because of the dealy they have, they already reduced the production goal from what I understand. I’ve seen the date of entry in service of 2019 being thrown around before the delay stroke
Probably not as much as you would think. I takes three six inch lengths of det cord to punch a huge dent in a steel door and remove all the locking mechanisms from the frame.
But speaking in non explosive terms, the air pressure from three leaf blowers can lift a man and a homemade hovercraft off the ground and propel it.
Then of course there’s that scene from the Score. 
Keeping it real at 1:35 scale I can offer the following observations from an experiment a few years ago:
The charge consisted of approx. 20 friction-match heads of phosphorus crushed to fine powder seasoned with sparkler scrapings packed in a paper cartridge, wired down to the hull floor directly under the turret. All gaps/holes in the hull were sealed (except for a short brass tube through the lower hull to carry the fuze) & a thin shaped slab of lead was glued to the inside turret roof to simulate its weight. The turret hatch (large T34/76 version, glued down) had already launched out of sight in the first detonation frame.
I thought the charge was a reasonable approximation of the explosive force of around fifty 76mm shells on board. As Carlos has said a basic ammo load would typically blow the roof or whole turret off, and I’d add highly unlikely if no ammo on board. With the full spectrum of loads in between, the obvious variations are what battlefield photos tend to show 
5 Likes
Another one I’ve never seen. Reminds me of a Bv 206.
4 Likes
the cook off of one round of generic HE in a tank buttoned up is all that’s needed. There’s no place for the pressure to escape. It would appear to me that the Russian designs don’t put a lot of strength in the turret rotating ring assembly. I’ve seen photos of T62’s in Iraq where the turret went close to a hundred feet and went into the ground barrel first. That’s shear power! I saw a picture once of an M113 (might have been a mortar track) that took a direct hit from the 90mm main gun from an M48. It pushed the engine out the back door! Let alone anybody surviving that episode. Now I figure the round hit directly into the engine block and just kept on pushing it backwards. No matter how you look at that is pure power! Yet if you look at one of the newer tanks (T80 or T72) with the hatches opened up. It looks like an F4 in after burner coming out the hatches
I’d rather get out and walk; thank you
gary
3 Likes
you should see what a 50 ton tank does with a 500lb. command detonated mine! Not only does it crack the hull, but usually rolls it at least one full turn. A 200lb. eight inch round will flip just about any tank on the planet, and a generic 155mm round ain’t far behind it
gary
3 Likes
I always thought submarines were steel coffins. But looks like I may have to do a re think. I guess the plus side is you’re dead before you can think about it. Any wonder there’s reports of crews just wanting to go home.
2 Likes
They also used the bigger DT-30 Vityaz there, with the same result…
H.P.
6 Likes
Just imagine it helplessly towed by a farm tractor…Bad PR !
H.P.
3 Likes
Don’t forget that in the Russian tanks and the BMP-3 the propellant charges for the automatic loader lay in a carrousel just under the turret. So there is enough explosive to blow away the turret above.
Olivier
4 Likes
Ah yes the old turret ejection system, perfected by the Russians since the 60’s or so. Don’t forget however that all tanks are a trade off between, protection, mobility and firepower. It depends on your countries policy/doctrine as to how that trade off is presented. Most western tanks are larger/heavier for a reason and that’s typically armour/protection, but also needs space for that 4th crewman i.e. the loader. I read somewhere that Challenger 2 is the best protected of the western tanks but also has the least mobility (read that as speed). Squeeze a gun into the middle of those two that is extremely powerful and it is in my mind a winning combination. Then factor into that in it’s next iteration it will receive a smoothbore as to get higher muzzle velocities you have to go smooth and that trade off become more pronounced but also better.
3 Likes
Probably not that much really, since the turret is only held in by gravity and most Russian tanks have the ammo and charges in the auto-loading system in the floor under the turret…
2 Likes
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPKfMchXoAA6eAx?format=jpg&name=900x900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPFWYdTXsAEgDVN?format=jpg&name=large
I guess we may have already seen this one in another view …
EDIT : it’s not the same but there’s a similar swing arm barrier (???) at the rear… 
This guy is loaded for (Russian) bear…
H.P.
9 Likes
here’s a small thought to ponder about that neat auto loader. In the world of hydraulics there is a device called an accumulator. Comes in many shapes and types of build. Europeans are big on piston type with steel rings like your car has. These are what is known as a stored energy device. The auto loader will need several of them, and they are a BOMB! Some are charged with a coiled spring, but most are charged with very high pressure nitrogen. They are there to give the system an instant surge of high pressure oil. Usually brought to action via a valve that either completely blocks it out of the system or allows it to discharge. There should be one for the ram in the auto loader, plus another for the breech. On top of that there may well be another two or three for the ammo storage system. I can see five and maybe even six of them charged at roughly 5000psi dumping about half gallon each. The spray off one will cut your arm or leg off! So you say omit them! It would take about a forty horsepower and a twenty gallon per minute pump to run that system with out the accumulators. With them you might get by with fifteen horsepower driving a fifteen gallon a minute pump set. You’ll be able to heat the inside of the tank from the hot oil!. A round penetrates a crewless turret and hit just a bracket hold them in place. It’ll be like a rugby ball flying around till it runs out of gas. Destroying what’s left. If the accumulator in penetrated it will simply explode like a 105mm round! Should the tank be caught up in a load cycle it would be beyond comprehension. Also remember the auto loader usually wants to load or unload in one single position (remember the old JS-2 tank?). The power behind those accumulators is probably enough to at least dislodge the turret from the rotating ring.
By the way there is no tank that is SABOT proof. The only thing that can stop one is if it hits the gun breech assembly. That’s what brought about ERA, and now they know how to defeat that. Still after nearly eighty years they’ve finally relearned the easy way to knock out a tank. From the top down. They didn’t earn the nic name “iron coffin” for nothing
gary
4 Likes
one thing for sure, those Ukrainians are not gonna run out of spare parts anytime soon
gary
2 Likes
Care to comment on the topic of hydraulic pressure lines punctured by hot supersonic metal fragments?
I heard some designs switched to electric motors for turret rotation and other tasks to get rid of hydraulics …
@Frenchy magnificent pictures Frenchy, what the hell is that gun the guy us holding in the last picture, it looks like something arnold Schwarzenegger would use as the terminator.
The British haven’t used hydraulics in turret systems since the Centurion entered service with an all electric turret drive and elevation stabiliser. Obviously there are still hydraulic systems namely in the steering and braking systems which require accumulators but they are housed in the engine/gearbox compartments. Edited this to say on MBT as the Saladin had a torque multiplier which was hydraulic.
1 Like
interesting view from the inside of a russian truck
1 Like
You don’t say…? I don’t expect you need a genius to work this one out.
4 Likes