78.65%; M1A2 Abrams, 72.21%; Leclerc, 72.03%; and Challenger 2E, 69.19%. Next was the T-84 and last the T-80UE.

The Leopard 2A5 was the only one with a demonstrated deep fording capability, while the M1A2 had the best firing results during hunter/killer target engagements.

The German 1,500hp MTU EuroPowerPack was fitted in both the Leclerc and the Challenger 2E and these two vehicles had the best cruising range and lower fuel consumption.

The T-80U had the best mobility and reliability.

Some shooting results:

Leopard 2A5: ~80%

Leclerc: 65% targets hit

T-84: 47 % targets hit

Challenger-2: 40 % targets hit

No data for the T-80UE and M1A2. The Challenger-II did not use proper ammo, while the T-80UE and T-84 used practice rounds 3P31, which corresponds to BM15 at below 1.5 km but become unpredictable after 2 kms. The Abrams could not fire practice ammo and had to wait for 3 days before real ones were brought.

The T-80UE had an experimental T type transmission.

The T-84 was considered to be somewhat inmature and had few problems: smoke grenades failing to work.

13131828444_cae8c509a4_o.jpg

13131827164_c7b4f6f692_o.jpg

13131533825_6b65624f77_o.jpg

13131644983_7b870e1892_o.jpg

13131522695_5b901565c2_o.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The question in these trials to me always is, how well are the crews trained that run the tanks during the trials (that could explain a lot WRT gunnery results, for example). Also, what is tested, how do you test it, what are the test criteria. You can influence the results a lot by making the selections there. That a conventional Diesel beats Hyperbar or gas turbine tanks in the cruising range (especially if there's tactical movement with lots of idle time involved) shouldn't come at anybody's surprise. How important you deem it (the relative weighting in the evaluation process) is another matter. Also, do you actually look into certain factors like how often air filters must be replaced in a dusty environment. These are all things that influence the end percentage value, but remain largely opaque if only the end result is published.

What I found quite interesting was a detail that surfaced later during the manufacturing process when the shocking truth was discovered - that a Leopard 2 turret randomly chosen from the manufacturing line only managed to stop 27 out of 30 DM53 rounds fired at it. The Greek press made a big brouhaha about it (and they in fact discovered deficits in the manufacturing process), but stopping 27 rounds was already a pretty good score by my book. That they managed to bring it up to 30 - even better, but a big scandal it was not. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if you guys know this ,The then Greek deputy defence minister.

Was/Is on trial on corruption charges and allegedly Krauss-Maffei was named as one of the company's who bribed him with a seven figure amount. Krauss Maffei have denied this.

One things for sure it was the end of the CR-2E. To this day I can not understand why the CR-2 team were so bad at there jobs they couldn't of

Made a worse presentation.

But I remember reading the Greeks where playing politics with the participating nations as well.

They wanted the British government to repatriate some statues from the UK back to Greece.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are what I managed to translate from an ukrainian pdf way back in a day :

Test 1 : Slalom to evaluate mobility.

Test 2 : 1000km run.

Test 3 : 50km by night.

Test 4 : 100km with stabilisation enabled.

Test 5 : Emergency brake (Norm was 25 emergency brake).

Test 6 : Optics stabilisation.

Test 7 : Target detection.

Test 8 : Target detection by night.

Test 9 : First round hit probability (@1600m; target: 2,3x2,3m still).

Test 10 : Firing on the move on fix target (40km/h; @1000-1200m; target : 2,3x2,3m still; 10 APFSDS).

Test 11 : Evaluation of the precision on still target (still; @2000m; target : 2,3x2,3m still; 10 APFSDS).

Test 12 : Evaluation of the precision of firing on the move on still targets (40km/h; same conditions as before).

Test 13 : Probability of first round hit by night (still; @1000m; target : 2,3x2,3m 1 APFSDS).

Test 14 : Probability of first round hit on the move by night on still target (40km/h; same).

Test 15 : Evaluation of the precision on still targets by night (still; @1500m; target : 2,3x2,3m still; 10 APFSDS).

Test 16 : Evaluation of the precision of firing on the move by night on still targets (40km/h; same).

Test 17 : Probability of first round hit on moving targets (still; @1000m; target : 2,3x4,6m 20-30km/h 1 APFSDS).

Test 18 : Probability of first round hit on the move on moving target (40km/h; @1000-1200m; same).

Test 19 : Evaluation of the precision on moving targets (still; @1500m; target : 2,3x4,6m 20-30km/h; 10 APFSDS).

Test 20 : Evaluation of the precision of firing on the move on still targets (40km/h; @1500-1700m; same).

Test XX : Rate of fire for 25 ammunitions (still; @1500m; 2 targets : 2,3x2,3m still angle between the two 100mils; 1min; 25 APFSDS; pourcentage at least 90%).

Test 26 : Emergency firing mode.

Test 27 : Hunter-killer.

Test 28 : Hunter-killer by night.

Test 29 : Evaluation of the maximum range (4 APFSDS).

Test 30 : Shooting the coaxial.

Test 31 : Fording 2,15m depth.

Test 32 : Smoke screen device.

Test 34 : Changing tracks.

Test 35 : Changing track pads.

Test 36 : Taking out the powerpack.

Test 37 : Taking out the power supply unit.

Test 38 : Taking out the coaxial.

Test 39 : Changing barrel of the coax.

Firing on the move :

M1A2 : 17/20

Leclerc : 20/20

Leopard 2A5 : 19/20

Challenger 2 : - (not documented)

T84 : 8 shot still and 3 on the move (according to translation)

Night firing by night results (with 10 shots out of 20, on the move) :

M1A2 : 20/20

Leclerc : 19/20

Leopard 2A5 : 20/20

Challenger 2 : 10/10 (Challenger would not have shot on the move)

T84 : - (thermal failure)

Firing on the move on moving targets :

M1A2 : - (not documented)

Leclerc : - (not documented)

Leopard 2A5 : - (not documented)

Challenger 2 : - (not documented)

T84 : 6/10 (remaining still according to the author)

Hunter-killer results :

M1A2 : did not took part by lack of ammunition

Leclerc : 13/20 (according to the author, there had been an autoloader failure in the middle of the session)

Leopard 2A5 : 17/20

Challenger 2 : 8/20

T84 : 9/19

Link to post
Share on other sites
The question in these trials to me always is, how well are the crews trained that run the tanks during the trials (that could explain a lot WRT gunnery results, for example).

