Jump to content


Photo

Good Old Fashioned Tank P*rn


  • Please log in to reply
4139 replies to this topic

#4121 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,784 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 0820 AM

 

 

 

 

The other option is penetration and then explosion of HE rounds stored against the plate that is destroyed. Is there a ready rack there ?

 

 There was an ammo rack behind that armour plate. https://youtu.be/6ZFPB0spgOw?t=438

 

Ok, I am calling this case closed.

 

That took a while. Ought to have been first choice.

 

Others were speculating about large bore AP or APHE being responsible for the first image. They were at least plausible explanations.

 

 

 

Yes, but we often forget the myriad ways to destroy a tank, leaving much the same debris afterwards. Too often we get twitterpated by notions of high velocity penetration, when it could also be a mortar round taken down a hatchway, setting off a round in the loader's hand. There is also the likelihood of a surviving crew walking away, leaving a fire to consume and set off munitions.


  • 0

#4122 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,583 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 0828 AM

 

Goes back to the middle ages, when the invention of the crossbow allowed the lowliest serf with one in his hands, to put down the noblest armored knight in the land and perhaps terminate a great European bloodline.

 

Then as now it must not be tolerated..... See Pope Innocent II in 1139 A.D.:

 

We prohibit under anathema that murderous art of crossbowmen and archers, which is hateful to God, to be employed against Christians and Catholics from now on. 

 

 

The fate of Richard the Lionheart, brought down by a lowly cook with a crossbow springs to mind.

 

There is a story that the Churchill symbol of V for victory, comes from an affectation by the English and Welsh longbowmen to let their opponents know they still had their draw fingers. It was a tendency of the French, when capturing to cut them off so they would be unable to ply their trade in future.

 

Yeah, its nothing really very new I guess.


  • 0

#4123 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,784 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 0853 AM

 

 

Goes back to the middle ages, when the invention of the crossbow allowed the lowliest serf with one in his hands, to put down the noblest armored knight in the land and perhaps terminate a great European bloodline.

 

Then as now it must not be tolerated..... See Pope Innocent II in 1139 A.D.:

 

We prohibit under anathema that murderous art of crossbowmen and archers, which is hateful to God, to be employed against Christians and Catholics from now on. 

 

 

The fate of Richard the Lionheart, brought down by a lowly cook with a crossbow springs to mind.

 

There is a story that the Churchill symbol of V for victory, comes from an affectation by the English and Welsh longbowmen to let their opponents know they still had their draw fingers. It was a tendency of the French, when capturing to cut them off so they would be unable to ply their trade in future.

 

Yeah, its nothing really very new I guess.

 

 

 

Yes another Churchill afterthought, only brought out after we actually managed to win! 


  • 0

#4124 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,051 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 0853 AM

 

 

 

 

 

The other option is penetration and then explosion of HE rounds stored against the plate that is destroyed. Is there a ready rack there ?

 

 There was an ammo rack behind that armour plate. https://youtu.be/6ZFPB0spgOw?t=438

 

Ok, I am calling this case closed.

 

That took a while. Ought to have been first choice.

 

Others were speculating about large bore AP or APHE being responsible for the first image. They were at least plausible explanations.

 

 

 

Yes, but we often forget the myriad ways to destroy a tank, leaving much the same debris afterwards. Too often we get twitterpated by notions of high velocity penetration, when it could also be a mortar round taken down a hatchway, setting off a round in the loader's hand. There is also the likelihood of a surviving crew walking away, leaving a fire to consume and set off munitions.

 

In that picture there is a medium caliber entry hole though. And the damage on the other side is less than catastrophic. A simple entry hole would be easily explained, as would a hull totally torn apart. But what looks like an entry hole and large exit hole is at least atypical.

The reason for the atypical damage is the small rounds and thin armor, such that a hole can be blown in the hull armor without the whole hull coming apart, and the lack of a turret, which rules out a pop tart loss.



 


  • 0

#4125 Martin M

Martin M

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,085 posts

Posted 15 October 2019 - 1405 PM

 

 

 

 

 

The other option is penetration and then explosion of HE rounds stored against the plate that is destroyed. Is there a ready rack there ?

