она подлетит, потом раскроется парашют и она плавно риземлится

так вы в дальнейшем и пишите, что лично ВАМ чего-то в ЧК не хватает и, что у вас очко крепкое, а не за всех остальных, ато они может и рады бы...

а в войсках продолжают пользовать обычные штатные БМП и БТРы... ну и бронировынные газельки. тем не менее МО что-то не делает никаких оргвыводов.

да ладно, немцы там воевали аж жуть  порядок прямо таки навели 
сколько там немцев на минах подорвалось? если 3/4 погибших - несчастны случаи и автомобильные аварии...

что именно появилось?

А о "Пуме" говорят спаренний пулмет слабенкий - 5,56 мм.

а можно все пукты подробно расписать ?

and you can paint all the items in detail?
1)--
2)--
3)--
etc

http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=35008

Interesting discussion, especially fragments about Leopard 1 protection.

I will try

About more interesting - test:

1) Germany tested they DM-12 against erly Leo2 armour.
Normally DM-12 can penetrate 750-800mm RHA. On this "special" armour it can penetrate only <450mm deep.
This info I have fom friend for army. First I thought -fake, but now I think that is true.
2) After German unification they tested ex DDR tanks and ammo. Acording polish military press/book publishing - 3BM15 and 3BM22 was not able to penettated erly Leo2A4(2A3) turret armor even on very close distanse. The same HEAT (3BK18?). Of course this ammo is not modern.
It's not suprising but for that we know that Leo2A3 and erly 2A4 should have more then 550mm vs HEAT (SC) and about 400-450mm vs AFSDS (for less then 500m range how is proper penetration value for 3BM22??)
3) acording to polish military press about Leopard2A4:

Source: Andrzej Kiński, "Jadą leopardy...", Nowa Technika Wojskowa, marzec 2002,s.11

ressume:
-in 80. Leo2 frontal turret armour (+30.from the longitudinal axis) was tottaly immune against 125mm HEAT     
- this armour can be perforated by Soviet APFSDS with TUNGSTEN rod from less then 1000m
- Leo2's 120mm APFSDS can perforated Leo2 frontal armour from 1-1,5km. 

Well as I know (from test) Leo2A3-A4(erly) is tottaly immune against 3BM15 3BM22 and 3BM18HEAT(?) even on less then 500m...
So propably this part is about: 3BM26 or 3BM42 (tungsten rod).  German DM-33A1 for 2000m have 470mm RHA, for 1000m should have about 530-550mm RHA.
How about BM42? According to this: 3BM42 -P0:580 P2500:460 for less then 1000m it should be simmilar value (540?).
Again: Leo2A3(erlyA4) turret armour can withstand smth. with about    500mm RHA +  penetration. 

4. In Poland there was test PT-91 125mm ammo vs Leo2A4 and Leo2A4 120mm ammo vs. PT-91. As I know - the resultat was like in 2).   

It's all about tests.

About this:
3. ratio Leo2A4 LOS and armour generation to nex Sovier/Russian AT weapons and it's penetration capabilities

As I remember it was posted here by You and it was translated.

About this:
"1. knowledge of the armor layer in erly 80. (of course armour in leo2 is not Burlinghton, but smth.simillar) "

It's big big thema.
In very very short -
1) erly burlinghton was 3x better against SC (HEAT) then RHA block with the same weight(mass).
2) Germans rejected Burlinhton becouse it was no better against KE (APFSDS) then RHA monoblock, and they made their own solution - simmiliar to the Burnghton but better against KE. 
3) Germans solutions:

Resumee:
- extreme and middle layers made of steel armor
- between them are ceramic elements embedded in packets of light alloys + one layer polymer in shape like honeycomb

rest later -if Admins allow to still use english

Hmmm, as far as I know, US M830 HEAT was estimated to penetrate ~600-650mm RHA, M830 is just DM12 with different fuze and some other minor modifications, so I think both should penetrate the same amount of RHA.

However the general conclusion that it will be more difficult to them to penetrate the same level of composite armor is probably true. One man, Pole but he was in Gulf War in US Army as a tank crew member said that he saw M1A1 or M1A1HA (it is uncertain) hit in turret front by AGM-114, armor was not perforated but only penetrated to the half or more than half of it's thickness.

So it might be true that HEAT have problems to penetrate same levels of composite armor and RHA.

