At this stage of tank warfare, I think maximizing tank silhouette is getting a little bit outdated. Especially because most tanks right now might be getting spotted from the air instead of land.
7 months ago | 10
Add in the fact that western tanks tended to have nearly twice the gun depression compared to Soviet designs, this would increase the turret exposure of the T series.
7 months ago | 19
That would be easy enough to compensate for. Just make sure the dugout is sloped downhill.
7 months ago | 0
The T72 is designed as an offensive weapon as such optimization was for mobility, firepower, ease of manufacturing (ie cheap and plentiful) reduced crew, reduced logistics. It didn't worry about crew survival and once committed were bordering on consumables rather continuing assests. The NATO nations armor was defensive in base nature. Thus designed to fight hull down in prepared position, retreat to the next prepared position. This is was based on never out producing the Soviet numbers and thus each tank had to be better, better equipment, better doctrine, most of all better trained. For European forces this was reinforced by literal fighting in their backyards. Thus tanks were a very important assest and crew efficiency and survivability were given higher priority.
7 months ago | 1
So a T-72 can't depress when fully dug in? Very interesting
7 months ago | 0
Military History Visualized
Post by Ryan A. Then about Tank Turrets
A tank turret is an aggregate of equipment, its shape depending on more factors than any one designer can control. However, the turret designer can at least try to find an optimal shape to deal with the intermarriage of firepower with crew space, crew visibility, and protection with the fewest compromises in volume and weight. The domed turret of the T-72 was one such shape. Even so, it usually takes a closer look to see the real qualities of a design.
When the four mightiest NATO members each brought a new tank into service in the 1960's, each of them chose a conventional, low-risk turret configuration with manual loading of the main gun. Compared to the American M60A1 and the British Chieftain, the German Leopard 1 and French AMX-30 were the lightest and most compact, and in a hull-down position, the Leopard 1 (depicted here as the 1A4 model) had the smallest silhouette area at 2.03 m². Thanks to the absence of a human loader in the T-72, the roof on the left side of the turret over the gunner's position was contoured into a domed shape. Even though the maximum dimensions of the T-72 turret in overall height (commander's cupola included) and width were almost the same as the Leopard 1A4 turret, its silhouette area was only 1.48 m².
Considering that the Leopard 1 was armed with a 105 mm gun and the T-72 had a 125 mm gun, this was a remarkable result. However, looking closely we see that the Leopard 1's gun was set much higher in its turret, while the T-72's gun practically sat on the turret ring. In a real hull-down position, the T-72's turret practically lost its advantage in height and silhouette size, even at night once the Leopard had its infrared spotlight mounted. Well, no one said tank design was easy!
In T-72 - The Definitive guide to the Soviet Workhorse, you will find an in-depth examination of the T-72's design and all the ideas, technologies, and design solutions that went into its creation. It is one thing to read a list of a tank's technical specifications, but another entirely to understand how they were achieved, and what consequences followed. The book is currently 20% OFF until 27 September exclusively on Lulu Press, additionally other books the Military History Group are reduced up to 10%: militaryhistorygroup.com/
It is also available on Amazon and Barnes & Noble.
7 months ago | [YT] | 534