Well, the complicated part is that it greek crews that procided to some tests. If the tests were excruciating, the constructor's crew enter into play to show the real performances.

Unfortunately I didn't manage to have more details on that. I only know that the M1A2 (was one of the tanks that ?) was forced to redo some tests.

That a conventional Diesel beats Hyperbar or gas turbine tanks in the cruising range (especially if there's tactical movement with lots of idle time involved) shouldn't come at anybody's surprise.

Regarding the Hyperbar, it wasn't there. GIAT Industrie prefered to use the prototype of the Tropicalised Leclerc (what strikes me is that they removed the RWS...) to perform the competition. Why that? I don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies guys, i also heard about cracked turret rings and defective type 212 submarines that the Greeks were unwilling to pay for.

Getting back to the trials:

Part 1 (A translation):

Protection tripped the drive turret (control switched off for 10-15 ceKundu). In fact, when measuring the angle of heel of 17 °. schashita nastraiis called for tripping at 150. Committee to give explanations on why the stabilizer off control and customization protectyou relieve at work on the roll to 18 ° -20 °.

Long ago there was a conversation that would "zagrubit" angles of heel to stab. And the question of 20 degrees has long been settled. Laid down, probably on an old proven option.

Slalom

T-80U has overcome this obstacle without collision on the flags. It should be noted that since the passage of the test was carried out from the place of tanks moved in first gear, so the rotation iswere connecting clutch OPF and thus were noticeable jerks. Tanks Western firms take turns at all speeds smoothly without jerking.

And why the place? Yes, and not knowing the dimensions "envelope" is difficult to judge.

Turns on the spot at 360 ° on the ground and concrete

The T:80U performing the exercises in full. The Committee notedthis means that wear The rubber tracks at the turn on the concrete a minimum compared to all submitted tanks. At timesthe collar housing with a maximum speed of withdrawal is the tower from the stable position due to lack of driving power stabilizer.

Yeah, probably not from the "lack" of power, but from the response from the dealer managers pregruza.

Maneuverability test

T-80U performed this exercise in full of minianomalous time compared to all submitted tanks.

According to the results of the test committee said the T-80U in the beamShui direction. In full this test without remarks carried out only the T-80U and Leclerc. " It should be noted that because of the low-speed reverse in such exercises, the result is reduced, Tanks westGOVERNMENTAL firms have speed reversing up to 30 km / h (T-80U - 12 km / h)

And the hell 30 need?

Test 2. Making 1000 km march.

T-80U completed the march in full. In carrying out the march figures were:

cruising range on the combined route

(Mountainous, dirt roads and paved)

Fuel consumption on highway

current stock of progress on the highway:

on internal tanks

additional barrels

maximum speed

time full charging

350 km;

4 L / km;

412 km,

562 km.

80km / h;

23 minutes (at a pressure of 1.5 atm);

noise from the engine and chassis - the data are not available, but for theappearance of a committee of the minimum from the selection of tanks;

The rubber wear track - after the march, wear rate of 100% replacement caterpillar tracks. Due to the absence ofthe second set of condition The rubber caterpillar tracks, the tank T-80U crawler mounted metal tape. We have no experience in mass production asfaltohodov. In the UAE, which drove his battalion on board (in Kosovo), then all 11 km the port is strewn with rubber.

maintenance time during the march and after withcompletion of the march. Committee recorded during technical maintenance:minimal smoothing of the tanks provided by:

According to the Committee of the T-80U has fulfilled all the requirements ofprograms to perform the march, and on such indicators as:

power reserve;

fuel consumption;

maximum speed;

full charging time;

exceeded the figures claimed by 15-20%. Excellent!

Test 3 Execution 50 km march at night.

T-80U test carried out in full. Excellent!

Test 4 Execution 100 km march with included stabilizer.

T-80U test carried out in full. Committee noted the reliability of the stabilizer. Excellent!

Test 5 Emergency braking

T-80U performed an emergency stop - 25 times (according to the program 25 times). Performing the test was stopped after 19 -the first deceleration, m, since the temperature in the gear box reached 140 ° C. After a 15 minute break execution - the test was continued and made six braking. When the temperature in the boxes gear about 150 ° C, the test run was terminated. Committee noted that this test was performed after 100 km march with included stabilizer. Other tanks, participantssponding in the trials, except T-84, this test was carried out without performing the march, that is, the "cold tank".it put!

Test 6 Stabilization of the visual field

T-80U This test is not performed, due to the failure of hydraulic transmission (GOP - 165) Lazhanulis!

Test 7 Target detection

T-80U fully complied with, with the result obtainedresults:

number of measurements in the range of minute-34;

maximum range of measurement - 9100m; Here's your answer to LD!

target detection - 9100 m;

classification purposes - 3000 m; In my opinion, these figures need to swap (klass. and identification).

identification purposes - 6500 m

Committee noted that the measured temperature exceeds 1,5 -2 times stated. Excellent!

Test 8 Target detection night

T-80U test carried out in full, at the same time obtained the following results for teplovizornomu Sight (Agave-2):

detection of targets - 6400 m;

classification purposes - 4600 m; At the level of villains

identification purposes - 2500 m.

By infrared imaging results were obtained:

target detection - 1750 m;

classification purposes - 1500 m;.

identification purposes - 1500 m

Note - Conditions of the test are close to ideal - clear starry night, clean mountain air.

3 test firing

Plot to shoot a 4 track in the foothills of the mountains from a distance 2500 m.

Goals are located at an altitude of 100 -150 m relative to the location shooting, with a track rise 5-7 ° towards the goals.

Nature of the track - clayey soil with lots of stones and rubble, sharp turns up to 50-60 degrees, the pit depth up to 1,0 -1,2 m.

Mission situation:

old tanks M-60;

shields size 2,3 x2, 3 m from the fabric material on the metalthe metallic frame;

moving target size 2,3 x4, 6 m, the speed of motionof 20-30 km / hour;

target for machine guns of various sizes,

for shooting at night used tissue target fordogretye hot air. At what distance?

To carry out fire at 3000 - 4000 m used these same target, with the position of fire moved from the territory of polyrut.

