Amedeo

I'm interested in plagiarism as an art form!

I'm positive the guy in the comic is referring to the T-62's tank, not the new tank's one.

Very interesting! As can be clearly seen by the photos, the T-72M1 used in the test is a model with the additional 16mm thick applique armor plate mounted from 1983 on the T-64B/T-72A/T-80B tanks to make them proof against the M111. So, it's no surprise that the tank resisted the Austrian NP105A2, assuming it performs closer to the M735 than the M111.

When the Soviets tested captured Israeli 105mm M111 APFSDS rounds against their own T-72A tanks, they were were shocked in finding that, although frontal turret armour was proof, the M111 was able to penetrate the glacis. There were also rumors that in the same trials the Soviets tested also a few smuggled M735, and found they were not able to penetrate the target. Are these, by chance, the tests you are referring to?

Yes, the PK armed guys sport something vaguely resembling an RPK. Moreover the folding stocks are all wrong! The AKS/AKMS folding stock had a totally different shape. What we see here is resembling the stock of an AKS-74. Anyway I like those old "educational" comics!

... and the good ol' turtle-shaped steel helmet!

Well, Prinz Eugen was the "lucky" ship, among German cruisers. As its WW1 (Austrian) namesake, she managed to survive her sister ships. On the other hand, Blücher sank at her first combat, just like her WW1 namesake. Maybe the Deutsche Marine should reconsider its criteria for deciding new ships' names!

Well, they obviously included what could have been scrapped from the bottom of the barrel, i.e. ship classes of the few active Kriegsmarine units that could be found in the Baltic in '44-'45.

Very interesting! Though I wonder why they classified Emden and Leipzig as heavy cruisers... which they weren't, of course, being armed with 15cm guns.

Hurry up, then!

Crewmen walking on turrets' roofs? No way it's CM! Anyway I'd pay up to 100 bucks for a Bundeswehr/NVA module, now.

Yes... but it's the German DLC of ArmA3, not CMCW!

Judging from Bil's AAR, it's my understanding is that the M60A1 gets only the M728 APDS. It's the RISE/RISE+/PASSIVE upgrade variants that fire the M735 APFSDS. And the DU M774, as you state, is reserved for the M60A3/A3 TTS and M1 tanks. Thank you for the clarification. I guess that also the Cobras get the latest TOW variant, right?

If I got correctly what the tester said, BGM-71C on board the various M150, M901, M901A1 tank destroyers, BGM-71B elsewhere.

No excuses! They've promised it and now I want USS New Jersey firing her 16in guns in my scenarios... along the Weser!

Yes, of course I know that the Super Hornet is a different beast. But the point of my pun stands: the difference between a Wildcat and a 40 years older Hornet (but hey, even with a 20 years older Phantom) is abyssal. The difference between a Hornet and a Super Hornet is minimal, in comparison. It's a fact that, during the last 30 years, military R&D stagnated. Cold war (as any hot war) was a powerful driving factor in this regard. P.S. Yes, you're right about the T-55 being outclassed before the introduction of the T-55M/AM variant. Anyway, thanks to the introduction of LRFs and APFSDS rounds in the mid '70s, Soviet and Warsaw Pact T-55A tanks were not as hopelessly outclassed as they would have been fighting with full bore ammo and stadiametric rangefinders only.

Oh, in that case, if you are referring to the 1967 or 1973 war, I agree it's perfectly reasonable. Arab armies had no access to the new 3BM8 APDS round for the D-10 gun of their T-54/T-55 tanks until early '80s, at best, not to speak of the newest 100mm APFSDS ammo. And lobbing APBC or APCBC rounds (BR-412B or BR-412D) at more than 1500 m against Centurions and M48s would have been almost useless, not only for the low PH, but also for the low PK. Yes, they probably had HEAT ammo at the time, but with a mere 5 rounds loadout, it wouldn't have been wise to waste them in long range fire.

The decade 1979-1989 was one of the most "dense" in regard to the introduction of new weapon systems. Hey, it was the cold war! As someone said: between 1941 and 1981 the US Navy went from the Wildcat to the Hornet, between 1981 and 2021 it went from the Hornet... to the Hornet! I completely agree. Moreover, the chart you are referring to, explicitly states that the hit probability is for a tank using stadiametric rangefinding. With a LASER rangefinder, hit probability should increase substantially. Of course, this when pitting a stationary T-55 vs a stationary M48. If the T-55 is firing on the move, advancing against a hull-down M48, I wound't expect frequent hits at 2000 m. Well, actually I wouldn't expect any hits.

As far as I know the T-55 we're speaking of has no sophisticated fire controls of any sort. It doesn't sport the Volna FCS of the later (1983) T-55M with a ballistic computer etc. It basically has a sight, a (crappy-sh) stabilizer, a retrofitted laser rangefinder and that's it. Here are the range scales on the TSh3B-32P sight: As one can see, the max. range for the shaped charge shell (BK) is 3000 m and the max range for the sabot rounds (podk.) is 4000 m. Of course, I don't expect they will be hitting anything at those ranges, but it's just to say that I do not see anything related to the FCS per se that should prevent engaging a tank sized target at 2000m or so. Moreover, if we are talking about engaging a stationary target from a stationary T-55, considering also that a non hull down M48 towers at 3m above the ground, and that the point-blank range for a 100mm 3BM20 APFSDS is about 2040 m, I don't see getting first round hits in this situation as something strange or exceedingly rare. Fair enough. Anyway, if, as you say, the ATGM wit a 4000 m range was intended to give an edge to the T-55 against NATO tanks firing up to 3000 m, I dare to say that the problem wasn't at the 2 km mark but way above it.

Honestly, getting some hits at 2000m against a large, stationary target in good visibility doesn't look to me an incredible feat. If the shooter and the target don't move, the biggest problem is getting the correct range, but the T-55 featured in the aforementioned test sports a LASER rangefinder, so even ranging shouldn't be a problem. Regarding gun launched ATGMs, my understanding is that the Soviet wanted something to fight back against a large number of cheap NATO ATGM armed vehicles. The fact that ATGM equipped AFVs/jeeps/helos were considered a major threat, not only for the long range but for their ubiquity, was also shown by the general introduction of first generation ERA blocks practically on all tanks in the mid '80s (Kontakt-1 was very effective against shaped charge warheads, practically useless against kinetik penetrators). Of course modern western MBTs were the deadliest threat but how many of them there were, and in particular, how many of them would a second echelon Soviet tank be likely to encounter after a couple weeks into the war?

I was impressed by the opening pages of Hackett's novel too, with the cavalry Sheridans fending off the Red Horde(TM). Anyway, if a US Airborne/VDV module is in the works, we might get the M551 someday (and the ASU-85!).

Even the Russians recently had to "import" T-34-85 tanks to satisfy their reenactment parade needs.

IIRC, islamist guerrilla manage to catastrophically disrupt Soviet oil production with a well executed (and lucky) attack on a refinery complex. Moscow realizes that the only way to save USSR from a collapse due to the lack of oil is to invade the Persian Gulf. And, since they fear that such an action might trigger NATO military intervention... they resolve to go to war with NATO just to avoid that! Basically, being driven to suicide by the fear of dying. Probably the lamest reason for a fictional WW3 ever, but at the time I liked the book. Honestly, I bought it only for the action, non for the plot.

As was explicitly said by a tester, Soviet uniforms and infantry models are still work in progress. So, beta screenshots might not represent what the final product will be. I'm positive that when we'll, finally, run CM:CW on our PCs, we'll see an assortment of SSh-68 and SSh-40/60 helmets.

Judging by your nickname, I guess you'd prefer 1983.