American tanks

[MSpencer 0]

Hellfish... same goes for you... I could use your help with some info on weapons and such, FAS and world.guns.ru, and my knowledge just don't cut it.

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Quote[/b] ]Zaloga and Clancy compared. . . that's a good one. . .

Steve Zaloga is pretty much the world's de facto expert on tanks.

Clancy is a (entertaining, to be sure) novelist specializing in military fiction.

While Clancy can sometimes be a source of info or stories (though I've found him to be flat-out wrong on many occasions, and often with an almost propagandist angle), where there might be a dispute between information from these two (though why anyone would consider Clancy a legitimate source is beyond me) I'm going to take Zaloga every time.

...and this is why I am seaking for Zaloga`s books (not only) when I need some data. In his book about "Abrams" if I remember he is quoting those story about "one shot two kills" but does not comment it.

Quote[/b] ]The thing is, I have no trouble at all believing that a 120mm DU round might go through two T-55s in a row (since they have demonstrated that they have more than enough energy to both enter and exit T-55 tanks apparently unhampered. It would seem to me that if you placed two T-55s side-by-side (though why you would stupidly do this begs a question) that an M829A1 would likely just continue on through the second one.

And I have that trouble Front turret armour more than 200 mm plus rear armour plus everything could be hit inside (gun elements). Hull hit? Here ammo and engine room can be obstacles in a straight way to blow up next tank. But as I said, maybe it happened. Just a trick.

Quote[/b] ]That established, it seems reasonable also that since the armour on the Asad Babyl is: a: not *much* thicker (compared to what the M829A1 can penetrate) than that on the T-55, and b: made of poor quality steel in any case, that since it's also been shown that the 120mm DU penetrator can both enter and exit this vehicle also apparently unhampered, that it might at least enter a second one (it doesn't have to exit it to kill it).

So happy Abrams` crew had double look: they meet two Iraqis "made in Iraq" tanks, one behind other, not T72 from import (which were not armoured enough to survive M829 hit, but made from good, steel). Do you know how many Asad Babyl were in Iraqis army compared to bought ones?

Quote[/b] ]Having spent six years in the Army as an infantryman , I think my general knowledge of vehicles and warfare (especially as it concerns the US Army) is greater than an average person, yes. And if you'll note - I never expressed my beliefs. I merely said that people who don't know anything about what they're talking about might want to defer to published accounts.

Do you BELIEVE that thise story happened or do you KNOW i happened? See the difference. If we do not know, we might suppose and believe. I choosed second possibility and you, as I seen in your post, too.

Now I can BELIEVE you that spending six years in mechanized, light and air assault units give a knowledge about this and that, including armour capabilities in duel with every projectile hostile fires... I wish that in Polish army young soldiers were trained so much.

Quote[/b] ]If a book tells me that an M-1 killed two T-72s at one time, I'm going to believe that book before I believe someone who has no solid background. I'm not saying that you are wrong and that the book is right, I'm saying that the book is a lot more credible than you are and the book probably had to undergo a research check before it got published. You, I imagine, don't have a bunch of researchers checking your facts.

This is the other thing. Remember that you are not the only person who read books ;) And not only Clancy, who you do not like.

Another thing: this is a topic about new (now not so new) Sigma-6`s addons. Some people can write something about textures , some about small model incorrectness. Others can doubt in armour/rounds performances. I do not see any reason why the last group cannot discuss with Sigma-6` system. The one other thing - high quality of his addons and fact, that his system would be use in two big modes, makes possible, that it would be very popular. Also among addonmakers.

[miles teg 1]

Look you can argue about this all you want, but at the end of the day, the fact of the matter is that the M1 will whip the ass of the Asad Babyl T-72 and Iraqi T-55s. There is no denying this. It is proven beyond any doubt that the M1 can take hits from these tanks and survive while the opposite is not true.

When it comes to talking about Russian T-72s and later tanks, then I think Sigma has good sources and good knowledge on these issues.

So Przezdzieblo, there is no need for you to argue points that Sigma has ALREADY MADE. I debated this with him and he convinced me with some pretty good facts and sources that I was wrong or at least mistaken on some points.

I believe I can say the same for most of us on here who at first did not believe him.

So please quit bringing up these arguements because there is no need for this unless you just like to argue using opinions.

I also heard these stories about M1's killing two tanks in a row and in shooting through sand berms, but I DID NOT hear these stories from Tom Clancy. These were in newspapers and numerous articles on armored warfare during and shortly after the first Gulf War.

But again, it really doesn't matter.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Guest]

About the "simple roadside bomb" that took out an Abrams tank... take a look at this video of a Palestinian IED that they used to destroy a Merkava (Merk 3 I believe)...

Middle Link: An Engineer Displays his Wares

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Miles Teg, if you were reading carefully, you would see points in which I have doubts. Whipping the as of the Asad Babyl T-72 and Iraqi T-55s was none of this doubts.

As I said before main problem for me was effectiveness of Russian armour pack. As now I know this addon pack is not "compatible" with the newest Sigma-6`s tanks. This case is over.

