T-80 and T-84 Main Battle Tanks Information pool

[Dazzler]

I didn't agree.Because in a t-90 vs khalid duel,none will enjoy the advantages enjoyed by abrams over monkey t-72s.In such a close contest turret geometry is very useful advantage.

Geometry is among a hundered factors but the lack of an efficient ammo is the most important factor. A Naiza fired from AZ can reath havoc on Arjun or T-90. Same applies for UD and AK. You cant fight a battle without bullets

 

[Armstrong]

@Dazzler - How would you rate the Al-Khalid, the Ak-1 & the purported Ak-2 when compared with the T-80 UD, the T-84 Oplot & the T-90S ?

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Geometry is among a hundered factors but the lack of an efficient ammo is the most important factor. A Naiza fired from AZ can reath havoc on Arjun or T-90. Same applies for UD and AK. You cant fight a battle without bullets

Naiza can't even penetrate either t-90 or arjun frontal armour even without ERA.U would need around 700 mm penetration to do that.
As for the sides just about any ammo can do that.
And oh,we have bullets.Thanks for posting the arjun ammo round pic.Couldn't find it myself.
And turret geometry is quite a bit more important than 'one of hundred factors',when neither side can penetrate others frontal armour,the one with more weakspots is much more vulnerable.

 

[Dazzler]

@Dazzler - How would you rate the Al-Khalid, the Ak-1 & the purported Ak-2 when compared with the T-80 UD, the T-84 Oplot & the T-90S ?

In armour, FCS, battlefield situational awareness and firepower, AK (not AK-1) is twice as good as T-80UD.

The new composite armour tested on AK-1 is known to be astoundingly good, there is no one readiy to talk on it. All i know is that some new R&D went solely for this armour which proved its worth against 120/ 125 mm ammo.

Before you question how they tested 120 mm ammo? Answer is; HIT makes guns from 105 to 203 calibres and fourth prototype AK had the 120 mm gun

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

In armour, FCS, battlefield situational awareness and firepower, AK (not AK-1) is twice as good as T-80UD.

The new composite armour tested on AK-1 is known to be astoundingly good, there is no one readiy to talk on it. All i know is that some new R&D went solely for this armour which proved its worth against 120/ 125 mm ammo.

Before you question how they tested 120 mm ammo? Answer is; HIT makes guns from 105 to 203 calibres and fourth prototype AK had the 120 mm gun

Was this 120 mm gun a new one or tech sharing with some country?Also will this gun go into AK-2?

 

[Dazzler]

Naiza can't even penetrate either t-90 or arjun frontal armour even without ERA.U would need around 700 mm penetration to do that.
As for the sides just about any ammo can do that.
And oh,we have bullets.Thanks for posting the arjun ammo round pic.Couldn't find it myself.
And turret geometry is quite a bit more important than 'one of hundred factors',when neither side can penetrate others frontal armour,the one with more weakspots is much more vulnerable.

I suggest you dont go there again

First you need to understand that a DU is NOT tungsten and has more penetration values than advertised i.e. a 550 mm DU may penetrate a 570-80 mm armour because DU molten jet in excess of 2000 Deg Centigrade digs through the armour.

Ragarding the T-90S armour estimates.. Fofanov again

T-90 turret projection without Kontakt-5 could thus be 38cm x 0.92 + 43.5cm x 0.56 = 59cm KE (the free edge effect will reduce this further to 0.95 x 59cm or 56cm KE) and 38cm + 43.5cm x 0.79 = 72cm HEAT.

Kontakt-5 coverage seems to be about 50%.

Upper front turret is 5cm cast plus 5cm STEF at ~77-78°.