Test 9

The probability of hitting a target the first shot

Range- 1600 m. Purpose - fixed uandt 2.3 x 2,3 m. Shooting from the spot by one shot.

T-80U test carried out in full, the percentage of damage - 100%.

Test 10

The defeat of the fixed target in motion

Range 1000 -1200 m. Purpose - fixed shield 2.3 x 2,3 m. Strelba tank in motion V = 40 km / h - 10 shots, shot - an armor-piercing.

T-80U test carried out in full, the percentage of lesions, 100%, the velocity of a tank of 20-25 km / hour (speed of 40 km / h tank does not develop because of the state highway). And in general, after 30 km / h. get problematic. If it is not me.

Test 1911 Carrying shooting accuracy

Range 2000 m. Purpose - fixed shield 2.3 x 2,3 m. Shooting from the place - 10 shots, the projectile-armor-piercing.

T-80U test carried out in full, the percentage of damage - 80%, with two falling into the center of the target, 6 hits in the right loweredge of the target equations. After the shooting revealed a grade slip withintact 1G46 on the device built-in test equipment to 0,25 etc. Aboutplagued by adjusting alignment sight 1G46 on UVKV.Unfortunately, it happens ...

Test 1912 Carrying shooting accuracy in motion

Range 2000 m. Purpose - fixed. Shield 2.3 x 2,3 m. Shooting tank in motion V= 40 km / h - 10 shots, shot - an armor-piercing.

Poluchenny result - the percentage of lesions - 30% (requirements committee-80%). After the shooting divestment marks the sight of 1G46 UVKV at 0.25 right up. Any adjustments in alignment withintact 1G46 on UVKV. Execution of the test re-manufactured Russian crew. Percentage of defeat - 20%. After the shooting divestment marks the sight of 1G46 UVKV at 0.25 right up.

As agreed with the committee allowed the re-holding test, but due to failure of the GOP did not hold.

After returning the tank to the park made test mounting the gun and sight, as well as verification of the stabilizer. The audit found:

produced by tightening wedges mounting guns;

Irrevocable sight backlash 1G46 up to 0.5 Right etc.;

after cooling the barrel and pulls the parallelogram drive 1G46 Brand sight of UVKV returns to its original position.

Test 13 The probability of hitting a target the first shot at night

Range 1000 m. Purpose - fixed shield 2.3 x 2,3 m. Shooting from the place - one shot, shot - an armor-piercing.

T-80U test carried out in full, the percentage of lesions,100%.

14 Test defeat stationary targets in motion at night

Range 1000 m. Purpose - fixed shield 2.3 x 2,3 m. Shooting tank in motion V = 40 km / h - One shot, shot - an armor-piercing.

The result obtained - the percentage of destruction - 0%.

Andrew! My personal achievement at night (And it is in the mode of double "):

- Through the Agave-2 - 8 of 9 through Agate 9 of 9. D av = 1340m. Purpose - real BMP-2.

Test 1915 Carrying shooting accuracy at night

Range 1500m. Purpose - fixed shield 2.3 x 2,3 m. Shooting from the place - 10 shots, shot - an armor-piercing.

The result obtained - the percentage of lesion-80% (requirements committee-90%).

Test 1916 Carrying shooting accuracy

Range 1500 m. Purpose - fixed shield 2.3 x 2.3 m. Shoot the tank in motion V = 40 km / h - 10 shots, shot - an armor-piercing.

The result obtained - the percentage of lesions 50% (according Committee - 90%).

According to the Greek crew gunner when firing a motionlattice is experiencing difficulties in finding objective measurement of distance to the goal, the tangent to the target (shooting made in the modes 4,5 and 18). In the 4.5 at distances greater than 1500 m target size commensurate with the thickness of the lines of sight. Because of the dependence of stabilization at dawnZhaniya and vibrations of the gun while driving a tank gunner loses the target. Noodle!

The analysis of the fire control system to resultthere run firings.

Tests 12 and 16 and found:

in the manufacture of fire seen a steady withdrawal, reconciliation of UVKV right up to the value of 0.25 TD per every 10 shots. After cooling down the barrel and pulls the drive 1G46 positivemapping reconciliation of UVKV returns to its original position;

If left "electrical zero" - MSA shit, if lost its alignment - 1G-46 crap.

when shooting moving on fixed targets in the D = 2000 m with the size of goals 2,3 x2, 3 m (1.15 x 1.15 etc. etc.) from the T-80U and T-84 with four crew observed the stability of solutionsresults 03/02 hit. In this case, the first shell at the beginning toelbow gets in front of goal second shell - about 100 m from the beginning of a track-left goals, the third in the goal. I do not understand a damn!

The most probable cause - an incorrect algorithm for making corrections to the migrated velocity of the target (angle φ) and the lack of powerstabilizer sequence (slip of the tower at a shot at turning the correlationPusa tank).

Amendment of the deferred rate target produced aboutproportional to the rate of change of angle between the hull of the tank and cannon. On this track, with the shooting angle of the body relative to the horizon was more than 5, ° with the gun fromthe body with respect to when a shot has a decrease 0-2 °; it contributes to improper development of the amendment and shells offalling below the target; Mudita sensor roll.

Perhaps there is some lag vyrabaPipeline amendment. When driving on rough terrain is no grouping of hits, but in 4 races (T-80U and T-84) is visible to the stability of the projectile flight, depending on the area trails;

influence improperly making corrections to the migrated velocity of the target and may explain the better results shooting at night, because TO1-PA2 (Agave-2) is dependent stabilization, and therefore in the process of mining various amendments gun takes aim with a crosshair thermal sight and the gunner can not produce a sighting shot. The shot is made only when the target is on the cross. According to the analysis of the decision about how to disable the deferred correction speed of the target by firing a tank in motion. Disabling produced rupture of the chain (U7SH6/35 - SH42 / 6 - BV2HS36/19) in the cable assembly from the electric unit.

Test 17 The probability of hitting a target the first shot

Range 1000 m. Purpose - movable shield 2,3 x4, 6 m Firing from the place - one shot, shot - an armor-piercing, the velocity of the target 20 -30 km / h.

T-80U test carried out in full. Percentage of hits - 100%. Before starting the test readjusted reconciliation of UVKV taking into account the slip marks on the 0.25 so on.

