T110's Zen-like Inner Core.
Дата: 21.08.2015 22:23:43
Potoroo, on Aug 21 2015 - 18:35, said: If you were forced to make a choice would you prefer to
command an Armata style tank or an M1 Abrams style tank?The_Chieftain: Probably an Abrams one, but it's what I'm used to.
LoooSeR78V, on Aug 21 2015 - 17:49, said: I actually can say that. I posted a
while ago a video where Merkava 4 was trying to shot 2 HAMAS
fanatics running around it and observer was yelling at radio their
locations near vehicle. This circus was almost 40 minutes
long, with tank moving forward and backwards, rotating turret
left and right, while 2-3 those fanatics were trowing grenades at
this tank. I suspect that in this situation Merk 4 crew would
really like to have something similar to Merkava 3 Baz dor
Dalet or Merkava 2 Batash observation cameras ("ears" that IDf
recently started to attach to older Merkavas turrets). So, in urban
conditions, and in any situation when enemy is close and there is a
danger for a commander in form of bullet or grenade, he will never
try to open a hatch (if he is sane) and stick his head out of
armor. In situation when you can open a
hatch and look around T-14 crew can do that as well as any other
vehicle. Commander head is at about same height as commanders of
T-90/80/72 when they are popped out. Problems with looking to
rear with eye do exist, but that is minor problem that is mitigated
by a panoramic sight and fact that tanks are doign their job as a
unit. Also, nobody stops commander from to get up from
his seat and look where he likes too. In case of modern tanks like
Merkava 4, commander have vision blocked by his panoramic sight,
HMGs (sometimes 3 of them) and RCWS, 2 Trophy launchers and crew
stuff in turret rear busket. Like this: At least
T-14 don't have things getting in your way when you are looking
forward. Hell, BMPT was for years around, with
big unmanned turret and nobody was criticising its layout for lack
of observation.The_Chieftain: Hell, BMPT was for years around, with big
unmanned turret and nobody was criticising its layout for lack of
observation. Sorry, on this one I'm not buying it. I don't
care what the Israeli guys did. (I haven't seen the video, I don't
know if they even opened their hatch or not). You can safely open
the hatch and have a good field of vision, you can safely open the
hatch and have a limited field of vision, or you can't safely open
the hatch and are stuck with whatever the periscopes can give you.
Armata falls in the last category. Indeed, visibility to the
direct front can be arguably the -least- critical position for the
commander to be looking when heads-out: He already has the gunner
looking to the front, also frequently the driver. There is, put
simply, no substitute for the field of vision that a crewman can
have using direct vision with his head out the hatch. BMP-T is
closer in analogy to the MGS I mentioned earlier than Armata, as
the TC is in the turret and can actually open his hatch with a
reasonable field of vision while the vehicle is in combat.
Now, there is the doctrinal difference. Historically Soviet/Russian
tankers have gone into battle buttoned-up. This is not something
that Western tankers ordinarily do unless there is damned good
reason to do so. I personally was far more comfortable with the
thought that I could stick my head out and look around, and only in
the most extreme cases of danger did I even half-close the hatch to
the open-protected position.
Quote and in any situation when enemy is close and there is a danger for a commander in form of bullet or grenade, he will never try to open a hatch (if he is sane) and stick his head out of armor.
The_Chieftain: Bull. This is pretty much how we were in
Mosul. http://data.primepor...q/tankmosul.JPG
My carbine was by my hatch, in addition to the loader and his flex
240, so at times when we're driving around high-risk areas, we had
at least the possibility of seeing the bloke with the RPG and
suppressing him before he could get an aimed shot off. Even
when the bullets started flying, we didn't close the hatch. We just
ducked down for a bit. Being able to see a wide, unobstructed field
of vision is invaluable. Compared to any optic yet devised, the Mk1
eyeball has better resolution, better field of vision (both
horizontal and vertical), and better ability to scan rapidly from
one sector to another. Again, you can debate the merits of
whether or not the loss of visibility is acceptable in return for
the other benefits. But denying that there is a substantial loss of
situational awareness and visibility is burying one's head in the
sand.
T110's Zen-like Inner Core.