Has Malaysian Army received their PT-91 Twardy?

[hantu]

Thanks for reply.

Sorry for asking again, what kind of weapon Malaysia army using like for example M-16 etc.

 

[Paxter]

Sorry for asking again, what kind of weapon Malaysia army using like for example M-16 etc.

right now regulars are using styer AUG - soon to be replace with M4 carbine. Territory army using M-16s, spec ops urm depends on what type. but ive seen them using from the latest H&K rifles to AK-101s so.... that bit not too sure i guess it depends on what type of mission they are on.

apart from that not very sure about AT weapons but mostly are from russia(metis varients),pakistan(baktar shikan), and some french ones if i am not mistaken

Hand held anti aircraft missiles urm - anza mk2 for the rangers/paratroopers, there are more but i dont remember they tend to be diffrent depending on the unit type and purpose.

 

[qwerty223]

“In May of 2000, there were presentations of Dynamit Nobel Panzerfaust 3 anti-tank grenade launchers for Polish Army as a part of marketing campaign. There were firing tests of Panzerfaust 3 armed with 3T and improved 3-T600 tandem HEAT warheads (Dynamit Nobel claims that 3T is capable of piercing 900mm RHA behind ERA and 3-T600 over 1000mm RHA behind ERA at the hitting angle of 90 degrees). On Polish testing ground 3T was fired upon armoured steel plates of 550mm RHA screened with Erawa-2 at the hitting angle of 30 degrees and 3T-600 was fired at the similar target at hitting angle of 15 degrees. In both situations German warheads pierced through Erawa-2 but then were capable of penetrating only about 400mm of RHA. Germans were surprised by the protecting level gave by Erawa-2.”

Hi, can you share me this info source?
I would like to add in to me review on PT-91M.
TQ

 

[gary1910]

I have found some info about possibilities of new amour of Malaysian..... T-72M1 420/480mm


“In May of 2000, there were presentations of Dynamit Nobel Panzerfaust 3 anti-tank grenade launchers for Polish Army as a part of marketing campaign. There were firing tests of Panzerfaust 3 armed with 3T and improved 3-T600 tandem HEAT warheads (Dynamit Nobel claims that 3T is capable of piercing 900mm RHA behind ERA and 3-T600 over 1000mm RHA behind ERA at the hitting angle of 90 degrees). On Polish testing ground 3T was fired upon armoured steel plates of 550mm RHA screened with Erawa-2 at the hitting angle of 30 degrees and 3T-600 was fired at the similar target at hitting angle of 15 degrees. In both situations German warheads pierced through Erawa-2 but then were capable of penetrating only about 400mm of RHA. Germans were surprised by the protecting level gave by Erawa-2.”


So it makes PT-91M immune to nearly all 105mm APFSDS and all direct attack HEAT. I would like to see real tests results, because this information really surprised me. I even didn’t dreamed about so good protection (if it is true) of PT-91M. I don't know if ERAWA is so good or Panzerfaust 3 with 3T is so poor.

So why only the results at 30 and 60 degrees and not at the optimun of 90 degrees( or 0 degress depending on how you measure it from) were released????

Is it becos at the optimum , Pzf3 did penetrated it????

The baseline T-72M1 as you said have armour protection of 420 against KE & 480mm against CE, and with the fact that (rough estimatiom) at 30 deg(or 60 deg) only abt have half of the original penetration power and at 15deg( or 75deg) I think only abt have less than 1/3 of the original penetration power!!!!

So based on the above, PT-91M cannot survive Pzf 3T/600 hitting at optimum of 90deg (0 deg)!!!!!

Sometime, one have to analyse amd filter out all the propangada BS from seller to see how they purposefully omitted unfavourable info so to sell their weapon!!!!

Next is based on what that you said that PT-91M immune to nearly all 105mm APFSDS???

Because since it is only tested on CE rds and the fact that most ERA has limited protection against KE rds.

 

[oskarm]

So why only the results at 30 and 60 degrees and not at the optimun of 90 degrees( or 0 degress depending on how you measure it from) were released????

Is it becos at the optimum , Pzf3 did penetrated it????