18 Test defeat a moving target in motion

Range 1000 -1200 m. Purpose - movable shield 2.3 x 4,6 m. Shoot the tank in motion V = 40 km / h - One shot, shot - an armor-piercing, the velocity of the target 20 -30 km / h.

T-80U test carried out in full. Percentage of defeat - 100%. Performing the test was carried out taking into account the disposal of reconciliation of UVKV at 0.25 so on.

Test 19 Conduct of fire on the accuracy of a moving target

Range 1500 m. Purpose - movable shield 2.3 x 4,6 m. Shooting from the place - 10 shots, shot - an armor-piercing, the velocity of the target 20 -30 km / h.

T-80U test carried out in full. Percentage of lesion-90%. Before shooting made adjustments to the alignment of light diversion.

Test 20 Conduct of fire on the accuracy of a moving target on the move

Range 1500 -1700 m. Purpose - movable shield 2.3 x 4,6 m. Shoot the tank in motion V = 40 km / h - 10 shots, shot - an armor-piercing, the velocity of the target 20 -30 km / h.

The test was performed twice. The Greek crew of the test is not performed. Percentage of lesion-60%. Russian crew of the test performed. Before shooting disabled amendment for the transfer speed of the target and made reconciliation with the adjustment to the 0.3 TD. (Pre-shift the aiming point). Percentage of defeat - 90%. Ie removed the "mistake of the day of shooting." And tomorrow, what?

Produced by the analysis of fire tests on 19 and 20 showed that pre-polnitelno errors fire control system is added and the inconsistency of practical flight trajectory of the munition ZP31 incorporated in the computational path armor-piercing projectiles (BM15, BM22, BM26). For example, at distances of up to 1500 m its ballistics are roughly equivalent BM/115, from 1500 to 2000 m - About BM22, at ranges of more 2000 m - Did not match any of the type planted in the calculator.

Thus, to deliver fire this type of weapon is difficult (requires adjusting the aiming point, depending on the target range). It's time to remove the practical shells. Save-with, damn ...

25 Test Firing

Range 1500 m, The goal - two fixed shield 2.3 x 2.3 distance between the goals -100 M, Shooting from the spot, while 1 - min., Armor-piercing projectile. The probability of hitting at least 90%.

Rate was 6 rounds per minute. Requirement Komitheta at least 7 rounds per minute. The low rate of performance due to the application for firing practice ammunition ZP31, which has a sample of black powder and windless weather (can not target detection, after the shot to scatter smokyof clouds. Time to scatter the smoky cloud was not less than 15 seconds).. And I got on 27 seconds of dispersion pyledymogo clouds ... loading mechanism provided rate of not less than 9 you arean arrow in a minute.

Test30 firing a machine gun

T-80U test performed.

Comments of the Greek crew: the inability of the impact of fire with a machine gun NSVT, in motion, due to lack of stability in the horizontal plane. Shoot for the brand through a stabilized panoramic. Everything is better.

Test 31 fording. Broad depth of 2,15 m.

T-80U test carried out in full. The test was carried out with full installation kit OPVT. Committee was fixed quicklyand that ease of installation of removable elements of the EAD, as well as their discharge and conduct of firing the gun after Fording without leaving eki's page from the tank. Fine.

Test 32 test launchers "cloud-902B"

T-80U test performed. Committee noted as a drawback of theabsence of a solid smoky clouds in calm weather. The speed of wind at the test = 0. After the test there was a refusal hydrostatic transmission (the tank had not been able to turn) and was evacuated to a park.

Tests 6, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 23, 29, 33 T-80U does not comply.

4 maintainability

34 test track replacement track on

T-80U test performed by the Russian crew, using a ZIPa tank for 18 minutes. Committee recorded the best result of all predstavlennk tanks. Fine.

Test 35 Replacement caterpillar tracks

T-80U test performed by the Russian crew to useindividual Niemi ZIPa tank for 1 hour and 45 minutes. Fine.

Test 36 Removing and installing engine

T-80U test performed by the Russian crew to useindividual Niemi ZIPa tank. For disassembly and assembly of engine load lifting means 2 ton (truck Greek apmission).

The dismantling - 1 hr 43 min. Installation time - 1 hour 20 minutes. A Leclerc - 30 minutes there and back the same ...

Test 37 Removing and installing the generator

Tashs T-80U test performed by the Russian crew to usethe ISP Niemi individual tank. The dismantling - 25 m, (???? Which of the generators? Maybe a minute?) while monThuja - 43. Committee marked the best result of all submitted tanks.

Test 38 Removing and replacing the PCT

The test was performed twice by the Greek and Russian crews.

Time of removal of PBC Greek crew -5 sec;

Time of removal of PBC Russian crew - 3:

Setup time FCT Greek crew - 17 seconds;

Setup time FCT Russian crew - 23 seconds.

Test 39 The barrel NSVT

The test was performed twice by the Greek and Russian crews.

Time to replace the barrel NSVT Greek crew - 21;

Time to replace the barrel NSVT Russian crew - 19 seconds.

Note - data is not the official results of the tests, as shown by foreign tanks

1 Training and education

According to the officers of the Greek army, the most complicated in Obuchenii and operation of tank Leclerc. Tank Leclerc "requires more trained personnel for maintenance and repair of all before therepresentations of tanks. During practice the tank, "Leclerc" identified bykaz loading mechanism.

For the rest of the tanks is no information. According to the committee members the easiest to learn and acooking crew is the T-80U.

2 Overcoming Obstacles and conducting sea trials

Test 1. wall 1 m

Tank Abrams MA2 "- head trauma Greek commander at the gathering with obstacles. The crew is replaced by an American;

Tank Leclerc - no comments;

Tank Chelendzher2E "- head trauma Greek commander at the convergencedes obstacles, utykanie gun into the ground at the gathering with obstacles.

Tank T-84 - Greek crew members injured while trying to overcomenegotiated the obstacle. The wall is not resolved. The crew changed to Ukrainian.Ukrainian crew overcame the wall, but the gathering occurred damageof the exhaust nozzle.