 

 There was an ammo rack behind that armour plate. https://youtu.be/6ZFPB0spgOw?t=438

 

Ok, I am calling this case closed.

 

That took a while. Ought to have been first choice.

 

Others were speculating about large bore AP or APHE being responsible for the first image. They were at least plausible explanations.

 

 

 

Yes, but we often forget the myriad ways to destroy a tank, leaving much the same debris afterwards. Too often we get twitterpated by notions of high velocity penetration, when it could also be a mortar round taken down a hatchway, setting off a round in the loader's hand. There is also the likelihood of a surviving crew walking away, leaving a fire to consume and set off munitions.

 

 

 "   There is also the likelihood of a surviving crew walking away, leaving a fire to consume and set off munitions.  "

 

 

This seems be the usual more likely to me, except perhaps for the first photo.


  • 0

#4126 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,507 posts

Posted 18 October 2019 - 1823 PM

 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division conducts gunnery qualifications to certify Abrams Tank crews and maintain readiness in the training area of Fort Hood, Tx. June 23, 2019.

m1a2-10-09-2019.jpg


  • 0

#4127 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,611 posts

Posted 30 October 2019 - 0146 AM


  • 0

#4128 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,462 posts

Posted 12 November 2019 - 1649 PM

Leo2A4 upgrade mockup:

 

UPu2vbT.jpgSRBeyYM.jpgdjUSb0w.jpg

 

 

What is the year of this upgrade?


  • 0

#4129 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,507 posts

Posted 16 November 2019 - 0825 AM

Not a tank, but still rather...exciting... :P

M1128-Mobile-Gun-System-11-15-2019.jpg


  • 0

#4130 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,549 posts

Posted 16 November 2019 - 1237 PM

Not a tank, but still rather...exciting... :P
M1128-Mobile-Gun-System-11-15-2019.jpg

:D

  • 0

#4131 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,784 posts

Posted 16 November 2019 - 1356 PM

The sophistication of the specialty variants of the Stryker are most impressive, especially the mortar carrier. As usual, the problem is, will they fight back and with what?


  • 0

#4132 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,678 posts

Posted 16 November 2019 - 1504 PM

 

Leo2A4 upgrade mockup:

 

UPu2vbT.jpgSRBeyYM.jpgdjUSb0w.jpg

 

 

What is the year of this upgrade?

 

 

This is just a proposal, not being followed through. Modernisation of Leo2A4s in Spanish service will be limited to comunications and optics/fire control.


  • 0

#4133 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,462 posts

Posted 16 November 2019 - 1623 PM

This is just a proposal, not being followed through. Modernisation of Leo2A4s in Spanish service will be limited to comunications and optics/fire control.

 

 

 

Thanks, what was the designation, who made this design of armor?


  • 0

#4134 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,678 posts

Posted 17 November 2019 - 0905 AM

 

This is just a proposal, not being followed through. Modernisation of Leo2A4s in Spanish service will be limited to comunications and optics/fire control.

 

 

 

Thanks, what was the designation, who made this design of armor?

 

 

No clue, most likely Santa Barbara Sistemas, based on the work on the Leopardo 2E


  • 0

#4135 methos

methos

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 905 posts

Posted 17 November 2019 - 1243 PM

The photographs are extremely old and show the Leopard 2A4 with MEXAS, it is a design pre-dating the Leopard 2 Evolution concept from IBD Deisenroth.


  • 0

#4136 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,051 posts

Posted 18 November 2019 - 0107 AM

What are the X shaped things, similar to those seen here as well:

1280px-SPZ_Ulan_turret.jpg

 


Edited by KV7, 18 November 2019 - 0108 AM.

  • 0

#4137 Tim Sielbeck

Tim Sielbeck

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 245 posts

Posted 18 November 2019 - 0156 AM

Snow cleats.


  • 0

#4138 Stefan Kotsch

Stefan Kotsch

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 873 posts

Posted 18 November 2019 - 0346 AM

They are attached to the track instead of rubber pads.  At regular intervals.


  • 0

#4139 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,369 posts

Posted 29 November 2019 - 1820 PM

How to become a Panzer Driver

 


  • 0

#4140 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,369 posts

Posted 03 December 2019 - 1350 PM

How narrow Normandy was

 


  • 0