есть отчет по обстрелу М1А1HA в 89 году емнип, там танк пробили ПТУР как раз вроде и был AGM-114, было так же отмечено частичное пробитие 105мм ОБПС XM900

The health hazards of depleted uranium munitions ANNEXE C Assessments of depleted uranium intakes from use of depleted uranium on the battlefield M R Bailey (NRPB), J Marriage (AWE), J Shaw (AWE) and C Walsh (NRPB)

The seven tests used the following rounds: 120-mm APFSDS KE (kinetic energy)-Tungsten; 120-mm Heat-MP; 100-mm AP-C steel rod; anti-tank mine; 120-mm APFSDS KE DU (test 5A); 120-mm APFSDS KE-Tungsten (test 5B); and ATGM equivalent (test 6B)…

but after several tests heavy armour material was blown out more than 76 metres…
Air sampling results for test #7, which caused a fire that consumed the vehicle,…
Researchers also sampled interior air during the three last impact tests, when breakthrough into the crew compartment occurred (see annexe C, section C2.2).
during the test was also observed partial penetration by 105mm APDSFS XM900, frontal armor was pierced by ATGM (AGM-114 probably)

But these tests do not say anything where, at what angle armor was pierced. From what I understand from this test, they were just shooting to armor until it completely break up in to pieces. Also it do not say what armor part was pierced, frontal, side?

The whole point of these tests were to messure DU dust outside and inside vehicle, not the offered level of protection.

Also Wiedzmin remember that this maybe was prototype, not the final configuration that maybe offered higher protection. If this armor would be a failure, Americans would just not field it on tanks and they would seek alternative.

But from these tests results we cant say anything about armor protection or where armor was hit (front, side, hull, turret).

Отредактировано Damian (2011-11-05 17:50:59)

Nobody knows where armor was hit, maybe it was test of all sides, so it could be shot in frontal armor, but maybe also in side armor? Who knows, not to mention that such documents are properly censored before released for public, it can be also manipulation so the potential enemy will think that the armor is weaker than in reality. Everything is possible and Americans are far from realising so important informations to public without proper... treatment.

First M1A1HA's were fielded in 1988, maybe date is about year when this document was ready and realeased for TACOM authorities, Senate, goverment etc.

In fact any conclusions about M1A1HA protection formed on this document are useless, because there are no specific informations, only laconic words.

@Wiedźmin

Yes, I know about steel HB scale, but:

1. Stefan site:

2. Paweł Przeździecki, "Czołg podstawowy Merkawa Mk 4 cz.2, Nowa Technika Wojskowa, 5/2011, s.27 (this picture with article) 
Again:
German DM12, American M830 have penetration values beetwen 700-800mm RHA

3. Polish test DM-12 - more then 750mm RHA

4. According to most of sources HEAT (SC) san perforate about 6-7x it's diamiter.
Even stupid wikipedia:

If You don't belive - just find diamiter AT weapons and its penetration dates...

5.  about dual and triple SC werhead (HEAT) - think: this additional SC is for bigger penetration value or for neutralize ERA casette/ NERA pannels? Or inner armour layers

For me is obvious thet pure Dm-12HEAT can penetrate more then 700mm normal RHA plate - more then 3 independent sources prove that.

Отредактировано militarysta (2011-11-05 18:39:05)

там может быть написана максимально возможная пробиваемость, с минимальным заброневым эффектом, что скорее всего и сделано

there may be written to be penetrated by the maximum possible, with minimal behind armor effect  that probably will

ну в таком случае советские должны пробивать 750-875мм но из серийных есть только 550 и 650, поэтому западные оценки для 120мм БКС мне кажутся сильно завышенными

Well in that case must penetrate the Soviet 750-875mm, but production is only 550 and 650, so the estimates for the Western 120mm HEAT seem to me greatly exaggerated

thick-walled 125mm HEAT penetrate 550-650mm, thin-walled 125mm ATGM punches 750-850mm, i  do not believe that  thick-walled 120mm HEAT can penetrate 700-800

толстостенный 125мм БКС бьет 550-650, тонкостнный ТУР 750-850, не верню что толстостенный 120мм БКС будет бить так же как ТУР, хотя с вопросами веры это в храм да, у кого нибудь из русскоязычных пользователй есть информация по западным 120мм БКС ?

[реклама вместо картинки]

DU in side armor ? if it was in side armor, with 360mm thick no need in ERA, because old grenades for RPG-7 can't penetrate

ОУ в бортовой броне  ? при 360мм габарите там бы тогда ДЗ была не нужна, старые поганки бы ее не пробивали.

sorry did not understand the translation