ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Mighty_Zuk
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 335
Joined: Sat 10 Sep 2016 17:56
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby Mighty_Zuk » Fri 30 Sep 2016 13:32

[EUG]MadMat wrote:
中铁四局 wrote:Yes, I knew I haven't play the game yet(like most of us), but the PERTH is based on M60 tank chassis with ERA block

That's actually a M48 chassis, and you'll notice it is already more armored than the most upgraded ROK M48 ...



The hull is still armored with the old Blazer ERA, but the turret is possibly entirely new with a much better armor scheme.
There's no telling how armored it is, or isn't. Regardless of its actual armor protection (I don't know if Eugen give armor rating based on turret, hull or both), its price tag is too much for its non-existing armor.

With only 6FAV it would not live to fire even 1/3rd of its massive 24 missile stock. So you basically give us a very expensive and highly situational vehicle that must get a lot of attention to be used correctly.

Otherwise there's no incentive to use the Pereh over the Hafiz (80pts) which also has a very large stockpile of missiles.

User avatar
orcbuster
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12362
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 21:04
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby orcbuster » Fri 30 Sep 2016 14:13

Mighty_Zuk wrote:
[EUG]MadMat wrote:
中铁四局 wrote:Yes, I knew I haven't play the game yet(like most of us), but the PERTH is based on M60 tank chassis with ERA block

That's actually a M48 chassis, and you'll notice it is already more armored than the most upgraded ROK M48 ...



The hull is still armored with the old Blazer ERA, but the turret is possibly entirely new with a much better armor scheme.


Considering the turret size it's probably actually quite a bit worse. Chassis can only take so much weight and larger volume means less armor for the same weight.
Image
Viker for ingen!

User avatar
中铁四局
Warrant Officer
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri 17 Feb 2012 13:10
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby 中铁四局 » Fri 30 Sep 2016 14:15

T80U = tankbankai wrote:How the hell does that thing work? does it shoot the missiles out the barrel? I love old vehicles covered in ERA but this thing confuses me.


barrel is fake, it launches missiles from the launcher you could directly see, and it's retractable back to the turret
Dear Eugen, Please give T-72BU its iconic red-eye shtora system back! It looks mean and awesome!

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby Fade2Gray » Fri 30 Sep 2016 14:20

orcbuster wrote:Considering the turret size it's probably actually quite a bit worse. Chassis can only take so much weight and larger volume means less armor for the same weight.


I suppose that makes sense.

Well, that thing is lethal, assuming you can keep it alive or at least not panicked. With the mortar meta being what it is, well... it will be panicked after it fires off the first missile.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

User avatar
T80U = tankbankai
Captain
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu 9 Jan 2014 21:15
Location: Land of dank memes and broken dreams
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby T80U = tankbankai » Fri 30 Sep 2016 14:26

中铁四局 wrote:
T80U = tankbankai wrote:How the hell does that thing work? does it shoot the missiles out the barrel? I love old vehicles covered in ERA but this thing confuses me.


barrel is fake, it launches missiles from the launcher you could directly see, and it's retractable back to the turret


So its a missile carrier disguised as a tank, I thought it was a missile rack on top of a Magach 5 but if the rack retracts I guess it can't hold shells. I'm looking up about this thing and it was only declassified last year!
Wargame: Mediterranean Factions/Thread Of The Year
Image
Countess Bathory wrote:Nearly all of humanity's problems could be solved by delicious fried chicken.

Mighty_Zuk
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 335
Joined: Sat 10 Sep 2016 17:56
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby Mighty_Zuk » Fri 30 Sep 2016 14:50

中铁四局 wrote:
T80U = tankbankai wrote:How the hell does that thing work? does it shoot the missiles out the barrel? I love old vehicles covered in ERA but this thing confuses me.


barrel is fake, it launches missiles from the launcher you could directly see, and it's retractable back to the turret


Feel free to google the difference in this thing's turret size and the M48's turret size. It's definitely not using an upgraded M48 turret. It's entirely new.

Because the gun is fake, the tank doesn't need to carry ammo (which is heavy), and doesn't need to have a real gun (which usually weighs 1.5-3 tons). Different wiring technology, different equipment, a lot of previous equipment was unnecessary. It's not hard at all to both reduce weight in many spots and simultaneously upgrade the chassis to have higher payload capacity.
Don't forget Germany managed to fit a Leopard 2 turret on an M48 tank.

User avatar
orcbuster
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12362
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 21:04
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby orcbuster » Fri 30 Sep 2016 14:57

Mighty_Zuk wrote:
中铁四局 wrote:
T80U = tankbankai wrote:How the hell does that thing work? does it shoot the missiles out the barrel? I love old vehicles covered in ERA but this thing confuses me.


barrel is fake, it launches missiles from the launcher you could directly see, and it's retractable back to the turret


Feel free to google the difference in this thing's turret size and the M48's turret size. It's definitely not using an upgraded M48 turret. It's entirely new.

Because the gun is fake, the tank doesn't need to carry ammo (which is heavy), and doesn't need to have a real gun (which usually weighs 1.5-3 tons). Different wiring technology, different equipment, a lot of previous equipment was unnecessary. It's not hard at all to both reduce weight in many spots and simultaneously upgrade the chassis to have higher payload capacity.
Don't forget Germany managed to fit a Leopard 2 turret on an M48 tank.


Weight is cited to be 50 tonnes. Base M48 is 45. Volume simply does not add up when you add 1 ton of blazer (Cited weight for an era layout for a magach) and a turret twice the size of a m48. Ammo actually ends up weighing more than a standard gun loadout considering that your average tank round weights about 10 kg while a long range spike is 35kg.
Image
Viker for ingen!

Mighty_Zuk
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 335
Joined: Sat 10 Sep 2016 17:56
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby Mighty_Zuk » Fri 30 Sep 2016 15:45

orcbuster wrote:
Weight is cited to be 50 tonnes. Base M48 is 45. Volume simply does not add up when you add 1 ton of blazer (Cited weight for an era layout for a magach) and a turret twice the size of a m48. Ammo actually ends up weighing more than a standard gun loadout considering that your average tank round weights about 10 kg while a long range spike is 35kg.


The Hebrew Wikipedia cites a weight of 65 tons for the Pereh.

Wirri
Warrant Officer
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat 3 Sep 2016 15:36
Location: PERKELE!!!
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby Wirri » Fri 30 Sep 2016 17:40

IMO, It shouldn't have even that much armor, no one wants a ATGM carrier you can't one-shot with a superheavy :roll:
Spoiler : :
Razzmann wrote:
Wirri wrote:Can I finally call myself a shitposter?

You have my blessing.

User avatar
Gorganhound
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 798
Joined: Fri 21 Feb 2014 09:49
Contact:

Re: ISRAEL ATGM PEREH frontal armor way too low?

Postby Gorganhound » Fri 30 Sep 2016 17:42

if an ATGM carrier gets shot it doesn't usually matter if it dies first hit, because its morale is dead and it can't hit the side of a barn
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 52 guests