Help support TMP


"Modern MBT Protection" Topic


12 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Gaming (2008-present) Message Board

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2008-present) Message Board



877 hits since 9 Dec 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Whirlwind Supporting Member of TMP09 Dec 2017 9:59 p.m. PST

I was reading the T-90 wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90 and I saw this about the T-90MS:

The T-90M Bhishma (named after the guardian warrior in the Mahabharata) is a vehicle tailored for Indian service, improving upon the T-90S, and developed with assistance from Russia and France. The tanks are equipped with the French Thales-built Catherine-FC thermal sights,[21] and utilise Russian Kontakt-5 K-5 explosive reactive armoured plates.[22] and Kontakt-5 ERA in addition to the primary armor which consists of laminated plates and ceramic layers with high tensile properties. The new welded turrets first developed for the Indian T-90S Bhishma have more advanced armour protection than the early cast turrets. In several tests conducted in front of an Indian delegation, the latest foreign M829A2/KEW-A2 APFSDS munitions were fired from 250 m against a T-90S stripped of the Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armor. The turret proved completely impenetrable, which proved to be a crucial selling point for the T-90S Bhishma

Noting that this was with the ERA removed, this implies very high levels of armour protection, but the modern rules I have seen tend to make MBTs quite vulnerable. How vulnerable does your preferred set of modern rules make the currently in-service MBTs?

Dynaman878910 Dec 2017 6:20 a.m. PST

The Russians make a lot of claims about their vehicles, in the past those claims were found to be seriously overstated. Current stuff, not a clue – and anybody who says they have a clue is lying.

Personal logo David Manley Supporting Member of TMP10 Dec 2017 6:37 a.m. PST

.. or has probably violated their nations official secrets legislation :)

Dynaman878910 Dec 2017 6:24 p.m. PST

And most likely still lying too.

Lion in the Stars10 Dec 2017 7:16 p.m. PST

I would like to know where exactly a Russian government-owned company got ahold of M829 ammo.

Tgunner11 Dec 2017 2:46 p.m. PST

It probably wasn't the real deal. They probably used a round with similar characeristics.

Joe Legan Supporting Member of TMP11 Dec 2017 3:16 p.m. PST

I suspect a little salesmanship. : ) Agree with Dynaman.

Joe

SovietCanadian Inactive Member12 Dec 2017 7:47 a.m. PST

To answer your question and not argue about the story behind it. All rules I play do not leave MBTs as unkillable monsters. Tanks are strong and you will not be guaranteed a kill on them, but you always need to beware up-to-date anti-tank systems. That said, a lot of systems I look at class the most recent Russian/Chinese tanks as seriously outclassed in terms of protection and firepower compared to their western counterparts, as if those nations ceased all armour development in the early 90s.

My preferred system for fighting with tanks (Fistful of Tows) lacks stats for the most up to date kit but gives similar levels of protection for the T-90A, M1A2, and Leopard 2A6. The stats given for the mobility and firepower of the T-90A are lacking compared to the other two, but it is still a major threat in the game to anything it comes across.

Charlie 12 Inactive Member12 Dec 2017 8:46 p.m. PST

Hmmmmm…. Let's see. The Indian T90S started production in 2004 with a total of 10 test vehicles produced up to 2009, with full (low rate) production starting after 2009. The M829A2 entered service in 1994 and was withdrawn in 2003 and replaced by the much more potent M829A3. Which itself has since been replaced by the even more potent M829A4.

So we have some goofy arms salesmen getting giddy about testing their newest tank against a round that has been out of the inventory for YEARS…. Yeah, I'm impressed… And so are any potential customers….

soledad13 Dec 2017 3:42 a.m. PST

I can draw a parallell to when they tested the 40mm APDS round for the Swedish CV90 APC. They said it would penetrate the side of a MBT. Then I saw the video. It did definetely penetrate the side armor of the T34/85 they fired at. So yes it penetrates the side armor of a MBT. They just did not specify what kind of MBT…

Kind of like it here.
But it is a good sales pitch

ROUWetPatchBehindTheSofa13 Dec 2017 1:48 p.m. PST

Its perfectly feasible that the round wouldn't penetrate if the turret is well enough constructed (or the round sufficiently obsolete). But I wonder at that kind of range surely the amount of energy transferred to the vehicle would have an effect – I'm thinking gun sights and gunnery computer out of whack, other electronic devices unhappy, turret jammed?

Charlie 12 Inactive Member13 Dec 2017 9:49 p.m. PST

Oh yeah…. Even a non-penetrating hit is going to rock the boat. How bad? Well, that gets into the other elements of the tank's design. Which, I dare say, few companies are very talkative about.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.