Jump to content


Photo

Weird And Wonderful Afv's


  • Please log in to reply
2269 replies to this topic

#2221 Tim the Tank Nut

Tim the Tank Nut

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,879 posts

Posted 12 July 2019 - 1040 AM

those were good machines

the M5 HST is a lot of fun to drive and will go anyplace. 


  • 0

#2222 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,042 posts

Posted 12 July 2019 - 1059 AM

M24s were also well liked with good mobility and served until the late 1970s with JGSDF. Japan got 375 of them in 1952 which was before the SDF was even established (1954).
  • 0

#2223 Mr King

Mr King

    Fat Body

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,418 posts

Posted 18 July 2019 - 1237 PM

I think this may have been posted before, can't remember 

 

ObHGTed.jpg​


  • 0

#2224 Stefan Kotsch

Stefan Kotsch

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 18 July 2019 - 1326 PM

A Swiss project for a Tank destroyer 105 mm? How the German Kanonenjagdpanzer 90 mm?


  • 0

#2225 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,479 posts

Posted 18 July 2019 - 1414 PM

A Swiss project for a Tank destroyer 105 mm? How the German Kanonenjagdpanzer 90 mm?

 

Jagdpanzer Taifun. A prototype from Switzerland. End of seventies iirc.


  • 0

#2226 Mr King

Mr King

    Fat Body

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,418 posts

Posted 20 July 2019 - 1550 PM

hnn6o4a4mbb31.jpg​


  • 0

#2227 Mikel2

Mikel2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,519 posts

Posted 20 July 2019 - 1733 PM

400x400_1438206256230-adga.jpg

 

Training vehicle?


  • 0

#2228 Stefan Kotsch

Stefan Kotsch

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 21 July 2019 - 0248 AM

There's a lot of soil on the hull. Maybe that was a tank turret firing position?


Edited by Stefan Kotsch, 21 July 2019 - 0248 AM.

  • 0

#2229 Coldsteel

Coldsteel

    Romanes eunt domus

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,479 posts

Posted 21 July 2019 - 0512 AM

I believe similar pictures have been posted online before, I think they were said to be turreted ATG bunker thingies?


  • 0

#2230 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,700 posts

Posted 21 July 2019 - 0525 AM

Yes, bunkers that got upgunned with T-62 turrets in the '80s  when Bulgaria retired T-62s.


  • 0

#2231 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,005 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 0505 AM

Check out this monstrosity:

5980870235_c97e5e7d2e_b.jpg

5844647008_d659ae2709_b.jpg


Edited by KV7, 15 August 2019 - 0507 AM.

  • 0

#2232 Inhapi

Inhapi

    Wielder of the Unicorn Hat

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 608 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 0955 AM

love it. Any pentration data available after all these years from that 183 mm gun ?


  • 0

#2233 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,005 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1042 AM

love it. Any pentration data available after all these years from that 183 mm gun ?

I don't think you can get a sensible number, as 'penetration' means breaking the armor, which will depend on the distance to welds etc.

Apparently testing against tank targets produced 2/2 effective kills (one turret torn off; one mantlet shattered and turret made inoperable).

Edit - here we go:

'The 183mm was tested in live fire trials against a Centurion and a Conqueror. In 2 shots, the 183 blew the turret clean off the Centurion, and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half.'

http://www.tanks-enc...heavy-gun-tank/


Edited by KV7, 15 August 2019 - 1047 AM.

  • 0

#2234 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,340 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1322 PM

Different kind of Panzer, from Chernobyl. What was the purpose of this configuration? Source gallery

 

ChernobylD1-0215-1010x671.jpg


  • 0

#2235 Stefan Kotsch

Stefan Kotsch

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1358 PM

BTS-2 ARCV i think.

 

Originally, this "tower" tube is intended for the escape of the crew during underwater driving. And with an ARCV, the commander can lead the vehicle with view over the waterline. But what was the purpose in Chernobyl?  No idea.

 

 

BTW.:

The tube could also be built on T-55/72 instead of the commander's cuppola. She was then inofficial called "panic tube".


Edited by Stefan Kotsch, 15 August 2019 - 1404 PM.

  • 0

#2236 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,479 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1826 PM

BTS-2 ARCV i think.
 
Originally, this "tower" tube is intended for the escape of the crew during underwater driving. And with an ARCV, the commander can lead the vehicle with view over the waterline. But what was the purpose in Chernobyl?  No idea.

 
didn't hey build ponton bridges for better access to the area? Could be that it was used at river crossings to recover sunk vehicles? (or at least move thenm out of the way to not stop operations)
 

BTW.:
The tube could also be built on T-55/72 instead of the commander's cuppola. She was then inofficial called "panic tube".

 
Like the tubes on Leopards 1 and 2 for deep fording. Certainly more comforting for the crews than the snorkels used on T-xy tanks otherwise.


  • 0

#2237 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,442 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 2007 PM

 

love it. Any pentration data available after all these years from that 183 mm gun ?

I don't think you can get a sensible number, as 'penetration' means breaking the armor, which will depend on the distance to welds etc.

Apparently testing against tank targets produced 2/2 effective kills (one turret torn off; one mantlet shattered and turret made inoperable).

Edit - here we go:

'The 183mm was tested in live fire trials against a Centurion and a Conqueror. In 2 shots, the 183 blew the turret clean off the Centurion, and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half.'

http://www.tanks-enc...heavy-gun-tank/

 

Sounds like a sledgehammer compared to an icepick.


  • 0

#2238 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,005 posts

Posted 16 August 2019 - 0046 AM

 

 

love it. Any pentration data available after all these years from that 183 mm gun ?

I don't think you can get a sensible number, as 'penetration' means breaking the armor, which will depend on the distance to welds etc.

Apparently testing against tank targets produced 2/2 effective kills (one turret torn off; one mantlet shattered and turret made inoperable).

Edit - here we go:

'The 183mm was tested in live fire trials against a Centurion and a Conqueror. In 2 shots, the 183 blew the turret clean off the Centurion, and split the mantlet of the Conqueror in half.'

http://www.tanks-enc...heavy-gun-tank/

 

Sounds like a sledgehammer compared to an icepick.

 

I think this is nicer though:

Object_120_(SU-152_Taran).jpg


  • 0

#2239 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,005 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0347 AM

296d9212a322f4c9495836f676d348dc.jpg


  • 0

#2240 Stefan Kotsch

Stefan Kotsch

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0456 AM

 

BTS-2 ARCV i think.
 
Originally, this "tower" tube is intended for the escape of the crew during underwater driving. And with an ARCV, the commander can lead the vehicle with view over the waterline. But what was the purpose in Chernobyl?  No idea.

 
...  Could be that it was used at river crossings to recover sunk vehicles? (or at least move thenm out of the way to not stop operations)

 

That is the point. So I had that in mind.

 

Like the tubes on Leopards 1 and 2 for deep fording. Certainly more comforting for the crews than the snorkels used on T-xy tanks otherwise.

The advantage of the snorkel is, that it's available on every tank. That makes things easier when needed and at any time.

 

(Real underwater driving is not for scaredy-eyed people. :) )


  • 0