What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

User avatar
Yakhont
Colonel
Posts: 2870
Joined: Sat 31 Mar 2012 04:33
Contact:

What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Yakhont » Wed 28 Dec 2016 18:56

Is this based on real life equipment, or is it due to Eugen's Eternal Quest for Flavor?
Image

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Mike » Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:18

Realism. The heaviest tank they actually operatrd was the T-72M1 until they bought Leo 2A4s OOTF. The two pricer tanks are fairly realistic "what if" upgrades to the T-72M1.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
Yakhont
Colonel
Posts: 2870
Joined: Sat 31 Mar 2012 04:33
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Yakhont » Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:25

What about the ammo?
Image

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Mike » Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:26

Yakhont wrote:What about the ammo?


More USSR exports? :lol:
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

Steamfunk
Lieutenant
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sun 14 Dec 2014 06:19

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Steamfunk » Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:32

T-55 without BDD - vulnerable to every modern APFSDS round, HEAT. T-72M1 - protected against most 105mm APFSDS, vulnerable to 120mm (DM-33, M829), can deal with TOW and HOT/Milan 1.

Sleksa
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2265
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 12:26
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Sleksa » Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:40

Yakhont wrote:Is this based on real life equipment, or is it due to Eugen's Eternal Quest for Flavor?


http://forums.eugensystems.com/viewtopic.php?p=996300#p996300


Yakhont wrote:What about the ammo?


The problem is that Finland never operationally fielded anything better than the mecar ammo for modernized T-55 (1989) as well as 3bm18 for T-72M1's (1984+), and due to low amount of tanks in the Finnish tab in general, the 2 finmod variants skewer the ap average of the tank lineup fairly high.

I've made the more extensive writeup of finmod on the finnish thread (can be found by searching finmod article on it), but as far as the ammo goes in the iteration that the finmod is portrayed in the game, was a western nation's 125mm ap round with a penetration between the dm33 (leo2a4 ingame) and the dm53 from the longer cannon (2a5 in the game) in the penetration tests when fired from a new 125mm cannon. The sources didn't want to reveal the exact favoured candidate, but it's not really hard to find out which countries were making 125mm ammo and were willing to sell to Finland for a 1+1 result. Other options included the leclerc's 120mm turret, autoloader, cannon and french ap ammo, but this option isn't portrayed as it was excessively pricy and discarded early on in the project
Last edited by Sleksa on Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:45, edited 2 times in total.
Image

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Killertomato » Wed 28 Dec 2016 19:42

23 AP for anyone outside the USSR is fudge. Even 23 AP is kinda fudge for Svinets.

AFAIK it was equivalent to M829A1, which is 22 AP.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Azaz3l » Wed 28 Dec 2016 20:02

Killertomato wrote:23 AP for anyone outside the USSR is fudge. Even 23 AP is kinda fudge for Svinets.

AFAIK it was equivalent to M829A1, which is 22 AP.

Indeed, but then all those Euro tanks would need to lose their 23/22 AP as well since they didn't even have anything comparable to M829A1 in the timeframe (before 1995).
Image

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby another505 » Wed 28 Dec 2016 20:05

Cough-challenger series-cough
Image
Of Salt

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: What is the reason for Finland's glass cannon tanks?

Postby Killertomato » Wed 28 Dec 2016 20:14

Azaz3l wrote:
Killertomato wrote:23 AP for anyone outside the USSR is fudge. Even 23 AP is kinda fudge for Svinets.

AFAIK it was equivalent to M829A1, which is 22 AP.

Indeed, but then all those Euro tanks would need to lose their 23/22 AP as well since they didn't even have anything comparable to M829A1 in the timeframe (before 1995).


This is why I'm okay with it. No REDFOR 23 AP is as cancerous as 25 AP M1A2.

I'm not saying it's just a BLUFOR/REDFOR thing, it's both. Everyone's top-tier shells are overspecced for the timeframe except the US's.

another505 wrote:Cough-challenger series-cough


Challenger 2 is a good example, but AFAIK Japan is just now introducing a shell superior to JM33, which is DM33 made in Japan. Imagine the KMS with 19 AP...
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 10 guests