Tank Leopard 2A5 - no comments.

ditch 2,5 m

All tanks overcame ditch without comment.

slope 30%

Tank M1A2 Abrams "was unable to stop on the way down (the crew of the Americanican);

Tank Leclerc - no comments;

tank "Challenger 2E - no. was able to climb the slope, slipping gusenichnyh tapes;

Tank T-84 - could not climb the slope with a stop (the crew of Ukrainian governmentInscoe);

And that's for you comment.

Tank Leopard 2A5 - unable to climb the slope. The head of the group protested the committee that the reason the test is notis the presence of traces of rubber from the caterpillar tracks of previous tanks. About thetest committee was rejected, because after the tank Leopard 2A5 "test performed T-80U and the obstacle was overcome.

Roll 15%

Tank T-84 - slip the stabilizer.

For the rest of the tanks is no information.

"Slalom"

All tanks are obstacles to overcome, the information shown on the time, while overcoming, no.

turns in place 360 degrees.

All tanks exercise performed, the information shown on the timeMeni not.

Change of position

All tanks exercises performed, the information shown on the timeMeni not.

After running a test on the tank''Leopard 2A5 "replaced the gooseboundary tape and held again to overcome the bias 30%. In the second attempt with the new tracks slope 30% tank overcame. After the second attempt on the tank to re-make the change gusenichGOVERNMENTAL tapes. Same shit!

The tank "Challenger 2E replaced 80-90% of the shoes gusenichnyh tapes and made a second attempt to overcome the slope 32 degrees. Information on the results there, but after the second attempt ofreplacement plagued track tapes. Same shit!

The tank Abrams M1A2 "any fault on the engine, dismantled the engine. The tanks, "Abrams M1A2", "Leclerc" and T-84 after the test also replaced the crawler belt.

Test 2 Execution march 1000 km

In the process of committing the march, the following failures andserviceability:

Tank M1A2 Abrams - the lack of 3-shoe caterpillar tracks, stop at a forced march to the conduct of the commission regulationgauge works; And the reason?

Tank Leclerc - problems with the engine or box transmission, as in small halts (10-15 min.) there is fainterof the engine. At a big halt (after 124 km path) - regulates thegauge or repair work on the engine;

tank "Challenger 2E - engine trouble or transition boxproblems (could not keep going after the big halt, arrived in the park alone after 3 hours after the daily march of waspsexperimental tanks). Repeated replacement of shoes caterpillar tracks in the process of committing marches; overheated?

Tank T-84 - in the commission of the first diurnal march of the Greek crew after the passage of the mountain sections of the route has refused to continueto press the motion, citing the increased fatigue, the crew changed to Ukrainian.

Refusal speedometer in the commission of the first daily march. Studythe use of respirators by crews of foreign tanks, following the T-84, due to poisoning

exhaust gases.

Tank Leopard 2A5 - after a third of the daily march substituted 2 -th left and right fifth road wheels.

After committing 1000 km the march on all the tanks were replaced caterpillar tracks.

Task Team Leader of the tank Leopard 2A5 has asked the Committee to test for weighing tanks, since he believes that the tank "Leclerc" shows good performance on the march as a result of making it to the lite version. ... it put a neighbor Committee scheduled the test after returning from the march but the test was not performed because of limitedtest time magnetization.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Part 2:

In the process of committing a march established:

Cruising:

- Abrams - 365 km;

"Leopard 2" - 375 km;

"Challenger " - 440 km;

· "Leclerc" - 500 km (Without the two additional drums);

· T-84 - 450km.

Maximum speed:

· Abrams -70 -72 km / h;

"Leopard 2" - 70 -75 km / h;

"Challenger" - up 70 km / h;

"Leclerc" - 70 -75 km / h;

· T-84 - 65 -70 km / h.

Full charging time.

Abrams - 35-40 min.

"Leopard 2" - 30 min;

"Challenger" - no data;

"Leclerc" - no data;

· T-84 - no data.

Test 3 Execution 50 km march at night

All tanks tests are performed. In the process of committing a march on the tank Leopard 2A5 "went down the night instrument mechanics - the driver, after replacing the unit continued to move the tank.

Test 4 Execution 100 km March included stabilizers

No information.

Test 5 Emergency braking

Tank Abrams M1A2 "-24;

Tank Leclerc " - 25;

Tank Leopard 2A5 - 5;

tank "Challenger 2E - no data;

Tank T-84 - 8.

Test 6 Stabilization of the visual field

No information.

Test 7 Target detection

Information on the tanks do not. The tank T-84 refused to thermal imaging devices, produced in France, the tank was not restored.

Test 8 detection circuits night

Information on the tanks do not.

3 Tests on shooting

Test 9 Probability of hitting a target the first shot.

Test 10 defeats a fixed target in motion.

Information on tests 9 and 10, no.

Conducting the test in 1911 shooting for accuracy.

Test 12. Conducting shooting accuracy in motion.

The results for test 11 and 12:

Tank Abrams M1A2 - 17 hits of 20;

Tank Leclerc " - 20 hits of 20;

Tank Leopard 2A5" - 19 hits of 20;

Tank "Challenger 2E-no information;

Tank T-84- with seats 8 hits in Traffic 3 fallingof.

Test 13 The probability of hitting a target the first shot at night.

Test 14 Defeats fixed targets in motion at night.

In tests on 13 and 14 tank T-84 did not participate, due to failure of thermalNogo device for the rest of the tanks is no information.

Conducting the test in 1915 shooting on the accuracy of night

Conducting the test in 1916 shooting on the accuracy of the night in motion

The results for tests 15 and 16: Well, what can I say? See my above!

Tank Abrams M1A2 - 20 hits of 20;

Tank Leclerc " - 19 hits of 20;

Tank Leopard 2A5 - 20 hits of 20;

Tank "Challenger 2E - 10 hits of 10, the move did not shoot;

Tank T-84 in the test did not take part due to the failure of the heatdiffusion device.

After the firing on the tank "Challenger 2E is produced forexchange gearbox.

According to the results of firing the head of the American tank Abrams M1A2 "refused to use training ammunition (and we have not given up) fightcurves ammunition were delivered within 3 days of the U.S. forces, stationed in Europe.

Test 17 The probability of hitting a target the first shot

Test 18 Porazhenke moving target on the move

Information on the results of tests on 17 and 13 no.

