El Mejor MBT Occidental

[JVV]

Llevo años escuchando, que la supuesta superioridad numerica sovietica, se compensaria con la superioridad tecnologica ocidental, sobretodo en electronica. Pues NO!!, en realidad, cuanto mas sofisticada y precisa sea la computadora de tiro (idem para el resto de los sistemas), mas cutre es el MBT en cuestion.

Señores, supongo que en el Leclerc, la electronica estara tan bien protegida, como la propia tripulacion, como supongo que tendra proteccion NBQ, etc.

Ah, pero sin combustible, creo que no arranca, (mierda de tanque)
Espero que me disculpen, pero a veces la ironia me confunde.
Saludos

[rojo]

JVV,
Estas hablando del Leclerc con respecto al combustible ?

[Springfield]

Excepto proyectiles entrantes de bajo/medio calibre, se espera que cualquier otro penetre la "cu#a", siendo asi decapado y desestabilizado antes de impactar contra el blindaje en si del carro. Por esto las probabilidades de "rebote" quedan reducidas a impactos de hasta 30 mm, los cuales pueden ser absorbidos por el blindaje del "techo" de la barcaza.

Amigo Luis, ¿podrías explicar un poco más extensamente eso de la forma de la parte frontal de la torre del Leopard A5 y A6?

Saludos

[Foxtrot023]

Encontre esta noticia interesante sobre los T90 hindues:

September 12, 2003: Two years ago, Russia finally found a customer for it's top of the line T-90 tank. India agreed to buy 310 of them, with 124 delivered assembled and the rest assembled in India using Russian made parts. The Indians will pay $2.1 million for each tank (half the price of the U.S. M-1). Some 20 percent of the cost is for the thermal sight, similar to the one that makes the U.S. M-1 tank so effective on the battlefield. Unfortunately, tests of the T-90 have shown that the Russian thermal sight system cannot handle the heat of Indian summers. Much of the border between India and Pakistan is desert, and T-90s undergoing field testing there this Summer has their thermal sight fail frequently. The problem is that, while the T-90 has air conditioning (something new in Russian tanks), it cannot handle the 100+ degree heat in tropical India, and there is no room inside the tank to install a more powerful cooling system. The American M-1 air conditioning has been able to handle extreme heat. It could be worse, the Ukrainian made T-80 tank, which Pakistan has bought, has encountered even more severe problems in the desert. The T-80 has a gas turbine engine, and the dust and sand in the desert has damaged the gas turbine engine, which takes enormous quantities of air when running. Russia had sent some T-90s to India in 1990 for tests, and thought they had fixed all the heat related problems. Apparently they did fix the engine (a 1000 horsepower diesel) problems, but then new problems appeared with the thermal sight and other computers installed.

The T-90 went into low level production in 1993, but was too expensive for the Russian army to buy many (perhaps 200 so far). The T-90 is based on the T-72, but has composite armor (plus reactive armor) and better electronics. The 50 ton tank uses a 125mm smooth bore gun, and can also fire the 9M119M Refleks-M missile (to 4,000 meters) at ground or air (helicopter) targets. The tank carries 43 tank shells or missiles, 22 of them in the autoloader carousel.

Puff...! Ese articulo equivoca muchas cosas...! Lo que uno termina leyendo...

The problem is that, while the T-90 has air
conditioning (something new in Russian tanks), it cannot
handle the 100+ degree heat in tropical India, and there
is no room inside the tank to install a more powerful
cooling system.

El tama#o de la torre del T-90 no permite la instalacion interna de un equipo de aire acondicionado, por lo cual la version india lo monta en un "bustle" adosado a la torre. La cifra citada es en grados Fahrenheit, que equivaldrian aproximadamente a 40/45 grados Celsius (cifra a ojo, no tengo ninguna tabla de conversion a mano...). Sea este AA capaz o incapaz de sortear los extremos calores deserticos, no hay otra opcion, ya que la falta de espacio interno es condenatoria....

It could be worse, the
Ukrainian made T-80 tank, which Pakistan has bought, has
encountered even more severe problems in the desert. The
T-80 has a gas turbine engine, and the dust and sand in
the desert has damaged the gas turbine engine, which
takes enormous quantities of air when running.

