What's new

Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

However, against DU armour tanks they will not do well on offense (going up against DU armour) or defense (going up against DU shells). If Iran’s upgraded tanks can fire next gen anti tank missiles some of this disadvantage can be made up.

There nothing magical about DU.

In a NERA design it just induces a greater shock magnitude due to its high density with low density material behind it.
Russians/Soviets didn't even bother to use it, they would just add another NERA layer of steel for that (x2) DU weight.

Same for APFSDS: Tungsten just lacks the pyro effect after penetration, peneration performance is very close.

Realistically the only likely country to wage a land war on Iran is USA. Thus Iran’s mechanized armour should reflect facing that opponents tanks.

T-90/Karrar would do well against M1A2.
What Iran lacks might be crew training and supply system that can keep pace with the advancing tank division.

Penetration is not everything in a battle. It would be likely that neither side manages 0° direct penetration.
When both sides close in and that 0° changes to 30° and more, here Irans APFSDS rounds will have no problems anymore.
T-90 is extremely well armored even at 30° off.

Furthermore, I cannot comment on Russian rumors, tho I will say their philosophy since the Soviet Union days has been quantity over quality on the battlefield. They believed they can could overwhelm NATO on sheer numbers rapidly deployed in case of conflict.

Everything has its downside. If your rod becomes long but thin, it breaks easier after a ERA and later NERA shock (s).
In fact the Soviet 125mm gun is more powerful than the NATO 120mm pressure/power/lenght wise.
In the days of K-5 ERA, the U.S thought their long rod penetrators would not be at risk to break.

Relict is said to be specifically designed to make use of the fragile nature of a long rod penetrator.

So you can't do magic: You design a penetrator that is not at risk of breaking by the known means the enemy may apply, just tick enough to be not at risk. The rest is dictated by the chamber pressure and length of your gun.


Fun fact: Soviet planners did not think western tanks would play any meaningful role in the ground invasion of western Europe in the 80's. Too few, too easily killed when outflanked due to their huge silhouette. Numerical superiority was also too overwhelming (reason: much more effective design).
 
.
it's a very good decision by DM. we might not afford to make new tanks but we can upgrade them to an acceptable level of capabilities. i'm wondering how an m-60 will look alike after upgrading to t-90 standards. they possibly will add an extra cheek and ERA to it's turret??

photo_2017-03-13_19-58-36.jpg
if we don't upgrade the engine why bother and if we upgrade it , then why not make new Tanks ?
 
. .
if we don't upgrade the engine why bother and if we upgrade it , then why not make new Tanks ?
the upgrade is mostly on the gunner sight, driver sights and map, communications, battle management and commander's RCWS. and the additional armor would not be that much to cost the mobility.
 
. .
Iran should sell some of its overhauled inventory to Syria. They are in dire need of replenishing their tank inventory after the war.

Iran could make a pretty penny by selling them cheaper upgraded T-72 tanks rather than Syria getting screwed by Russia
 
.
This obsession with overhauls must end and Iran needs to start getting it's self ready for export!

Your obsession with fancy non priority toys needs to end! At least you have matured versus a few years ago where every post was some Sci-fi idea you had of a new wonder weapon.

I used to call you Hollywood Boy because you lived in movies and not in reality!
 
. .
Your obsession with fancy non priority toys needs to end! At least you have matured versus a few years ago where every post was some Sci-fi idea you had of a new wonder weapon.

I used to call you Hollywood Boy because you lived in movies and not in reality!

Deeg be deeg megheh root seah! LOL!

This is coming from an immature boy who still to this day doesn't comprehend how absurd a Mach 2 flying wing design UCAV would be! LOL! Yea that's not Hollywood but Iran producing tanks is! LOL!
 
.
There are rumors that Russians are confident that the western notion for ever longer APFSDS rods will make them vulnerable for a stress induced break via Russian ERA.

My wording here could be misleading: I meant there are rumors that Russians are confident that their Relict ERA is able to defeat lastest U.S long rod, high L/D ratio APFSDS M829A4. It means they think it is very unlikely any western tank would be able to penetrate a Relikt equipped T-90 at relevant ranges.

There is no doubt that Relikt uses a defeat mechanism directly exploiting high L/D ratio APFSDS rounds, this is not a rumor. The question is to what extend the performance will be degraded.

1411993779_17.jpg


Irans new ERA is based on Relict.

In my previous post it may have sounded like its all based on speculation or rumors.
 
.
Deeg be deeg megheh root seah! LOL!

This is coming from an immature boy who still to this day doesn't comprehend how absurd a Mach 2 flying wing design UCAV would be! LOL! Yea that's not Hollywood but Iran producing tanks is! LOL!

1960’s US technology:

D-21 and D-21B without booster
  • Wingspan: 19 ft 0.25 in (5.8 m)
  • Length: 42 ft 10 in (13.1 m)
  • Height: 7 ft 0.25 in (2.1 m)
  • Launch weight: 11,000 lb (5,000 kg)
  • Maximum speed: Mach 3.35 (2,300 mph; 3,600 km/h; 2,000 kn) (conversions estimated at the service ceiling altitude)
  • Service ceiling: 95,000 ft (29,000 m)
  • Range: 3,000 nmi (3,500 mi; 5,600 km)
  • Engine: 1 x Marquardt RJ43-MA-20S4 ramjet, 1,500 lbf (6.7 kN)

Wether it’s flying wing or delta wing, my idea would be a force multiplier creating synergies with the BM force. If Iran implements my idea (swarm based high altitude supersonic UCAVs) it would be one of the greatest assets for the Republic.

On the other hand, brand new tanks would be a waste that would sit and decay in military bases only to be rolled out in few numbers for war games and would create no additional deterrence effect.
 
.
In all of the excitement theres a rather interesting looking component on the turret that seems to have been overlooked,perhaps a sensor for an APS of some sort?
EfS2ztsXkAEi9rE

EfS4ebrXYAU5c78
How do you even notice these things??! Good attention to details! Could it be a laser lock detector?
 
.
How do you even notice these things??! Good attention to details! Could it be a laser lock detector?

In all of the excitement theres a rather interesting looking component on the turret that seems to have been overlooked,perhaps a sensor for an APS of some sort?
EfS2ztsXkAEi9rE

EfS4ebrXYAU5c78

it’s for the laser warning system, not APS. Iranian APS has already been shown a couple Years ago.

Ex of laser warning sensors

screenshot-2020-07-05-at-10.07.34-pm.png
 
.
How do you even notice these things??! Good attention to details! Could it be a laser lock detector?
I wish that I could take all the credit but in this case it was someone else who spotted it first.
The curved bottom section could very likely be the laser detection part of the sensor,but you still have the vertical and horizontal elements mounted above it.These could very likely be the radar antennas for detecting both horizontal flightpath type atgms as well as the newer top attack types such as the javelin or the bill.
 
.
Almost any system will first use a laser range finder before launch/shot.

This triggers the laser warning sensors and tells the tank where the threat is coming from.

Turret and vehicle is turned toward the threat.

Radar sensor goes active and detects incoming projectile. It times when to automatically launch aerosol grenades.

Aerosol grenades are launched to create smoke screen in front of the incoming projectile.

Useful against ATGM and rockets, less effective against gun launched HEAT or even APFSDS rounds.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom