Armorgunner

I know, just a bad joke from my side

Wasn't agent orange some kind of deleafing tool in Vietnam War?

Below the turret ring, has a new post of the BMPT and T-90's http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.se/2017/07/more-t-90-and-bmpt-contracts.html

You don't like leaf's for some reason?

Why don't just bring a few SSGN's, and SSN's. Each of the four Ohio class SSGN, has 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Take out the nuclear infrastructure, radars, and as much of the high alltitude covering SAM's. Then bunkerbusters from B2's, covered by F22's? I don't really know, as im not the Commander in chief of the US armed forces. But im sure he would have a plan, for that scenario

I think that, if N.K were an isolated Island nation in the Middle of the pacific. That would alredy had happened. But the chance of an N.K retaliation against S.K would be near 100%. And with Seoul in strikning distance of NK artillery. Things can go really bad, fast.

I dont know why. But to me, it seems quite often. In "incidents" like that, the unit Omon's name come up.

What the f××k happened to the text in my former Post? Ok drag it to the left and you can reading it all. But i dont know how it became That?

Availability is another Key. The US today have a very high number of planes. So they can compensate for the low availability of their aircrafts. And whith the F-35 it will be even lower. As it needs even more maintenance.

I only remember the technology's fascinated voices, about the difference in the armor of our vehicles. And that they were so fascinated about the high brinelll figure in the Russian BMP. But maybe Haiduk or some other can give us more info, if its facehardened. Or have the high brinellscale right through.

HerrTom Now when you bring it up. I dont remember if it was facehardened, and it only was the "face" outerside that was of this hardnes. I'm sorry. The T-72M1's that Sweden bought from Germany, after the fall of the Wall. Had facehardened steel, with much higher brinell on the surface. So if no other here have some more info? I don't know.

I can add to that. That now, 25 years later, I don't remember the different ranges that the .50 was tested against the BMP though. But probably from pointblank to eternity, if it was the usual testing program. And it could been only the "normal" or "expected" combat ranges that i was informed of though, its a long time ago ( I left the Army sometime in the late first half of the 2000-2010) The expected combat ranges was quite short anyway, in our woodland country. 100-500 meters for most encounters. Even though the tank, and mechanized brigades mostly traind for encounters a little bit further away. The motto was always: Firepower over protection. On the attack of a Soviet/Russian beachhead.

Or the best fighters in the world, like the Me 262. But only a handfull, so they get show down when landing.

HerrTom First of all. Its an absolutely fantastic work you have done. What kind of hardnes of the armour are you using? From the 350 Bmp's Sweden bought in the the late, first half of the 90's. I know they had a high brinell hardness of 350-400 IIRC. Which is quite high. Makes the armour strong, but brittle. As a comparison, the Swedish PBV 302 had a brinell hardness of 250-270 IIRC. I know that soviet used high brinell hardness steel on their Apc/ifv's at the time of BMP/BTR/MT-LB. It can affect the results, because smaller-sized high-speed fragments just bounce away. While heavier slower fragments cause the armor to break? The opposite should be the case on lower brinell hardness. It should be better at resisting the big slow ones, as its tougher and will not brittle. But worse on the high speed smaller ones, that goes throw like a knife in butter. And I can add to that. That the armor on the BMP resisted the .50 AP bullets of the time, even in the side. We (Sweden) belived that the .50 should be able to penetrate the side armor. At weakspots it did of Course. But the armor was tougher than expected against smallarms, and HMG. But brittle when the limitation was met.

I don't know if it is tested. But i maybe think that, the ammo recovvery might be a bit faster. At least when not under supression?

This one I Think, Me myself have linked to in this topic? Or maybe some other topic in the CMBS. But thank you anyway. It is very interesting to see, for anyone here. The S-tank, was actually quite good for its time. But when the stabilization of guns got better. And the Soviet tankrounds got better (when they stoped bouncing of the slope) The S-tank was not the way to go anymore. But when introduced, it was pracitcally imune frontally. To anything in the Soviet arsenal.

I will be sure to watch these movies, after dinner. I always belive that, i know what i need to know about the Strv 103. But every time i get suprised. Thanks John

If you buy it today. You get the latest version. The uppgrade is only for earlier customers.

Not sure inte case of mp44. But in the case of mg42. They grab the mg42 first, then if not directly under supression fire. After a wile they grab some more ammo, and a while later even more/the rest. Depending on supression level, and availible ammo on the dead/wounded former mg Gunner. It can take a few turns. Not a big problem on the Defence. IIRC they do keep their former weapon, so when they run out of mg ammo. They use the former one. If I recall wrong. Please tell.

It´s sad to hear that you are not so well John!!

I was to fast on the buttons there. Ofcorse i meant "SS". Since no nuclear subs was in any of our plans The Project "Viking" though very ambitious. With no turret/Tower or what you call it in English. Was without enemies in the mid 90´s. And with smaller military budgets it was cut.

I´m getting a little worried for you John. This is the second time in this topic, I remeber you. She is not from Sweden, she is a Norwegian. So i dont think she eat Swedish MRE´s. Norwegian military´s decisionmakers, dont seem to like Sweden at all in recent time. They left the joint SSN Submarine Project. They left the Joint Heavy artillery "Archer" Project, which they left though, only after Sweden bought the inferior Kongsberg RWS. Which was part of the joint deal. So they have smart decisionmakers for the shortrun.

Thats not Finnish humor, that is the Finnish "Sisu". Of which you can explain by yourself, what that is for potentially interested. But it was the Finnish "Sisu" that defeated the 5-10 times, by number. Superior Russian forces in WW2. Nothing else. Yes i wrote about the new version of Tuntematon sotilas comming out this october, in my July 11 post. Looking very much forward to it. No, i have not seen the Movie 1944. But after your post here, I will surely do.

+1 For all that And maybe an overhaul of the armour on certain AFV´s. Right now, the armour is the same for M1A1SA, M1A2, M1A2HC and M1A2SEP. The same goes for the very much inferior armour ( In game ) of the Leopard´s. The Leopard 1 C2 has the same armour as the A4, A4+, A6, and A6M. The same inferior armour goes for the Challenger 2, with a minor improvement on the enhanced version. The CV9035 irl is rated to defend against 30mm AP in the front. In game hardly against rifle bullets frontally. But now 10 years later, we know that was not the case back then, so a correction might be in Place? Hope so anyway. Thanks for all your work Steve, and the team behind you. Sorry for Chris, i hope he will return in some way, when he feel he can.

I had to check my DVD. And the DVD release of Tuntematon Sotilas, in Sweden. Has all Nordic countries subs, and English/American Subs to.