Glacis is 235mm thick with probably 105mm STEF and 30mm hard steel. The TE of STEF is 0.41 KE and 0.55 HEAT and the TE of hard steel is 1.34 vs KE & 1.3 vs HEAT. Thus the glacis should offer [3 x 1.34 + 10.5 x 0.41 + 11] / 0.38 =~51cm KE and [3 x 1.3 + 10.5 x 0.55 + 11] / 0.38= ~ 54cm HEAT armor. With Kontakt-5 the KE value is up 15-20cm KE and 40-50cm HEAT thus about 69±2cm KE and ~99±4cm HEAT.

Lower hull is 8-10cm at 64° = LOS thickness of 0.438 or 17-23cm KE and HEAT armor.

so T-90S is still vulnerable against Naiza

Was this 120 mm gun a new one or tech sharing with some country?Also will this gun go into AK-2?

indigenously built by HIT under western pattern aka Rheinmetall 120 mm, how they got the know how, no idea. Surprisingly China has much more expertise in 120 mm smoothbore gun and one of the readings mentioned the German connection!

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

I suggest you dont go there again

First you need to understand that a DU is NOT tungsten and has more penetration values than advertised i.e. a 550 mm DU may penetrate a 570-80 mm armour because DU molten jet in excess of 2000 Deg Centigrade digs through the armour.

Ragarding the T-90S armour estimates.. Fofanov again




so T-90S is still vulnerable against Naiza



indigenously built by HIT under western pattern aka Rheinmetall 120 mm, how they got the know how, no idea. Surprisingly China has much more expertise in 120 mm smoothbore gun and one of the readings mentioned the German connection!

1.Better not to repeat the same flawed arguments from ur side,But is see ur doing exactly that.First increasing penetration values at whim.
Second,U did the same thing again by taking t-72b armour estimate with cast turret from 1980s.
In case u are blind,IA t-90 uses new welded turret with 30-50% greater armour rating and more composites.
Second IA t-90 uses much heavier kanchan composites,which is why there is large weight difference between t-90A AND T-90M/S BHISMA.
And third in trials even without ERA IA t-90 withstood latest ukrainian rounds as well as KEW-A2 120 mm rounds with close to 650-700 mm penetration.So naiza is a baby doll to it.
Lastly thanks for info on the gun.

 

[SQ8]

1.Better not to repeat the same flawed arguments from ur side,But is see ur doing exactly that.First increasing penetration values at whim.
Second,U did the same thing again by taking t-72b armour estimate with cast turret from 1980s.
In case u are blind,IA t-90 uses new welded turret with 30-50% greater armour rating and more composites.
Second IA t-90 uses much heavier kanchan composites,which is why there is large weight difference between t-90A AND T-90M/S BHISMA.
And third in trials even without ERA IA t-90 withstood latest ukrainian rounds as well as KEW-A2 120 mm rounds with close to 650-700 mm penetration.So naiza is a baby doll to it.
Lastly thanks for info on the gun.

I think the biggest issue is actually differentiating on how much the T-90 has changed from the T-72.
After all, essentially the T-72(no matter how well improved) is still the cheapo end tank They were built for numbers to replace the horrible T-64. Oddly, India was given the M(monkey model) of the T-72 instead of the regular B variant..which essentially puts the Ajeya Mk2 no better.

Now the T-90 taken on the T-80(possibly the deadliest tank for a while) traits and the following link might show its status in terms of armor.
T-80U and T-90 Trials 20.10.99

 

[Armstrong]

Now the T-90 taken on the T-80(possibly the deadliest tank for a while) traits and the following link might show its status in terms of armor.
T-80U and T-90 Trials 20.10.99

That does not make for a very good reading !

 

[SQ8]

That does not make for a very good reading !

Not very detailed, but it does show pictorial proof for the results.
It must also be said that the T-90 was developed on the lessons from the T-80.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

I think the biggest issue is actually differentiating on how much the T-90 has changed from the T-72.
After all, essentially the T-72(no matter how well improved) is still the cheapo end tank They were built for numbers to replace the horrible T-64. Oddly, India was given the M(monkey model) of the T-72 instead of the regular B variant..which essentially puts the Ajeya Mk2 no better.