Pakistan ha comprado la version de T-80 que fabricaba Ucrania, la T-80UD, que es la unica version con motor diesel...asi que lo de la turbina de gas es una falacia absurda. Para cumplimentar el pedido paquistani, Ucrania comenzo a entregar T-80UD, pero tras la independencia con respecto a la ex-URSS, los rusos se negaron a entregar ciertos componentes de factura propia, por lo cual losucranianos tuvieron que copiar sistemas o reemplazarlos por sucedaneos locales. El posterior desarrollo del T-84 en base al dise#o T-80UD llevo a que una parte de los vehiculos entregados a Paquistan gocen de mejoras correspondientes a este ultimo, aunque demoro la entrega total del pedido.

Russia
had sent some T-90s to India in 1990 for tests, and
thought they had fixed all the heat related problems.
Apparently they did fix the engine (a 1000 horsepower
diesel) problems, but then new problems appeared with
the thermal sight and other computers installed.

Las pruebas originales en India fueron posteriores a 1990. Los ejemplares testeados llevaban el equipamiento estandar ruso en cuanto a FCS, y este ultimo se comporto excelente aun en los extremos ambientes deserticos donde se espera que actue el T-90. Los problemas al respecto comenzaron cuando se decidio adoptar un FCS mas moderno con TIS, ya que el T-90 esta llamado a ser el pilar de la fuerza acorazada india a futuro, tras el cuasi-fracaso del autoctono Arjun. El FCS elegido era fantastico en los papeles, pero las pruebas en campo demostraron problemas debido al calor. Ha tomado mucho tiempo y trabajo de los tecnicos rusos, pero hace muy poco tiempo se ha anunciado que ya esta todo solucionado, y los carros operativos.

Luis

Estimado Luis,

Gracias por la informacion. No, si hay que coger todo con pinzas, porque si no.....

Saludos,

[JVV]

JVV,
Estas hablando del Leclerc con respecto al combustible ?

Estimado Rojo, con mi post anterior, intente de forma ironica, protestar por el modo en se trata al Leclerc, en mi opinion en parte por el hecho de ser frances. Vaya por delante que no soy ningun experto en la materia y disfruto leyendo las opiniones (y controversias) sobre angulos de inclinacion de las barcazas, sobre la preferencia diesel-turbina, blindajes, etc. Pero me niego a creer que los ingenieros franceses hayan decuidado la proteccion de la electronica frente al barro, cuando hoy en dia en un tema bastante superado (el ambiente salino es bastante mas corrosivo y no creo que nadie me diga que el AEGIS, presenta fallas en ese sentido), se puede comparar la precision o efectividad de la conputarora de tiro del Leclerc, con la de sus competidores, en funcion de ensayos, pruebas, etc, pero no presentarla como el talon de Aquiles del MBT, por su inadecuada proteccion.

Tambien me niego a etiquetar al Leclerc como un mal tanque por el hecho de que los franceses no tienen tradicion de buenos fabricantes, (os recuerdo que España se dispone a fabricar submarinos y pueden ser buenos o malos, pero eso lo decidira el tiempo y no la coletilla "made in spain"), me hubiera gustado conocer la opinion sobre el Leclerc, si fuera manufactura alemana y se llamara "Wildschwein A1", o un producto yanki denominado "M3A1 Busch Jr.", y ya que hablo del gran presidente os recomiendo un articulo, bastante ironico, que aparece en la siguiente direccion:

http://elmundolibro.elmundo.es/elmundolibro/2003/09/19/no_ficcion/1063990054.html

Saludos

[MakodFilu]

Pues parece bien claro: aquí se ha desprestigiado el Leclerc por ser "gabacho". Esa es su opinión.

Personalmente, no lo sé: hace mucho que leí y voté en este hilo. Pero en vista a los últimos comentarios estoy por cambiar mi voto (algo que desgraciadamente no puedo).

[rianxo]

¿Si el Leclerc es el primer carro de 4ª generación,es el Ariete el 2º ya que es más reciente?

[rojo]

¿Si el Leclerc es el primer carro de 4ª generación,es el Ariete el 2º ya que es más reciente?