I argued against high penetration ratio of the newest APFSDS rounds against the newest armour. In this case I do not give any others arguments. Becouse of Sigma-6`s statement, that he would probably not change those values, this case is also closed.

That what you see above are OT posts, not only my. But indeed, it doesn`t matter, now it is discussion about beliefs, quiting bringing up arguments, military experience and Tom Clancy...

[miles teg 1]

Ah ok good. All I can say is that I trust Sigma in that he is aware of all these issues. I think he's done a wonderful job on his tanks overall and I'm happy with them.

Sure things can be modified to make it a bit more realistic, but I think a balance between gameplay and realism is the most important thing since OFP right now can not 100% simulate real life armored combat. So it is not an accurate tank simulation. Instead it is more of an infantry simulation that has vehicles and aircraft added in to make the game funner.

Now we also have artillery with the CoC artillery system.

Hopefully in OFP2 we will have a more realistic system of dammage/armor values for tanks in OFP2.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[da_ofp_man 0]

Quote[/b] ]da_ofp_man, any info about BM44? Lenght, diameter? I know only that it penetrate more than 500 mm RHA at 2000 meters... how much more?

If not much more, it is rather opositor for M829A1, not for round M829E3 - hit=instant death in Sigmas addon - and even not for M829A3 - ~650mm/2000m.

finally i found some infos about BM-44

weight 7,05kg

weight of root 4,85kg

escape velocity 1700 (m/s)

max pressure in barrel 490 (MPa)

and the penetration at 2000 meters is 540 mm RHA and it depends on the barre that is fired from in the newest variants of RAPIRA the penetration is bigger.And i think that this newest Russian ammo could fit better to new Sigmas Russian tanks.

[Sigma-6 29]

Quote[/b] ]Do you know how many Asad Babyl were in Iraqis army compared to bought ones?

As far as I know, the Iraqis only bought 50 examples of the T-72 from Russia. According to the import list I have, these are simply listed as T-72 (though commonly taken to be T-72M1, these are quite likely just the basic version [no T-72M1 series armour expansion], since all the info I have shows they have the development era 125mm gun).

Given that Iraq supposedly had about 700 all told, nearly all of them would be Asad Babyl.

Quote[/b] ]finally i found some infos about BM-44

Are you sure you're looking at projectile stats? BM-44 is the entire assembly (including propellant). . . the BM-44 assembly uses the BM-42 projectile, and that's not the newest round. . . the BM-42M is, and it is capable of at least 100mm more than that at 2000m.

[Przezdzieblo 0]

da_ofp_man, I found another data.

BM32 (DU) - 500/2000

BM42 - 460/2000

BM44 - 500/2000 or 600/2000 (! - this is interesting. The same, short and fat - when compared with Western "needles" - penetrator and so big difference?) The question is what BM42M can do and how does it looks like.

Sigma-6, what do you mean by entire assembly? 3WBM17 has two "pieces".

Another thing: only 50 from Russia and no more? Strange, "my" S. Zaloga "tells me" that the most of Iraqis panzerwaffe where Poland, Czechoslovakia and Russia imports. Another, "paper", Polish source gives the same info. Maybe there were some new reseraches...

[da_ofp_man 0]

Quote[/b] ]Do you know how many Asad Babyl were in Iraqis army compared to bought ones?

As far as I know, the Iraqis only bought 50 examples of the T-72 from Russia. According to the import list I have, these are simply listed as T-72 (though commonly taken to be T-72M1, these are quite likely just the basic version [no T-72M1 series armour expansion], since all the info I have shows they have the development era 125mm gun).

Given that Iraq supposedly had about 700 all told, nearly all of them would be Asad Babyl.

Quote[/b] ]finally i found some infos about BM-44

Are you sure you're looking at projectile stats? BM-44 is the entire assembly (including propellant). . . the BM-44 assembly uses the BM-42 projectile, and that's not the newest round. . . the BM-42M is, and it is capable of at least 100mm more than that at 2000m.

Well i know  about similaritys of BM-42 and BM-44. The BM-44 was built for the T-64,-70,-80,-90 tanks family so it must had used some solution from BM-42 because its qualified by the size of the auto-loader in those tanks. And also i sad that the performance of that ammo is higly depends of witch barrel  is it fired so in the newest t-90 with 2A46M-4 barrel this ammo could have 600\2000meters penetration as you say Przezdzieblo.  

And about the t-72 of Iraq it is formaly now that the Iraq imported a lot t-72 from Warsaw pact countries because ther  industry was charged with other projects so thats way they imported so much tanks.

And one more thing Sigma in the new tank pack for RHS what ammo is going to be the killer of tanks are you going to this role apply 9M119M??because now in yours t-90 t-80 packs this ATGM has to littel "fire power"

[Sigma-6 29]

-My mistake. . . I was confused by the question. You asked 'how many they imported', not 'how many from Russia.'