Conducting the test in 1919 shooting on the accuracy of a moving target

Conducting the test in 1920 shooting on the accuracy of a moving target on the move

The results obtained in tests on 19 and 20:

Tanks Abrams M1A "," Leclerc "," Leopard 2M5 "," Challenger 2E is no information;

Tank T-84 from the place of information is not in motion six hits in 10 shots;

Tank "Challenger 2E returned to the test because of non-serviceability of the engine or gearbox.

Test probability of 21 lesions moving target the first shot at night

22 Test defeat a moving target in motion at night

In tests on 21 and 22 tank T-84 did not participate because of refusal of thermal imaging device, the remaining tanks to no information.

Conducting the test in 1923 shooting on the accuracy of a moving target at night

Conducting the test in 1924 shooting on the accuracy of a moving target in motion at night

In tests on 23 and 24 tank T-84 did not participate because of refusal of thermal imaging device at the other tanks no information.

25 Test Firing

Tank Abrams M1A - 8 in / min.

Tank Lyklerk " - 9 in / min.

Tank Leopard 2A5 - 9 in / min.

Tank "Challenger 2E - 9 in / min.

Tank T-84-Greek crew of 6 in / min., Ukrainian crew - 7.

After running tests, 17 - 25 American group has been called the best crew of the tank the U.S. Army to perform tests on fire. In-in!

Test 26 shooting in the emergency mode

Information on the shooting, no.

Test 27 shooting in the "hunter-shooter"

Tank Abrams M1A2 " - did not participate due to lack of ammunitionowls;

Tank Leclerc "- 13 hits from 20 shots; 0.65

Tank 'The Leopard 2A5 - 17 hits from 20 shots;0.85

Tank "Challenger 2E - 8 hits of 20 rounds;0.40

Tank T-84 - 9 hits out of 19 shots. 0.47 All the same ingleshey done. And it's good.

Test 28 shooting in the "hunter-shooter" at night

Information on the shooting, no.

29 Test Firing at maximum range

Tank Abrams M1A2 - 3 shots hit out of 4;

Tanks Leopard 2A5 "," Leclerc "," Challenger 2E-no information.

Tank T-84 - unguided flight guided missiles (test execution terminated). Then, when shooting with two guided missiles at a distance 2500 m - 2 hits.

In the process of running tests on the firing of the tank, "Leclerc" zafika fixed three failure loading mechanism. The tank Leopard 2A5 " replacing track tapes. The tank "Challenger 2E denial weapons, gear failure (restoration was carried out in 3 days ), the replacement of the drive wheels.

30 test firing of guns

The tank T-84 - refusal fire control system, on the other tanks no information.

After completing tests on firing on the tanks, "Abrams M1A", "Leclerc" and "Challenger 2E" was the repeated execution of some test shooting (no information on the results). Trying to prove that they are the best?

Test 31. Fording (the depth of the ford - 2,15 m.)

The test did not attend the tanks, "Leclerc" and "Challenger 2E. The tank Abrams M1A2 "came flooding of the engine performance test was prekrasheno; tanks Leopard 2A5, and T-84 to perform the test in full without comment.

December 14

When leaving the box after installation and first centerfold was found that there was no turning control of the wheel. On examination revealed a cut of the pump feeding the GOP. Feed pumps jammed. When viewed filters GOP found a large number of chips and damaged items yellow. The reason for the defect - failure GOP MP-280RU number 973011 (working hours in the tank 10 minutes).

Due to lack of facilities for manufacturers and developers of certified GOP to recover the tank decided to discontinue the participation of T-80U tank in the trials. Take the spare tire on the experimental build!

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

according to test results

During tests carried out checks on more than 100 parameters. By all parameters tested the T-80U has confirmed compliance with the stated performance characteristics, except for the test rate (rate not provided because of the inability to make a shot to the dispersion of smoke from the practice rounds with melon powder).

A number of parameters T-80U has surpassed the alleged characteristics:

reserve of fact - 350 km when driving on the mountain, and dirt roads with asphalt (by TTH - 340 km on the highway) ,

Fuel consumption on the asphalt - 4 l / km (TTC - 5-7 l / km);

maximum measurement range is actually - 9100 m (By TTX-5000m);

maximum speed to virtually 80 km / h (By TTH - 70 km / h).

Tender Committee noted the reliable operation, comparedcompared with foreign tanks, engine GTD-1250, transmission, loading mechanism.

Advantage in comparison with foreign tanks, is the presence of APU GTA-18A, which has significantly reduced the total fuel consumption by 1 hour of the tank systems ~ 60 l / h (total time of the tank is - 50% on the spot and 50% in traffic) for a tank with a didiesel engines without APU powercompletely 1500 L. with the fuel consumption is 120 - 50 l / h.

Starting the main engine GTE-1250 was carried out in 60 seconds, the other tanks, except tanks "Abrams", used the heater. And what was the T air?

According to the results of tests we can conclude that the waspsnovnymi competitors on the international market for T-80U are tanks Leopard 2A5 "and" Leclerc ". After the slightlywith respect to modernization, taking into account the proposals for dumping chainto us, significant competition will be a tank T-84 (Ukraine).

To ensure competitiveness in the foreign market work is needed to bring the main tactic - the technical characteristics of the tank T - 80U to the level of modern requirements.

Key issues to be addressed:

A hydrostatic transmission. Crude another thing.

The tank has not complied fully test program due to lack of reliability of hydraulic transmission (OSG).

Disadvantages:

When turning with a radius of less than 12 meters there are jerks, that is marked as failing.

When working in heavy traffic conditions reliability is obviously insufficient.

Unreliable control system spools the switchingof distribution mechanisms. The electric drive train control wound up on the CBA board mechanic driver together with other consumers, it is not permissible, because for any closure of theInstitute in these chains car loses control. must necessarilyoverlap with respect to this chain.

Is not sufficiently reliable box design zamykatefields and limit switches control the wheel. During operation requires constant attention and adjustment.

It is advisable to introduce hydraulic servo controlof spools distribution mechanism: that the call smoothly rotate at small radii. Yes, the witness had to lay the principle from the outset.

It is advisable to ensure the installation of back-up forwater, providing the ability to control the tank at the exit of failed GOP. If the existing control scheme, when you exit the building the GOP machine is not fully controlled, although a serviceable engine, transmission and distribution mechanismsleniya.

