Jump to content

Leopard unable to kill Russian modern tanks?


Recommended Posts

It's not really an assumption, I'm going by what I have seen personally working on the equipment and seeing the competition over the last 15 years.

But yea, I agree with you guys that it's better to error on the side of caution and overestimate rather than underestimate.

The latest Armata has a sensor head that is noticeably larger and is kept under cover for the most part. This is the most interesting part for me to see is if they have an improved thermal or other optical system. I would expect that it does in some way improve over the T-90/BMP-3 optical systems.

Using an uncooled thermal can be a big improvement if you have no other thermal devices, but they still do not compare to cooled thermal sensors in the ability to see at longer distances.

http://www.flir.com/uploadedfiles/Eurasia/MMC/Tech_Notes/TN_0005_EN.pdf

Video comparison 640x480 pixel imager: https://youtu.be/7p72_I-z9No

Diamond turning Germanium plus coatings and making it useful to an electronic array of highly exotic element pixels that are driven by microprocessors is a different animal than making a simple daylight gun sight using standard glass.

Yes there are commercial and cheap thermal imagers available to the public, especially here in the U.S., but when you compare them to military thermal systems the difference is still night and day.

https://youtu.be/EkUwo2PTd28

Contrast with handheld U.S. thermal binoculars: https://youtu.be/iK1jk0cY9_0

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's not really an assumption, I'm going by what I have seen personally working on the equipment and seeing the competition over the last 15 years.

But yea, I agree with you guys that it's better to error on the side of caution and overestimate rather than underestimate.

The latest Armata has a sensor head that is noticeably larger and is kept under cover for the most part. This is the most interesting part for me to see is if they have an improved thermal or other optical system. I would expect that it does in some way improve over the T-90/BMP-3 optical systems.

Using an uncooled thermal can be a big improvement if you have no other thermal devices, but they still do not compare to cooled thermal sensors in the ability to see at longer distances.

http://www.flir.com/uploadedfiles/Eurasia/MMC/Tech_Notes/TN_0005_EN.pdf

Video comparison 640x480 pixel imager: https://youtu.be/7p72_I-z9No

Diamond turning Germanium plus coatings and making it useful to an electronic array of highly exotic element pixels that are driven by microprocessors is a different animal than making a simple daylight gun sight using standard glass.

Yes there are commercial and cheap thermal imagers available to the public, especially here in the U.S., but when you compare them to military thermal systems the difference is still night and day.

https://youtu.be/EkUwo2PTd28

Contrast with handheld U.S. thermal binoculars: https://youtu.be/iK1jk0cY9_0

I wonder which MBT has the best night and day sighting systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's actually a tough call. Especially comparing daylight optics among the various vehicles.

The M1A2 I would say has the current best night optics, but with the new Leopard 2's that might be getting the Attica thermal sights I would say in some instances they have some range advantage over the M1A2's system. Below it's showing the Attica M-ER HD as having a Tank ID range of 13km!! not counting the detection range on Page 20 of the brochure.

http://www.defenceandsecurity-airbusds.com/documents/10157/137612/Prosp8_Sensors_WEB.pdf%3bjsessionid=83928EBADBA1B42A57CC8853DA9BC38C

And the system above allows 50x magnification as well as the following real time digital enhancements:

processing local adaptive dynamic compression, edge enhancement, histogram equalization, image stacking,

reduction of air turbulences, haze reduction, combination of different IP-modes

Those are significant contributors to extended range and ID for a thermal system.

By contrast the Thermal system for the Challenger 2 the TOGS II system is outlined here: https://books.google.com/books?id=QPBQ5w4X8RkC&pg=PA185&lpg=PA185&dq=UK+TICM+2+thermal+imager&source=bl&ots=dE1vDYkAKY&sig=VBDby02URGbX-oja4o3JrSgNsM0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9ZVDVaDQLMWSNsS3gaAF&ved=0CE8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=UK%20TICM%202%20thermal%20imager&f=false

It's rather dated by today's standards but it's an incredibly complex optical device as outlined in the diagrams and schematics, especially when you start reading about the support electronics to create the image to the eyepiece.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but with the new Leopard 2's that might be getting the Attica thermal sights

In the end Leo 2 users have little choice but to fit a new TI, since WBG-X is no longer supported.

Below it's showing the Attica M-ER HD as having a Tank ID range of 13km!!

Yes but that's not the version used in the Leo's, the ATTICA Z is, which has a more reasonable ID range of 6 KM. But being HD and a newer generation, it still ought to have better image quality than the M1A2 SEP's TI.

And the system above allows 50x magnification

Well actually the ATTICA M-ER has 50x optical zoom AND 4x digital zoom , meaning 200 times magnification in total !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the end Leo 2 users have little choice but to fit a new TI, since WBG-X is no longer supported.