Hombre no es porque fabricas hoy un RPG7 que sera un AT mas moderno que lo que ya existe. Si el Leclerc ha tenido su fama de carro moderno es por algo mas que su fecha de puesta en servicio 8) .

Luis M,

Esta ves si que he comprendido todo lo que ha escrito JVV y comparto tutti cuanti lo que dice sobre el Leclerc. Afortunadamente habia yo entendido mal su post anterior.

El unico fallo que hubo sobre problemas electrotechnicos en el Leclerc fue que los switch de seguridad tenian una mala tendencia a quemarse y de alli cortar la motorisacion de la torre para proteger al equipage. Eso duro hasta que los stock de switch se acabaron y se decidieran a arreglar el problema y desde 1999 no hay mas problemas.

Un saludo.

[rafael]

CREO QUE EL LEOPARD 2 ES SIN DUDAS EL MEJOR CARRO QUE EXISTE HOY AUNQUE SOLO PRESENTE UNA DESVENTAJA CON EL ABRAMS Y ES QUE NO HA SIDO PROBADO EN COMBATE

PERO LO CIERTO ES QUE NO ADMITE COMPARACION

SALUDOS

CUBANITO
RAFAEL

[Giancarlo_HG.]

Aparte, existen diversos modelos de L2, que admiten comparacion entre ellos...para empezar...

World Weapons Markets Analisys Center

Russian Tanks Superior to Western Counterparts in Cost-to-Effectiness Ratio

All the tanks offered for export have a classical layout whose capability for protection is virtually depleted. The classical layout implies the traditional placement of the main armament in the rotating turret, controls compartment in the front, and engine and transmission compartment
in the rear of the tank hull. In other words, because of such layout all modern tanks are practically unprotected on top, at the bottom and on the sides. Also, it should be borne in mind that the Leopard-2 and M1A2 MBTs
weighing around 60 tons, need special aids for their transportation and for negotiation of wide and deep rivers. Furthermore, they call for bridges with sufficient load carrying capacity which are not always available in a combat situation.
Moreover, the Russian T-90S tank is superior to all above mentioned MBTs in running characteristics. The Russian tanks dont need any auxiliary aids for transportation. In addition to those advantages, in case of purchasing the Russian tanks the customer is assuredly supplied with spares, tools and accessories as well as follow-on modernization of armament and servicing. To better realize the faults of the classical layout of modern tanks, lets consider the protection capabilities of the Leopard-2 - the leader of the worlds rating as per Forecast International - in the event of its engagement by modern anti-tank weapons.

The Leopard-2 under fire
of antitank weapons

In modern combat conditions the anti-tank defense is arranged in an chelon. Throughout its depth it is protected by a system of anti-tank
weapons which include: various types of canister guided and unguided munitions delivered to tank saturated areas by aircraft, missiles, and
artillery shells; anti-tank guided missiles with operating range from 50 to 8,000 m; anti-tank mortars with operating range up to 8,000 m; artillery systems with operating range up to 2,500 m; hand-held and platform mounted grenade launchers with operating range from 200 to 450 m;
anti-tank mines, including those for remote mining.

The current tactics of combat operations implies destruction of a large number of armored targets long before they approach the front line while they are on the march or are being placed in positions for going into action. This tactics can be most advantageously employed using anti-tank ammunitions devised to engage armored vehicles in their most vulnerable areas - the top of the turret and the hull. For example, Motiv-3M, Skit, and Sadarm homing canister elements used in aircraft ammunitions and MLRSs can effectively strike the top of the Leopard-2.


Because of the obsolete classical layout with a weak armor protection of the top of the Leopard- 2 (20-70 mm), all guided and unguided canister
hollow-charge munitions attacking from the upper hemisphere and defeating 200 to 500 mm of armor can destroy the passive armor protection (even if fitted with ERA) and disable the interior units of the Leopard-2 MBT.

The weak armoring of the top of the Leopard- 2 precludes fitting it with high protection capability ERA. Therefore ammunitions even with one hollow-charge filling (non-tandem type) defeat ERA with sufficient behind-the-armor effect in attacking the Leopard-2 from the top. Placing ERA with the required quantity of explosive on the tank roof presents a real challenge for the following reasons. The ERA fitted on thin armor tiles breaks through them once it works. Therefore it is necessary to employ a bumper device that would absorb the energy of the ERA tiles incapacitating them to pierce the main armor.

