tq mmc bukan semua wa tau la bro...:)
Kapal angkasa Russia jadi tarikan TMM
Reply #25 insignia's post
takpe2..MD/jeneral mana pikir bab taktikal ni :)...janji boleh dapat tiket murah ke kalau beli kat kau :) Originally posted by mmc at 27-9-2006 09:26 AMaii orang tourism pun tak tau ke :)
http://www.bvspace.com/
angkasawan kita terbang 2008 ler HPC..anyway this will be the second time ada pamiran sebegini....dulu kat bukit raja kelang tahun...
tak sabar nak tengok lebih dekat lagi...
Reply #27 HangPC2's post
huh pi simpan RM35 awal2...nanti bajet lari..kalau bawak pasangan..lebih lagi...:) tengok dari artikel tuh boleh tengok lebih dekat lagi kalau boleh aku nak tengok bahagian kokpit tuh macam kokpit MIG-29 + 2 jer...[ Last edited byHangPC2 at 27-9-2006 09:58 AM ]
Reply #25 insignia's post
Info kpd Menteri Pelancongan : Buran memang dibawa kemana-mana dengan pesawat Antonov An-225, sebelum ni naik M4 Bison.... korang rasa china ada sebijik macam buran tak..???Reply #31 HangPC2's post
diorang pakai roket long march lagi...belum ada reusable...space shuttle pun belum tentu selamat weh banding dengan roket..link
[ Last edited bymmc at 27-9-2006 12:12 PM ]
Reply #31 HangPC2's post
i thk China and Russia currently wont use someting like Buran or space shuttle ...cz too expensive for maintain compare the spacecraft current they use to go space....http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/654/shenzhou2002jg0.gif
[ Last edited bygancity at 27-9-2006 12:24 PM ]
T-80U and T-90 Protection Trials
T-80U and T-90 Protection Trials20.10.1999
On October 20, 1999 extensive trials of T-80U and T-90 protection from various types of threats were conducted at TsNIIO 643a Testing Grounds. The tests involved firing large amounts of ordnance (including several versions of RPG ATGL, light and heavy ATGMs, and APFSDS rounds) at frontal projections of T-80U and T-90 MBTs both protected with Kontakt-V ERA and stripped of it.
T-80U and T-90 MBTs were represented by 3 vehicles each, one with Kontakt-V ERA, one with removed explosive packages and one reserve vehicle. For the ERA part of trials, knocked-out ERA packages were replaced after each shot.
One more T-80U MBT was used for special trials that focused on testing of Shtora-1 EOCMDAS.
The following weapons were used:
Infantry ATGLs (fired at a distance of 40m)
RPG-7 (using advanced 105mm grenade PG-7VR with a tandem warhead, pen. 650mm RHA)
RPG-26 (disposable launcher, pen. >500mm RHA)
RPG-29 (advanced 105mm launcher, pen. 750mm RHA)
ATGMs (fired at a distance of 600m)
Malyutka-2 (pen. >600mm RHA)
Metis (pen. 460mm RHA)
Konkurs (pen. 650mm RHA)
Kornet (pen. >850mm RHA)
APFSDS (fired from T-80U MBT at a distance of 1,500m, the most likely round is 3BM42)
Each weapon was fired 5 times at each target, for a total of 20 shots per weapon. The total number of shots fired during the trials thus exceeded 150.
The trials yielded the following outcome:
ATGLs
T-90: RPG-29 produced a total of 3 penetrations.
No other RPG rounds could penetrate even the stripped target.
T-80U: RPG-29 penetrated 3 times with ERA, all 5 times without ERA.
Of all other grenades, one PG-7VR penetrated the stripped target.
ATGMs
T-90: No ATGMs could penetrate the ERA-equipped target. One Kornet ATGM penetrated the stripped target.
T-80U: 2 Kornet ATGMs penetrated the ERA-equipped target, all 5 penetrated the stripped target.
No other ATGMs could penetrate.
APFSDS
T-90: ERA-equipped target could not be penetrated. Furthermore, after firing the crew entered the vehicle, activated
it and was able to execute the firing sequence.
Without ERA, one round penetrated.
T-80U (data available only for stripped target): One round almost penetrated (3mm hole in the inner lining, no visible
equipment damage); two penetrated to 1/2 thickness; one missed the target completely; one hit the gun.
The following pictures show the locations of impacts by ATGL RPG-29 (in red) and ATGM Kornet (in black) against ERA-equipped vehicles. Which of these hits penetrated was not disclosed.
http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/TRIALS/T-80U.jpg
http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/TRIALS/T-90.jpg
Shtora-1 Trials
10 Kornet ATGMs with removed warheads were fired at a tank with a crew. 4 ATGMs hit the tank, the other 6 deviated to the left of the target in the middle of the flight.
Conclusions (VF)
RPG-29 proved to be by far the most potent weapon among those used. As powerful as heavy ATGM Kornet, it appeared to assure the frontal penetration of T-80U even for the squad-level firepower. Even though T-90 fared better, it is still not immune to it. Considering sufficient proliferation of this weapon and the fact that this is still a fairly light infantry weapon, it is the most dangerous adversary of modern Russian MBTs, and is a very disturbing development.
Original reports that ATGM Kornet performance is severely degraded by ERA due to its peculiar order of internal components proved true as the ATGM with at least 100mm higher penetrating potential was not superior to a much lighter RPG-29.
Report of Shtora-1 EOCMDAS trials is confusing. Being laser-guided, ATGM Kornet should not suffer any interference from Shtora as it only affects IR SACLOS ATGMs. Furthermore, ATGMs can only deviate to the left if the marker is set to the left of both emitters, which is hardly likely. It is possible, however unlikely, that it was caused by a sloppy work of removal the warhead which e.g. could cause a gyro cofusion.
Data provided by Lt.Col. Vladimir Karpov
ATW Testing Center NPO "Geodezia"
http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html
[ Last edited byyipun78 at 13-10-2006 10:43 AM ] You think any of these tanks stand a chance against the Hellfire? Well the Hellfire completely in different league with land hand held or shoulder fired anti-armour missile, I think even the M1 Abrams Tankcan't stand Hellfire...
Just my 1 cent opinion... since the 105mm PRG 29 is good enough to peneprate T90 with ERA, I think they shld somehow merge its warhead with ATGMs.
You just can't expect a good hit with RPGs all the time. The test failed to mention whether the T-90 is local or for export version, but since the test done by the Russian in Russia, I think the tset subject is not an export version
The fact that a low cost light weight RPG 29 able to penetrate the latest russian tank with Era package is totally impressive ! That makes the deployment of tanks much more restricted.
A tank needs to move fast all the time in operations theater or be dead. That will bring a whole new set of problems to the tank. I'll rather invest in a lot of cheap & mobile anti tank weapons than in tanks.
Reply #6 Debmey's post
so debs what do you think our army is doing all this while...do you realise that unknowingly you have validated our armed forces modus operandi :) More so for Singapore. We don't invest in battle tanks but tank killing helos, we also make our own anti tank RPG. Its call the Matador.basically tanks like PT91 are very heavy and can get stuck in mud very easily in local terrain, they may even overturn if they travel too fast over undulating terrain.