Now the T-90 taken on the T-80(possibly the deadliest tank for a while) traits and the following link might show its status in terms of armor.
T-80U and T-90 Trials 20.10.99

Yes that was the welded armour variant tested and it performed very well.The original 310 exported to india and now in service are this tank variant.The next 330 and the now being license built 347 plus more are modified versions over this variant.
The variant dazzler keeps talking about is t-72b not t-90s which was a cast armour variant and also had much less composite armour and .IA never had this design and only earliest russian t-90 were of this type when t-90 was just a new name for attracting export.

As for t-72s u are spot on.IA was sold monkey models t-72Ms.They were limited upgraded/produced to t-72M1 standard during 90s it seems.CIA is the final attempt to modernize these tanks.

 

[Dazzler]

@AUSTERLITZ

lets take the discussion to this thread if you want to discuss IA in here please!!


http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-army/22400-pa-tanks-comparison-contempory-tanks-50.html
@Armstrong

forget DUs and APFSDSs, all you need is a good old RPG-29

 

[Shiji]

Why is that where ever there is a thread about any equipment that Pakistan has people have to start comparing it with other stuff. For Example people here comparing the AK with the Arjun or T90. Well once and for all make it clear shall we?

Arjun

—General Kapoor says Indian army does not posses ability to fight armoured combat in night
—Army Chief shameful admission makes Defence Minister Antony chew his buts
—India’s numerical tank supremacy over Pakistan eliminated by Armoured Corps’ night blindness
—India Arjun Tank eats dust while Pakistan Al-Khalid MBT remains a success story
—India’s missile systems remain shady as nation celebrates 62nd Army Day
Source

T-72
Well let's face it the T-72 is not that good of a tank considering it's performance in Iran-Iraq, Georgia and Ongoing Syria.
As you can see the bottom of the T-72 is hidden thus meaning that the RPG hits the turret which is directly facing the camera. And since that is the strongest point of the armour so we are forced to presume that the frontal turret armour isn't that strong enough to take a direct hit from an RPG-7.
[video]www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwvlYcFpiys[/video]

T-90
Well that is a really impressive and sexy piece of machinery! What turns me on about the T90 is Sthora-I active protection system. It really works! Check the following video till the end to be amazed!

 

[Armstrong]

Not very detailed, but it does show pictorial proof for the results.
It must also be said that the T-90 was developed on the lessons from the T-80.

What I meant was that it doesn't make for a very good read from the Pakistani perspective in that the T-80 didn't fare as well as the T-90 & we're the ones operating the T-80s !

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Why is that were ever there is a thread about any equipment that Pakistan has people have to start comparing it with other stuff. For Example people here comparing the AK with the Arjun or T90. Well once and for all make it clear shall we?

Arjun



T-72
Well let's face it the T-72 is not that good of a tank considering it's performance in Iran-Iraq, Georgia and Ongoing Syria.
As you can see the bottom of the T-72 is hidden thus meaning that the RPG hits the turret which is directly facing the camera. And since that is the strongest point of the armour so we are forced to presume that the frontal turret armour isn't that strong enough to take a direct hit from an RPG-7.
[video]www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwvlYcFpiys[/video]

The T-90, well that is a really impressive and sexy piece of machinery! What turns me on about the T90 is Sthora-I active protection system. It really works! Check the following video till the end to be amazed!

For arjun and night blindness old news.disagreed.
Agreed t-72 is nothing special.
Agreed these always end up in measuring contests.

What I meant was that it doesn't make for a very good read from the Pakistani perspective in that the T-80 didn't fare as well as the T-90 & we're the ones operating the T-80s !

Pakistani t-80 has superior turret than the t-80 used in these trials,so don't get urself up.Though IA t-90s too have different turret than the one tested here except the first batch of 310.Its a good reference source though.