This will result in weight and size increase. The second peculiarity is that the explosive in the ERA is initiated not immediately as the hollowcharge
jet goes through it, but some time subsequent to this. Therefore there will be enough time for part of the hollow-charge jet capable of piercing 50 to 80 mm of armor to penetrate the tank interior. In other words, even a short hollow- charge jet can seriously damage the tank interior units and the crew.

The hull bottom of the Leopard-2 MBT is also protected very weakly. The thickness of armor plate under the controls compartment is mostly 20 mm, being 60 mm only in a small area. The thin bottom and the running gear are especially susceptible to anti-tank mine blasts. Therefore the tank is very vulnerable to anti-bottom mines fitted with strike core warheads. The effect of such mines can be enhanced by compounds that
heighten temperature or create conditions that make the tank crew bail out.

Also, it should be borne in mind that there are now sufficient quantities of anti-tank canister mines for remote mining. For example, PTM-3 canister mine (weighs 4.9 kg, 1.8 kg of explosive) with a non-contact fuze is resigned for laying anti-tank mine fields with the help of VSM-1 helicopter
based mining system, UMZ multi-purpose mine layer or PKM man-portable mining kit. Anti-track mines are somewhat less effective since they put out of action separate units of the tanks running gear. Recently, jumping mines have been created that strike against the tank roof from the upper hemisphere. Such mines have homing canister submunitions and a strike-core type of warheads. The destructive effect of jumping
mines against the Leopard-2 tanks in the turret and powerpack areas is quite dramatic.

The comparative analysis of armor protection of the Leopard-2 and the piercing capability of modern anti-tank munitions allows to point out the following:

the tank has high armor protection only in the frontal parts of the turret and hull; the weak armor protection of the sides, bottom and roof of the tank does not ensure the tanks survivability in a combat engagement
with most of modern anti-tank weapons. As regards the advertised protection of the Leopard-2 tank in its frontal part, it should be noted that ATGWs like Kornet-E, Hellfire, and Brimstone currently fielded by a number of countries can defeat ERA and pierce more than a meter of behind-the-armor passive protection (the estimated passive armor protection of the Leopard-2 MBT is 850 mm, the thickness which
is pierced by the hollow-charge jet of the warhead of above mentioned ATGMs featuring a high behind-the-armor effect). In addition, Russia completes trials of a new ATGW, Khrizantema, featuring still higher specifications. The marketing of this product has already been undertaken by Rosoboronexport and Instrument Design Bureau of Kolomna. Finally,
not all methods of neutralizing the Leopard-2s built-in ERA have been utilized. It can be easily defeated without detonation of the explosive by
means of squashed high explosive leader which creates explosive free areas large enough for the hollow-charge jet of the main charge to go
through and do its job.

In order to obtain a comprehensive evaluation that takes account of a variety of factors in the development of arms it makes sense to consider a mathematical model applied to evaluation of the effectiveness of anti-tank ammunitions, and then study the results obtained through this procedure that show the quantitative aspect of fighting efficiency of the anti-tank weapon in defeating the Leopard-2 tank."

[Giancarlo_HG.]

"All countries building tanks and anti-tank weapons have a tool enabling them to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-tank ammunition and survivability of the machine on the battlefield. This tool is essentially a computer-aided simulation of the impact of anti-tank ammunition on
an armored target. This model takes account of the main factors and reflects rather fully the stages of the engagement process.

The reference data of the model are the following characteristics:
ammunition (ERA defeat; armor piercing capability in engaging multi-layered, spaced apart obstacles; parameters of the behindthe-
armor effect); armored target (the extent of protection with ERA and its effectiveness; resistance level and the structure of passive armored
protection; interior layout and vulnerability of interior units with regard to mutual screening; the target functioning pattern - the impact of disablement of each unit of the target on its fighting capability); conditions under which ammunition impacts the target (range and accuracy of
fire; distribution of firing angles). Based on reference data, models are built of the stages of engaging the armored target : firing, interaction of ammunition with the armored protection, behind-the-armor effect.

