Turret popping championships

I'm sure we're all familiar with Soviet era auto loader equipped tanks popping their turrets but most of you I'm sure are equally unfamiliar with Leopard 2 tanks having a similar if not even worse problem on the modern battlefield.

However fear not! The ever industrious German engineers have already tackled this problem and have developed new ammunition propellant that mitigates the risk of ammo cook off considerably if not even totally nullifying it.

The question is... will the Russians follow suite and fix the biggest single flaw of their auto loader tanks..?

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2007/im_em/ABriefs/8Vogelsanger.pdf

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I remember reading that the main problem for T-Series tanks isn't the ammo carousel but the fact that they have a bunch of loose ammo lying around the fighting compartment and that is what tosses the turret

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      the carousel is still a big issue since it can't really be seperated from the fighting compartment the way a bustle autoloader can

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >they have a bunch of loose ammo lying around the fighting compartment
      There's no space for anything except small caliber ammunition.
      The T-series tanks are cramped as hell.
      I remember going in a T-72M1 as a kid at a tank museum.
      It was claustrophobic.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >There's no space for anything except small caliber ammunition.
        That's where you're wrong, buddy.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >T-series
      You fricking moron the T just means tank. The M1 Abrams isn't part of an M series.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I know, just thought people used that as a colloquial umbrella term for the bunch of them.
        Guess I was wrong

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >just thought people used that as a colloquial umbrella term
          I understood you. Don't let the turbo autists get to you fren.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            nah it's fine. If I use some technical term wrong I don't mind being corrected, even if I am understood regardless

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If we give them long enough they might discover wet stowage.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      If we wait long enough the might also just run out of shells

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Even if they do fix the turret issue it doesn’t fix the problem that small arms are penetrating the hulls of their tanks.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >small arms are penetrating the hulls of their tanks
      They are not. Whom ever has told you this is a silly person.
      The Germans upgraded their Leopard 2A4 gun for the A6 model because they were worried that the old gun wasn't powerful enough back in the day.
      I don't think a 50. cal could penetrate anything except the very weakest spots from behind at the engine compartment.
      And 50. cal isn't "small arms".

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        50 cal is absolutely in small arms

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >The question is... will the Russians follow suite and fix the biggest single flaw of their auto loader tanks..?
    They've had thirty years to change it. Fact is they don't consider turret tossing a problem.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I mean realistically speaking it isn't.
      If your ammo cooks off inside the fighting compartment you don't really care whether or not the turret stays attached to the tank

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It is if you can get the ammo to cook off outside instead.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >keeping your tank crew alive isn't important
        kek

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Reread my post, I'm saying that IF the ammo cooks off in the fighting compartment, it doesn't matter if the turret stays on the tank or not

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >20 years

      You mean 60

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    > Leopard 2 tanks having a similar if not even worse problem on the modern battlefield.
    Lol. Vatnik cope.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Look at the OP pic moron.
      That's worse than turret popping.
      The ammo rack in the hull to the left of the driver has exploded and ripped the tank apart.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Couldn't you just not load ammo into the hull if you're worried about that. The turret ammo has blow-off panels.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          The turret ammunition storage capacity is very limited. Other systems in the turret take most of the space so it would take a serious re-design to increase the capacity.
          Even the US Abrams has ammunition stored in the hull but not that much and the turret of the Abrams is HUGE.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Worse?
        A) It's optional. If you don't store anything there, nothing can explode. You can't just not load a T series autoloader to avoid turret popping.
        B) New propellants don't exhibit the rapid burning behavior. Dunno how they did it, but they did. Considering the ammunition is fired via electrical impulse (there is even a push button dynamo in case of manual firing) you can probably make it so it requires a very high temperature to start burning.
        (That's why it is not recommended to handle the ammunition while being electrical charged and say putting it on a metallic surface)

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >A) It's optional
          Yes but it's like 85% of the total ammunition capacity of the Leopard 2.
          As far as solutions go it's not optimal.
          >B) New propellants
          I know. I mentioned it in the OP and even put a link there.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        You're right but also wrong.

        The Leo in OP's pic was from the turkish army in Syria and was a mobility kill because roaches can't into modern warfare.
        The tank was subsequently blown up by the turkish airforce so it wouldn't fall into the hands of kurds or whoever they were fighting, it's not like an AT weapon caused that carnage.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          That's hardly the only example of a destroyed Leopard 2 tank in Syria.
          For the record my country has used T-72 tanks and is currently using Leopard 2 tanks so it's not like I'm playing favorites here.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >That's hardly the only example of a destroyed Leopard 2 tank in Syria.
            He never said that but ok. Where is your footage of those other tanks in Syria being ripped apart by their own ammo storage?

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >The question is... will the Russians follow suite and fix the biggest single flaw of their auto loader tanks..?
    No because the crew is expendable. The rubles are better spent building additional tanks with whatever parts they can scrap together.

    That Leopard 2 in the picture was destroyed by the Turkish air force by the way. There is no confirmation of a Leopard 2 popping and throwing the turret ike Russian tanks do when hit by a tank or an ATGM.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If the turret is too heavy 🙂

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >6 road wheels

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      F

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Is that a Centurion?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      That's like one of those 4th of July tank / pagoda things.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Any tank can jack in the box. Its merely a question of likelihood. The M1 for example is far less likely to toss its turret than the T-64, T-72, T-80 or their derivatives.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *