But better than PG-7L for example. And it can be good enough to penetrate side turret with at 90 degrees from turret longitudinal axis. Besides there were some informations that insurgents had also M136 taken from somewhere. IMHO HEAT warhead with RHA penetration capability of ~500-550mm can perforate side turret armor at 90 degrees from turret longitudinal axis.

Because it was simpler, cheaper and faster than own R&D program for 120mm HEAT for smoothbore gun?

Wiedzmin знанием английского щеголяет

Косяки лечатся гугл переводчиком.

Depends, maybe M1A1HA's did not have it in turret side armor but later variants had, but maybe not, who knows, either way it is a + for M1, if there is not DU in turret sides, then most of the weight increase comes from reinforced frontal armor, if there is in turret sides, then side protection was increased, if not in HA, then in some more advanced variant.

For example this document:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/wsh2011/16.pdf

Says about side armor upgrades, so maybe the lates variants have DU in turret sides.

Everything is possible.

Unfortunetly do not have them, do You know where I can get them?

Отредактировано Damian (2011-11-06 02:17:44)

Well, it seems that it will take long time before I get them.

But still, this is only a drawing, and still, if there was not DU in side turret and even front hull armor, the latest document I provided mentions armor upgrades in the latest variants, this can mean (but not nececary of course) that DU was installed finally. Besides this I heard that some vehicles had non standard armor configuration, for example some of them had upgraded frontal hull armor, some not (in the 1980's and late 1990's to early XXI century period), however as latests informations suggest, all effort is made to standarize everything.

I can be wrong, but who knows.

Contrary, it increased by several tons, M1A1HA weight is ~59,000-60,000kg, M1A1SA weight is ~63,100kg, same for M1A2SEP.

first: Indeed - 127mm for BASICK TOW - my mistake...

second: 
monography about TOW:

[реклама вместо картинки]

[реклама вместо картинки]

BASIC TOW:
127mm diameter - >600mm RHA (single SC 4,8x diameter)

ITOW:
127mm diameter: ~800mm RHA (single SC advanced in material and shape - 6,3 diameter)

TOW-2:
149mm diameter: 1100mm RHA (single advanced 149mm SC ~ 7,4 diameter) 

First:
I don't get it - where is problem with dates? Officially: HOT with 136mm diameter SC have ~800mm RHA (diameter 5,8 - 1976), ITOW with 127mm diameter but advanced in material and shape have (for single SC!) ~800mm RHA (6,3 diameter) in 1981.  It's simillar. From midlle 1970. on west was technology which can achieve penetration value like diameter x ~6-6,3 at least. 

Second:
I don't understand talking: "Dm-12 can't achive ~700-800mm RHA becouse Soviet HEAT BK haven't that diameter-penetration ratio". It's like talking "Kontakt-5 can't bo so good becouse polish ERAWA and Israeli BLAZER can't achive that effectiveness".

Third:

Sources about DM-12 value.
-Stefan Kosh site (http://www.kotsch88.de/m_120_mm.htm)
-Article one:
[реклама вместо картинки]
-Article two:
[реклама вместо картинки]

All of them are talking about more then 700mm RHA penetration for DM-12. I don't even talking about tests in Poland - becouce no one can check it.

To many sources and circumstantial that DM-12 really have this more then 700mm RHA.

ps. I forgot:
HOT (1976) and ITOW (1981) it's for first series, of course developmend and test should be erlier in : 1972-1975 and 1977-1980.

Отредактировано militarysta (2011-11-07 17:18:31)

Если ответы на двух языках, то по моему нормально. Интересное обсуждение. Судя по графику на рисунках, в конце 70х по оценкам американцев, их ПТРК били не достаточно  ? Я правильно понял ?

Отредактировано BVV (2011-11-07 18:22:50)

Очень прошу оставить два языка на форуме.  Эти/этот поляки/поляк очень знающие/ий (я думаю, что Damian - это тот же Militarysta).  Damian-a я давно читаю на http://www.militaryphotos.net/ Могу найти интересные дискуссии там.  Данный форум выиграет, если он сможет продолжить писать сюда.  Уверен, его перевод на русский будет непонятен: Гугл польский-русский плохо переводит, поверьте.

английский это вообще латынь современности, инструмент (один из нескольких) межнационального общения цивилизованных людей,  решение вопроса с тем что " в многих странах есть танки".

@Василий Фофанов

I haven't idea on what basis You can wrote:

Becouse all in this doc.(I know it...) have dates and estimateus around late 70. Even on this picture we can see dotted line - for estimates and forecasts not tech.dates!

BTW: declassified in 2004 mean that this document is before 1980... 

So for ITOW it's not a source. It's no more then estimates.

About TOW - no idea, becouse there is no about version or year, and "only" 450mm for 127mm diameter SC is for late 50. level (about 3,5), even RPG rounds for 1960-1970 have better ratio.

Article about Merkawa is from 2011... Stefan Site about 120mm round is not from "1990s. literature".  Article about TOW is from 2000 -based on offcial BGM advertising materials.

Yes, yes... Jewish propaganda (cooperation with IMI during Making Merkawa IV article), Germans propaganda (?) and US Propaganda (TOW article based on materials from manufacturer), all is propaganda, but one article one Genneral (in principle, cross-sectional synthesis, not analysis) is true becouse it was branded as "CIA". And after 25yers prolongation it was declassified.

Sorry I don't get it. Especially there is nothing about ITOW (only dotted line - for vague estimates) and for TOW (which?) - 127 diameter and  450mm RHA is worse then for old chinesee RPG-7 PG-7VM round (70mm diameter and more then 300mm RHA).

If three diffrent article + Stefan site is not enought it will be problem. But of course it's "western propaganda" - OK, it's Yours point of view, my is diffrent. For now I end of my tea.

ps.
I'll ask friends for DM-12 instructions, or photos from test - but I can't promise that I'll get it -but propably it will be "polish propaganda".