Yes but that's not the version used in the Leo's, the ATTICA Z is, which has a more reasonable ID range of 6 KM. But being HD and a newer generation, it still ought to have better image quality than the M1A2 SEP's TI.

Well actually the ATTICA M-ER has 50x optical zoom AND 4x digital zoom , meaning 200 times magnification in total !!!

Is this upgrade to the leopard announced already? and if so can you provide a link?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this upgrade to the leopard announced already? and if so can you provide a link?

http://www.janes.com/article/39208/new-eyes-for-the-leopard-es14e1

http://www.defenceandsecurity-airbusds.com/web/guest/a-new-eye-for-the-leopard

Here in Dk its part of a larger mid-life upgrade program for the Leo's including a new APU, new A/C , BMS , GPS new armor package (allegedly) etc etc.. Somehow its gone a bit under the radar so far, so you wont find much reference online unfortunately. According to our electronics technicians we have had the attica TI's in store for quite some time already, just waiting for the go ahead of the MLU program.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There is various generla media reports her ein Germany today that the Leopards in use by the BW may lack the ammunition to defeat armour on modern Russian tanks, namely upgraded T-80s and T-90s. It gets reported that due to the Ukraine war the BW will reactivate/buy back 100 of its older 2A4 to add these - once modernization is completed - to its current tank fleet of around 220 2A5 and 2A6 (and 20 2A7). Critics now say that would be a placebo, since current available "Pfeilmunition" (kinetic ammo) available for the A5 and A6 would be unable to defeat the modern Russian tanks which ha sseen a series of upgrades and protection modernization at high frequency. The planned next version of the German kinetic ammo should also be not able to reliably defeat Russian armour, and there is growing recommendations to go for DU ammo instead, since the German way of Tungsten ammo seems to have come to the end of its useful longevity.

All this just general reports in mainstream newspaper today over here, with not more details than the above given, so I save myself from collecting links to German newspaper articles. Most people here could not read them, and the additional info would be zero, since they really just wrote what I just summarised, not more background info given.

What's the view on this issue with people in this forum, and eSim?

Spent most of today doing some research.

Found this, it seems its not only German ammo may need updating.

Read this from at least three different publications.

On the new composite welded turret of the t-90m BHISMA/vladimir [not the basic t-90s export version]-

In several tests conducted in front of Indian delegation using latest foreign ammunitions (APFSDS) of the M829A2/KEW-A2 type conducted from 250 meters against T-90S devoid of the normal built-in explosive reactive armor (ERA) Kontakt-5 (K-5) resulted in the turret being completely impenetrable. This absolute resiliency to enemy fire resulted at the end, as one of the most crucial selling point for T-90 Bhishma MBT to India

Link to post
Share on other sites
[...]

In several tests conducted in front of Indian delegation using latest foreign ammunitions (APFSDS) of the M829A2/KEW-A2 type conducted from 250 meters against T-90S devoid of the normal built-in explosive reactive armor (ERA) Kontakt-5 (K-5) resulted in the turret being completely impenetrable. This absolute resiliency to enemy fire resulted at the end, as one of the most crucial selling point for T-90 Bhishma MBT to India

They fire a KE Round at 250 (!) Meters?

Find the Error?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I think they want to prove that even with a speed close to V0, the armor stops the penetrator.

Would the penetrator and sabot petals have separated by then,

if not would it make a difference?

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, they separate at 300 ~ 400 Meters.. So it´s a Joke !

Really?!

As soon as the group is out of the gun, it's just a matter of dozen of meters in order to liberate the penetrator.

Otherwise the sabot would reduce the kinetic energy of the ammunition. It just doesn't make sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was under the impression a round would need a certain distance to reach maximum

Velocity. before its kinetic energy starts to dissipate.

As soon as the round leaves the gun tube doesn't increase much.

Sure, the hot gazes push a little the round but the sabot slows the whole thing with its aerodynamic made to free the penetrator.

The moment when the ammunition reaches its maximum efficiency is when the sabot petals no longer stick to the rod.

Then, it undergo the slowing down by the air friction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spent most of today doing some research.

Found this, it seems its not only German ammo may need updating.

Read this from at least three different publications.

Three publications doesn't make the information any more valid. It usually means there was only a single source news report which was copied without additional investigation. You should at least trace it back to the original article by cutting and pasting sentences into google because most of the time they don't even bother to rewrite their own copy.

On the new composite welded turret of the t-90m BHISMA/vladimir [not the basic t-90s export version]-

In several tests conducted in front of Indian delegation using latest foreign ammunitions (APFSDS) of the M829A2/KEW-A2 type conducted from 250 meters against T-90S devoid of the normal built-in explosive reactive armor (ERA) Kontakt-5 (K-5) resulted in the turret being completely impenetrable.

All this says is they fired several APFSDS at a T-90 no-ERA turret from 250m away with no penatrations.

How many tanks did India buy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Three publications doesn't make the information any more valid. It usually means there was only a single source news report which was copied without additional investigation. You should at least trace it back to the original article by cutting and pasting sentences into google because most of the time they don't even bother to rewrite their own copy.

All this says is they fired several APFSDS at a T-90 no-ERA turret from 250m away with no penatrations.

How many tanks did India buy?

In 2001, India bought 310 T-90S tanks from Russia, of which 120 were delivered complete, 90 in semi-knocked down kits, and 100 in completely knocked down kits. The T-90 was selected because it is a direct development of the T-72 that India already employs with 60% logistics commonality with T-90 simplifying training and maintenance. India bought the T-90 after the delay in production of the domestically developed Arjun main battle tank, and to counter Pakistani deployment of the Ukrainian T-80UD in 1995–97. These tanks were made by Uralvagonzavod and the updated 1,000 hp (750 kW) engines were delivered by Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant. These tanks however did not feature the Shtora-1 passive/active protection system though there are reports that a separate contract for shipment of a modernised version of this suite is being discussed.[16]

A follow-on contract, worth $800 million, was signed on October 26, 2006, for another 330 T-90M "Bhishma" MBTs that were to be manufactured in India by Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi, Tamil Nadu.

The T-90M Bhishma (named for the almost invincible warrior in the Mahabharata) is a customised, improved version of the T-90S, which India developed with assistance from Russia and France, with both of whom India has very close ties. The tanks are equipped with the French Thales built Catherine-FC thermal sights[17] and utilises Russian Kontakt-5 K-5 explosive reactive armoured plates.[18] Kontakt-5 (K-5) ERA in its export variant provides a protection level of 1.2 [20%] against Kinetic Energy (APFSDS) rounds and 1.7–1.8 [70 %] against Chemical Energy rounds (Tandem HEAT). Semi-active baffle plates and ceramic layers with high tensile proprieties are employed in T-90 base armour. Even more advanced armour composition was implemented in the welded turrets of domestic T-90s and on export T-90 Bhishma tanks for India. In several tests conducted in front of an Indian delegation the latest foreign M829A2/KEW-A2 APFSDS ammunitions were fired from 250 metres against a T-90S lacking the normal built-in explosive reactive armour (ERA) Kontakt-5 (K-5) The turret proved completely impenetrable, which proved to be crucial in selling the T-90 Bhishma MBT to India.[19]

In April 2008, the Indian Army sent a request for proposal to Rafael, BAE Systems, Raytheon, Rosoboronexport, Saab, and IBD Deisenroth Engineering for an active protection system for the T-90S Bhishma.[20] The contract is expected to be worth US$270 million. Saab's LEDS-150 won the contract in January 2009.[21]

A third contract, worth $1.23 billion, was signed in December 2007 for 347 upgraded T-90Ms, the bulk of which will be licence-assembled by HVF. The Army hopes to field a force of over 21 regiments of T-90 tanks and 40 regiments of modified T-72s. The Indian Army would begin receiving its first T-90M main battle tank in completely knocked-down condition from Russia’s Nizhny Tagil-based Uralvagonzavod JSC by the end of 2009.[22][23]

The T-90M features the 'Kaktus K-6' bolted explosive reactive armour (ERA) package on its frontal hull and turret-top (the T-90S has 'Kontakt-5' ERA), is fitted with an enhanced environmental control system supplied by Israel's Kinetics Ltd for providing cooled air to the fighting compartment, has additional internal volume for housing the cryogenic cooling systems for new-generation thermal imagers like the THALES-built Catherine-FC thermal imager (operating in the 8–12 micrometre bandwidth).[22] In all, India plans to have 1,640 T-90 tanks in service by 2018–2020.[24]

The first batch of 10 licence built T-90M "Bhishma" was inducted into the Indian army on August 24, 2009. These vehicles were built at the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi, Tamil Nadu.

A ₹10000 crore (US$1.6 billion) purchase of 354 new T-90MS tanks for six tank regiments for the China border has been approved[25] which would take the total number of T-90 tanks in the Indian Army's inventory to 2011 and with a total of nearly 4500 tanks (T-90 and variants, T-72 and Arjun MBT) in active service, the world's third largest operator of tanks.

India plans to have 21 tank regiments of T-90s by 2020, with 45 combat tanks and 17 training and replacement tanks per regiment, for 62 total each.[26]

On 17 September 2013, India's Defence Ministry approved the production of 235 T-90 tanks under Russian licence for $1 billion.[27]

Link to post
Share on other sites
... and we have our plausible explanation for why there was no penetration.

One could conclude, either the T-90 is a good tank well suited to the Indian army requirements. Or large suit cases full of cash were exchanged. LoL

The T-90 far cheaper then western designs and when you have large boarders to defend.

Price has to be a factor when you need thousands of tanks to protect them.

The T90 on paper anyway should be a good match for the Pakistani Al-Khalid tank or the Chinese Type 98/99

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...