You must install additional filters, since in case of failure GOP hydraulics completely clogged products of destruction - a quality wash it after that is impossible,

Replacing the GOP field is impossible without applyingequations of special tools, jigs, stands. necessarywalk development of this equipment.

Not perfect and does not meet the aesthetic requirements of design control wheel. In the process of testing at the site of mounting the wheel appeared backlash, making it difficult to adjust the limit switches. necessary to develop a design helm, meeting modern requirementsNiyama (by analogy with the control tanks of Western countries).

2 Powerplant

The power plant has shown sufficient reliability and powersequence for all kinds of tests, but a clear advantage in comparisoncompared with the other tanks are not visible. Fuel asphalt roads - 4 l / km is comparable to the cost of diesel power plants of other tanks. Here is the answer to skeptics of the diesel-engine.

Fuel consumption on dirt roads and when driving at lower transmission rate of -7 and a l / km, which is significantly greater than the tanks of the NATO countries. Large fuel consideredis a serious fault.

Further work is needed to increase the power of the forcecurve setting, while reducing fuel consumption.

Three auxiliary power unit (GTA-18A)

During testing observed some nezapuskov GTA-18A after a break in a few days of sunbathing warning light "no oil pressure (the formation of an air tube in the oil system). Starting out only after repeated spins.

Need to develop activities obespechityuschih reliable starting GTA-18A after a long recess.

4 Fire Control System

The fire control system is much inferior to the precision shooting at ranges of 2500 - 2000 m tanks of the NATO countries. Required indicator of the probability that at these distances according to the standard target (2,3 x -2.3 M) From the place and go for armor-piercing projectile at least 90%. And we are laying ... 0.99 three shots.

Tolerances and errors in manufacturing, configuration and verification FCS 1A45 T-80U is 0,5 m on, that at distances 2500 m comparable to half the size of the target. For good results the total error of fire should not go beyond 0.20 0.22 ... etc..

Days to ensure the required accuracy permitted bydeviations should not exceed 0.25, etc. What is permitted? See above.

Insufficient power totabilizatora weapons can not provide the required accuracy when firing a descent at speeds of 25-40 km / hour (Standard NATO) of - for the tower takes when turning the body.

Working withtabilizatora to overrun leads to an increase in time to manufacture a shot, and also reduces the accuracy of shooting. Stabilizers tanks of the NATO countries operate without reruns.

We need to continue work on implementation of the stabilizer increased power and accuracy.

Lack of automatic input correction for "elevation targets" dramatically reduces the accuracy of fire in the mountains. When shooting in a landfill (in excess of target over a tank at 100 -200 M, The slope of the track 5.7 deg.) Calculator work out the wrong amendment "on the migrated velocity of the target and makes it impossible to shoot on the run in these conditions.

Require special algorithm of the evaluator to ensure shooting in these conditions and provide automaticelectric input amendments to the "elevation of purpose." For the record - at Kubinka at Dstr-2200 elevation of purpose - (minus) 20m. And the fall!

Under intense rate of fire main gun (80 - 100 shots for a few hours) is more than 0,5 withdrawal reconciliations, etc. because of the curvature of the barrel and the influence netermostabilnosti drives and sight. Reduce backlash joints, variation in wall thickness and curvature of the pipe. In this we do ...

Necessary to introduce into the FCS sensor ensuresautomatic entry of developing amendments to the curvature of the channel the setla and netermostabilnost drives.

Fluorescent channel sight commander does not provide the standards of NATO detection and identification of goals and precision firing.

You must install a panoramic sight with a built-nym channel laser range finder and automatic input onrevisions to the conditions of firing.

TVP "Agave 2 " much lower than TVP tagosov NATO countries on the detection range of targets in difficult conditions, image clarity and usability. The required accuracy of firing at a range of 1500 - 2000 m armor-piercing shells from their seats and run for at least 90%. dependent stabilization makes it impossible to provide the required accuracy of the shooting on the move.

You must install RTA, which is comparable to the characteristictics TVP tanks of the NATO countries.

Night-sight channel commander does not match the trianglesatisfy the requirements imposed on modern tanks and does not provide the required range target detection and accuracy. Once again, see my results.

You must install a night-sight channel commander of the main characteristics to the characteristics of the night gunner's sight. Work to upgrade the sights gunner and commander should be made comprehensive.

4 Complex "blind"

Complex optical-electronic suppression "blind" does not provide the response to radiation of the laser rangefinder foreign tanks of the Leopard-1A5 "," Lsopard-2A5, M-60AZ. Firing complex "blind" only occurs when irradiatedchenii with the T-84 ( Ukraine), a similar operation Origin ofhodilo and have a system installed on the tank T-84.

Require completion detection laser irradiation for the response to radiation rangefinders modernized and modern tanks of NATO, including those currently under development (range of response should be not less than 0,6 - 10,6 mm). The second step should be to develop multi-level sensors responding to all types of laser radiation and the radiation of radar stations in the milli-meter range. That's right.

5 Ergonomics

Noted discomfort after prolonged use because of notsufficient quality ergonomic seats (no solidGOVERNMENTAL bench seat gunner and commander, the lack of lateral support, as well as difficulties in adjusting the seat). There is no needto ensure the necessary conditions of life under continuous determination of the crew in the tank for a long time without logging off. According to the tender committee were significantly less space in the reserved amount in comparison with foreigneign tank, which creates additional inconvenience during combat operation.

6 Chassis

Comments on work sites chassis, except forNiemi ACG was not. When making long marches with painShimi speed on asphalt roads due to wear shoes ACG often had to adjust the tension of the gooseboundary tapes. Hatyazheniya gooseboundary tapes manually examinesthe Xia as a drawback.

Necessary to introduce a mechanism for automatic control - tension caterpillar tracks.

The disadvantages of existing anti-aircraft withknowledge - the impossibility of aimed fire from a poolof meta NCW while driving due to lack of stabilization, and also the overlapping fields of view, the commander of an anti-aircraft unit. I do not understand, explained that way.

Necessary to introduce a closed anti-aircraft installation.

7 Maintainability

Checking for maintainability showed that when replacing major components and assemblies meet requirements trianglesatisfy the requirements. At the same time, it should be noted that no significantconvenience is no quick release connections and valves for fluid retention and a large numberof bolted connections in the set of removable elements (MTO roof blinds, etc.). And we do not know! regarded as a drawback lack of equipment, allowing for an engine start is tanka, for the detection and troubleshooting. All the removed engine-transmission setting, we have the power plant. Here they have to stand up and running.