The baseline T-72M1 as you said have armour protection of 420 against KE & 480mm against CE, and with the fact that (rough estimatiom) at 30 deg(or 60 deg) only abt have half of the original penetration power and at 15deg( or 75deg) I think only abt have less than 1/3 of the original penetration power!!!!

So based on the above, PT-91M cannot survive Pzf 3T/600 hitting at optimum of 90deg (0 deg)!!!!!

Sometime, one have to analyse amd filter out all the propangada BS from seller to see how they purposefully omitted unfavourable info so to sell their weapon!!!!

Next is based on what that you said that PT-91M immune to nearly all 105mm APFSDS???

Because since it is only tested on CE rds and the fact that most ERA has limited protection against KE rds.

1) Estimates of tanks armour are given for projectail hitting at 0 deg and thous includes slope of armour plates, but penetrations for warheads are given in path of penetration (there's no metter if it is 15 or 30 deg)

2) Why 15 and 30 deg were tested? Propably becouse that there are no ERAWA at 0 deg on the PT-91 (expect sides of hull - hull thicknes is ~20mm of steel).

3) Test were conducted with Nobel-Dynamit and Polish Army's Armament Technical Instytiut (WITU) and info is from Polish: "Nowa Technika Wojskowa" Magazine (new militery technique) not from producer of ERAWA. I don't remember the issue but it must be june or july of 2000.

4) The biggest value for 105mm APFSDS i have ever found was samthing like 600mm of RHA at 2km. My estymates are bassing on this book (i have given this info in post you quoted ): http://www.wysylkowo.pl/product_info...17&language=en Author of this book is main disigner of Polish ceramic and ERA armors. This book is mainly for students, engenniers and so on. There are many equations but on the other hand there are lots of pictures from tests.

Now I know something more about tests of ERAWA. At my estimations I was thinking that BM-9 or BM-15 APFSDS were used (penetration ~280mm of RHA at 2km) but now i know that Pronit APFSDS were used (penetration ~500mm of RHA at 2km), so in reality combination of ERAWA and CAWA-2 in modernised T-72 should give even better protection.

 

[gary1910]

1) Estimates of tanks armour are given for projectail hitting at 0 deg and thous includes slope of armour plates, but penetrations for warheads are given in path of penetration (there's no metter if it is 15 or 30 deg)

2) Why 15 and 30 deg were tested? Propably becouse that there are no ERAWA at 0 deg on the PT-91 (expect sides of hull - hull thicknes is ~20mm of steel).

3) Test were conducted with Nobel-Dynamit and Polish Army's Armament Technical Instytiut (WITU) and info is from Polish: "Nowa Technika Wojskowa" Magazine (new militery technique) not from producer of ERAWA. I don't remember the issue but it must be june or july of 2000.

4) The biggest value for 105mm APFSDS i have ever found was samthing like 600mm of RHA at 2km. My estymates are bassing on this book (i have given this info in post you quoted ): http://www.wysylkowo.pl/product_info...17&language=en Author of this book is main disigner of Polish ceramic and ERA armors. This book is mainly for students, engenniers and so on. There are many equations but on the other hand there are lots of pictures from tests.

Now I know something more about tests of ERAWA. At my estimations I was thinking that BM-9 or BM-15 APFSDS were used (penetration ~280mm of RHA at 2km) but now i know that Pronit APFSDS were used (penetration ~500mm of RHA at 2km), so in reality combination of ERAWA and CAWA-2 in modernised T-72 should give even better protection.

Based on the report you have posted , max penetration is at 90 deg( 0 deg of incidence) where Pzf 3T at 30deg( 60 deg) and Pzf 3T600 at 15 deg(75 deg) penetrated 400mm RHA after ERA which kind of showing the limit of PT-91 , because the baseline T-72M1 has 480mm RHA protection against CE.

Let's look at the PT-91:
http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/338/mspopt91029aw.jpg

At the glacis just in front of driver, perhaps about 30 deg and for the turret front is at best about 60~75deg slope, so in reality for the turret at 30 or 15 deg penetration data do not apply to PT-91!

Next is, why there is data about Pzf 3T at 30 deg released but not the data for the more powerful Pzf 3T600 at 30 deg??

The way I see it, only favourable data at very steep sloped are released , in fact , if you do some analysis , the data so far show that Pzf 3T600 and even weaker Pzf 3T have high probability of penetrating a PT-91.