50 from Russia specifically. Having looked again, Asad Babyl figures as +/- 100 tanks out of +/- 800. 50 are T-72 (basic T-72) from Russia definitely, and the others are other inferior (to T-72M1) European imports; T-72 or T-72M. In any case, on paper, the Asad Babyl would *appear* (it's the Iraqi attempt at the T-72M1, so I say 'appear', with full understanding of Iraq's debatable competency in armour production) to be the superior version in Iraqi service.

Quote[/b] ]3WBM17 has two "pieces".

Yes. Projectile and propellant.

There seems to be some confusion here. . . your numbers for these Russian penetrators seem way too low to me for 2000m. . . where are you getting them?

-The barrel-launched missiles have been entirely remodelled. Not only are the more powerful, but they have their own model and textures.

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Sigma-6, those data is from "Nowa Technika Wojskowa" [New Military, erm, Technology?], article about modern tank ammo; and A. Wisniewski, W. Zurowski, "Amunicja i pancerze" (Ammunition and armours),  Radom 2001. This first author is constuctor of Polish ERA and ceramic armour.

Why "my" numbers for these Russian penetrators seem way too low for you for 2000m? As for "short and fat" (when compared with M829 family) and slower (at 2000 m) this values looks good.

Thank for that data about Asad Babyls

[Sigma-6 29]

Well, can't say that I agree with them, but I'd like to see a chart using those numbers of rates at different ranges with velocities (0 degrees). . .

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Well, that would be difficult because of standard: penetration capability in mm/2000 meters. But there is a hope: high velocity Russian APFSDS has diameter about 44 mm, more than the most of a bit slower but slimer Western rounds (even 27 mm). Decrease of velocity is in case of BM42 125m/s / 1000 m, in case of M829 rounds family 50-65 m/s /1000m (data from "NTW").

So it would look like this:

BM42     velocity   penetration

0 m      1700 m/s        ?

1000 m  ~<1550 m/s   ?

2000 m  ~<1400 m/s   460

If someone think, it can count it, I encourage him to do it ;)

P.S. I got also velocity comparison between old DK13 and BM15 and few counts for 27 mm l/d= >35 rounds.

Interesting page: http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/ - there is that story about "happy" bullet.

[OKO 0]

The thing is, I have no trouble at all believing that a 120mm DU round might go through two T-55s in a row (since they have demonstrated that they have more than enough energy to both enter and exit T-55 tanks apparently unhampered. It would seem to me that if you placed two T-55s side-by-side (though why you would stupidly do this begs a question) that an M829A1 would likely just continue on through the second one.

Well ...

those sabots are supposed to lost 2/3 of their weight, as it is tranformed in very hot plasma (more than million C° degree) when encounter an armor, whatever armor.

--> the biggest armor, the more is tranformed in plasma, usually 2/3 for a modern tank, maybe only 1/2 for a T55

After penetrating a MBT, the sabot will lost his head (dart) 1/2 to 2/3 of his weight and near all his KE.

So I doubt very much there is someting lethal for a tank after the sabot penetrate a previous one ...For an APC or IFV maybe, but not for a MBT.

Anyway I found your work on US tank really great.

I think your older T72/80/90 pack is a (very) little bit too strong for them

--> only the E3 can destroy in one shot a T80UE or a T90, as T80/90 destroy them all (all the US tanks) in one shot.

but I'm sure you will correct this later, and it's not a real issue actually.

For information, we use your tank in a MP dynamic campaign (human on both sides, I think I told you about it earlier) with the FDF mod and ADATS+2S6 from DKMM

This give us, I think, the most realistic theatre around with OFP.

So thanks a lot for your job Sigma ... without you we couldn't have "real" MBT.

Your addons gonna be used a lot there  

[Sigma-6 29]

Quote[/b] ]So I doubt very much there is someting lethal for a tank after the sabot penetrate a previous one ...For an APC or IFV maybe, but not for a MBT.

I beg to differ. . . I think you would be surprised to see how much of even a steel penetrator stays intact after an impact.

[SILESIAN 0]

My textures contribution in this project :

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Gimme, gimme

[SILESIAN 0]

Gimme, gimme

soon

[Nathanz 0]

Looking VERY nice silesian, Keep up the good work 8)

[Sigma-6 29]

That's the old BIS model. . .

wouldn't it make more sense to retexture the new ones? I just applied Marfy's to it. . . I didn't do any texturing of my own except the treads. . .

[SILESIAN 0]

These text. are that same good for old and new model.

[stgn 39]

These text. are that same good for old and new model.

will this mean that the tanks wohnt be black under the turret?

STGN

[Sigma-6 29]

Only if he's going to apply his textures to the new models. . . there are, after all, about ten of them.

[stgn 39]

Only if he's going to apply his textures to the new models. . . there are, after all, about ten of them.

He would have to get them from you to retexture them right.

Texturing anit that hard since its only the bottom of turret that has to be textured. So when the first is textured he could just keep the texture in place and then load the models one after one and bagground map. but you problery know that.

STGN