Noted a large number of the nomenclature used tools and equipment, which increases with time onservicing and repair. Quality and aesthetic characteristics of the instrument does not meet modern requirements.

Necessary to introduce the valves and quick-comequations, reducing the number of bolting swap items for export versions of tanks, which will significantlyreduce the time with respect to the replacement of main units and reducethe complexity of zit replacement.

Must use universal keys and accessories. Develop a special set of tools for the exsupplies tailors to meet the requirements of foreign customers. necessary to develop a stand that permits forstarting the engine out of the tank ..

8 The hull and turret

In overcoming the wall brackets front dust shields run into an obstacle and without dismantling preovercome the obstacle is impossible.

Require refinement of brackets to exclude upiraniya an obstacle.

When going from the wall is damaged exhaust pipe.

Need to develop measures to eliminate damage to the pipe at overcoming obstacles.

9 Observation

Prism vision devices significantly inferior in its characteristics instruments used on the tanks of the NATO countries. Location and viewing angles of prism instruments commander can not provide an adequate review at roundabouts roads. Who has more weight is right! devices are not equipped with filters of protection against laserradiation. Hmm ...

Night Vision mechanics - the driver does not comply with the requirements of NATO standards in viewing angles and distance vision (at least 1000m). necessary to develop a thermal imaging device as a nightof mechanical driver.

You must enter a complete set of export filters for theboards of laser devices for monitoring commandsDir, gunner, driver.

10 Means of communication and control

Communication and management do not meet the standardsof NATO there. One of the mandatory requirement is the presence ofpresence in each tank, a satellite navigation system, a systemcommand and control subjects, CICS. The tank T-80U, these systems are absent.

Need to develop the installation of communication facilities of western production, navigation systems, command and control, CICS.

11 The rubber tracked tape

The tank was equipped with The rubber crawler belt (ACG) with fixed rubber shoes. Tank, complete with ACG showed good handling etc, and on the chassis and in urban environments in all speed ranges. When driving on dirt roads and obstacles TTX requirements are satisfied.

Following the path of 600 - 700 km on highways and gravel roads (80 % - the highway, 20% - soil) began an intensive destruction onruzhnyh rubber arrays. Last march (350 km) Passes throughto the ACG Deal with completely destroyed rubber arraymi. When the motion observed strong vibration and heat caterpillar tracks. Due to the heat began the destruction of the internal array of rubber and as a consequence of the destruction of arrays of rollers. At the end of the march completely destroyed the interiorrennie rubber arrays more than a 20 Trakai.

Necessary to provide a resource with fixed ACG shoes in the range 1200-1500 km, and inability to provide indicatedzannogo resource to continue to work on the ACG with detachable towerpoppies.

Forgive me for the broken English and poor formatting :icon_frown:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Night firing by night results (with 10 shots out of 20, on the move) :

M1A2 : 20/20

Leclerc : 19/20

Leopard 2A5 : 20/20

Challenger 2 : 10/10 (Challenger would not have shot on the move)

It should be noted that the transmission broke down in the middle of the firing trial. :cvcsalut:

Link to post
Share on other sites
With the greek trial, Myth of T-80 fall.

The tank is not able to fire accuratly on the move over 20km/h, over 2000m, the accuracy is poor, and it can't hit if the target is not on the same level!

Poor! Even the average grunt learn how to do angle shots with his MG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and it can't hit if the target is not on the same level!

Issue was caused by 5-degree side slope. In conjunction with main gun depression this led to error in lead calculation. Turret azimuth resolver can not make wonders.

P.S. Actually most of the problems with tank should be addressed to the team dispatched to Greece and to those who failed to prepare equipment for the trials(episode with broken transmission explains a lot).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder if at least some of the issues with the respective tanks were the result of a failure by Greek Army authorities to properly brief the participants on the nature of the tests. For example, did the M1A2 team really just forget to bring training ammo?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily a matter of "forgetting" to bring ammo, but who knows if the container arrived in time, or the paperwork for importing live ammo was complete, or whatnot. Greek bureaucracy has a reputation for being ... somewhat opaque.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Issue was caused by 5-degree side slope. In conjunction with main gun depression this led to error in lead calculation. Turret azimuth resolver can not make wonders.

P.S. Actually most of the problems with tank should be addressed to the team dispatched to Greece and to those who failed to prepare equipment for the trials(episode with broken transmission explains a lot).

May be you could provide us a better translation than google is able to.

You'd be sincerely thanked by the whole non-russian speakers communauty!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Complex optical-electronic suppression "blind" does not provide the response to radiation of the laser rangefinder foreign tanks of the Leopard-1A5 "," Lsopard-2A5, M-60AZ. Firing complex "blind" only occurs when irradiatedchenii with the T-84 ( Ukraine), a similar operation Origin ofhodilo and have a system installed on the tank T-84.

Require completion detection laser irradiation for the response to radiation rangefinders modernized and modern tanks of NATO, including those currently under development (range of response should be not less than 0,6 - 10,6 mm). The second step should be to develop multi-level sensors responding to all types of laser radiation and the radiation of radar stations in the milli-meter range. That's right.

So if I'm reading this correctly, the laser warning reciever was unable to detect it was being lased by legacy Western designs, but reacted when the T-84 was used??

Link to post
Share on other sites
So if I'm reading this correctly, the laser warning reciever was unable to detect it was being lased by legacy Western designs, but reacted when the T-84 was used??

The same as some western-"jammers" are able to fool the TOW but not russian made ATGM ...all praise the defence-industry :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you fool a TOW with a laser?

I'm no expert,but the TOW guidance system uses a infra red device/emitter in the back of the missile, so a AFV could fool the guidance at the operators end in emitting , or dazzle the receiver, thous causing the signal from the transmitter to the missile to give bad/false readings on the way to the target.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the dazzlers in Shtora and similar systems use lasers; I think they use some kind of IR strobe light which creates confusion for the TOW guidance unit in trying to track the IR beacon on the rear of the missile. The Shtora suite does include an array of laser warning receivers to identify when the vehicle has been lased and orient the turret in the direction of the laser.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...