The model of defeating an armored target by anti-armor ammunition allows on the one hand to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-tank weapons
and, on the other, to evaluate the survivability of the armored target.

The effectiveness of antitank weapons in defeating the Leopard-2 tank
The modeling has yielded the defeat probability of the Leopard-2 tank in terms of «loss of mobility or firepower». The loss of mobility implies disablement of the engine, tracks or other components as well as the tank driver. The firepower neutralization is attained through disablement of the gun and its systems as well as the gunner. In engagement of the Leopard-2 by the ATGMs like Hellfire and Brimstone the kill probability is 0.7 in firing at the tanks best armored areas, and 0.8 in firing at the sides.
In firing at the best armored areas of the Leopard-2 the Konkurs-M and Metis-M manportable anti-tank weapon systems have the kill probability of 0.3, and 0.6 to 0.7 in firing at other areas. Under similar conditions grenade launchers offer a somewhat lesser kill probability.

Questions may arise: was the environment (visibility conditions, nature of terrain, etc.), new ECM techniques and, finally, the human factor, i.e. the ability of the ATGW crew to operate under stress taken into account in the modeling? Naturally, those factors play an important role in a combat situation. However, the presented values of the Leopard-2 defeat probability aim to evaluate the technical parameters of the tank protection
and the destructive effect of ammunition. Also, the evaluation of arms effectiveness is usually made in terms of «effectiveness - cost»
ratio. Recall that depending on the component package the price of the Leopard-2 varies between US$ 4 and 7 million. By comparison, a
hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher costs US$ 2,000-3,000, ATGM from US$ 7,000 to 50,000. Therefore the evaluation in terms of «effectiveness-
cost» will always be in favor of anti-tank ammunition. The rapid development of characteristics of anti-tank weapons is way ahead of the protection assets of the Leopard-2. Despite the many upgrades the protection of the machine against modern ammunitions, especially in attacks from above, remains weak. Sure enough, the Leopard- 2 will continue to serve another decade or two but its time is running out, largely due to the advent of high precision weapons.

Practical recommendations

The main buyers of the tanks are as a rule the countries geographically situated near «the hot points». A typical example is provided by India
pursuing the rational policy in purchases of modern armor which enabled it both to settle its financial problems and to acquire modern T-90S tanks featuring high firepower and excellent mobility. The purchase of T-90S
tanks has considerably increased the fighting capability of the Indian land forces. Thus during the transition to the push-button warfare, India has acquired - with consideration for the likely theater of operations - the T-90S tank, indisputably a sensible move in terms of effectiveness-
to-cost ratio. The first batch of 40 T-90S tanks was shipped to India in December 2001, the second and third in spring and autumn of 2002. Overall, the customer received 124 completely assembled T-
90S tanks. The contract provides for delivery of 310 machines to India. According to the contract, after completion of deliveries of assembled
tanks, Russia will supply India only with component parts and units while the assembly will take place at the heavy duty vehicles assembly
facility based at Avadi in the South of the country. A US$ 900 million contract for supplies of tanks built in Nizhnii Tagil to India was signed in February 2001. Experts believe that the purchase of T-90S tanks would have been still more effective in case of simultaneous acquisition of Khrizantema anti-tank guided missiles(ATGM) featuring high armor piercing capability and Motiv-3M homing canister munitions with a capability to defeat from above tanks located deep in enemy defenses. The powerful ATGMs and homing canister munitions combined with T-90S tanks make anti-tank defense stable as dictated by the rules of modern
military science. "

saludos

[Giancarlo_HG.]

Que les parece, ¿tiene algo del T-95 no es cierto?


saludos

[Giancarlo_HG.]

Un excelente sistema de armas:T90 Indio


saludos y disculpen pero la foto lo merece

[rojo]

Un excelente systema de Armas de pakistan : al-khalid

[Mauricio]

Excelente... hmmm...

Necesitaron abundante ayuda China, la mayoría de los sistemas son de orígen foráneo, el motor es Ucraniano... mas bien parece uno de esos programas que se hacen para decir que pueden