Re: Polish OOB 5.5
Back to the main subject - we came to PT-91 Twardy... I must say, that there is a problem with this tank.
First, we should keep in mind, that after a fall of communism, funding for the Polish Army was always scarce, Polish tanks weren't used in any conflicts in that period (including Iraqi and Afghan missions), and a situation in Europe is calm, so there was a natural tendency to save money on tanks...
Armour issue:
We have three versions of PT-91 in the game, with different armour: HF/TF steel 40/40, 55/59 and 60/65. In fact, all articles in the Polish military press since prototype presentation in 1993 agree, that all PT-91s present similar level of basic protection, as T-72M1, and the only change is ERA (among others, in Nowa Technika Wojskowa (nTW) 5/93, 4/98, 5/99, 8/99, 9/2007 - especially thorough are last two). Despite a hull was redesigned, but its shape and technology obviously remained the same, as in T-72M1. The Poles didn't carry works on own modern multi-layer front armour by that time - there was no such need in the 80s, because there was a fresh licence to produce T-72M1, regarded as a modern tank, and there were plans to replace it with T-72S (pity, that a licence wasn't bought before fall of communism).
Main improvement of PT-91, enhancing its capabilities over T-72M1, were to be ERA and new fire control system and vision devices (among other improvements was VIRSS system with laser warning system, a bit stronger engine, better ergonomics and crew's safety, modern firefighting system). The only element said to be strengthened, was bottom (against mines - I guess it has no effect in the game).
A production of new PT-91s lasted only in 1995-1997 years, and it is known, that they weren't later modernized in any significant way (not counting stronger engine in two dozen vehicles PT-91M). After this date, further PT-91 were obtained in a way of modernizing T-72M1 tanks in 1998-2002, obviously retaining their hulls and turrets. New and modernized tanks are virtually not distinguished, and all are named just "PT-91" tanks (modernized T-72s are designated in documents PT-91MA1, but it is never used in practice). Definitely their basic armour structure wasn't changed during the service, which would be difficult and expensive, if possible. Article in nTW 9/2007 says explicitly, that even tanks of modernized variant for Malaysia retained basic armour on T-72M1 level, despite new works on multilayer armour carried in Poland.
There were published many articles in military press, suggesting a need of PT-91's modernization. All agree, that armour protection isn't very good, but as tanks are getting old, nobody views armour strengthening to be feasible (earlier some enthusiastic authors suggested a whole new turret, with 120mm gun at best). There are suggested instead other ways to enhance the tank's capabilities, like (in order of cost/effect) new ammunition, new stabilizer, newer model of 125 mm gun, new engine and transmission, eventually new fire control system (all these things were in fact applied to the Malaysian export PT-91). As a result of limited funds, none of these proposals were accepted so far. It looks like the MoD waits until the tanks happily live their lifespan without any scars and the problem gets solved...
Therefore, all PT-91s in the game, from the beginning, should have the same armour - basically the same as T-72M1. As for sides, only rubber skirts were replaced with tin ones. It also should apply to Malaysian PT-91.
However, as for T-72M1 itself, I don't know, if it shouldn't have the same armour, as Russian T-72A1.
By the way, there is a possible inconsistency in the Russian OOB. I assume, that T-72A1 (designation not used in Russian sources) is a late production "Dolly Parton" model of T-72A. In the game it has weaker TF steel armour (40 vs 45), though (it has stronger turret from other sides and TF heat armour 57 vs 56). Is it assumed, that a ceramic core worsened AP resistance? But if T-72A is the model without the ceramic core, it shouldn't have much better HEAT resistance, than steel armour. T-72A1 also has thicker HF steel armour: 40 vs 34 (I understand, due to welding of an additional plate), but no change against Heat: 45. I'm writing it in this topic because of a possible impact on Polish tanks.
ERA issue
I'm afraid, that Polish ERAWA isn't advanced ERA, unlike Soviet Kontakt-5. According to an article by its designer A. Wisniewski, it decreases penetration of HEAT rounds by 50-70% (ERAWA-1) or over 70% (ERAWA-2) and sabot rounds by 30-40% [nTW 2-3/94].
You must decide, if it's "advanced ERA" in game terms - it doesn't stop sabot round as a rule, only decreases its penetration. Maybe it is a justification to increase basic steel armour to values similar to #010 PT-91A1 Twardy (60/65 steel armour)?... But then, isn't it double protection: increased armour and advanced ERA?
Maybe a number of ERA should be increased?
Contrary to Soviet T-72s and most other tanks with ERA, ERAWA bricks on PT-91 are more numerous, tightly fitted and very thoroughly cover hull's and turret's front and forward part of sides and roof, with few gaps.
The same applies for Malaysian tank.
Gun issue
Unfortunately, as for now PT-91s use only obsolete and poor models of Soviet ammunition from the 70s - first generation used with T-72. The best APFSDS is steel BM-15 (apart from it, worse BM-9, 12, 17), the only HEAT are BK-12 and BK-14.
In 1998 there was shown more modern APFSDS Pronit Ryś, with Israeli tungsten core - but reportedly only a small party of 1000 were made, due to unsatisfactory penetration (500-540 mm RHA, worsening in frost), and they aren't used in practice. There were also developed one or two Polish rounds, but didn't reach production stage.
There were no new Heat rounds bought nor even proposed and it seems, that no development nor import in this field is planned. As for now, there are no announced plans to buy new APFSDS in following years, but it is possible.
So, tanks with old guns should be available from beginning until end. There should be option with Pronit APFSDS, but old Heat, maybe from 1999 - maybe it should have several Pronit available as Sabot, and more BM-15 as AP?
There is however one more option I think of. In case of a "real" war threat in Europe, it may be assumed, that Poland would hastily buy some modern 125mm ammo in Israel or Ukraine (or even Russia - although many players may view Russia as a "natural" enemy in such hypothetical scenario). Such tanks could be available as option, and marked as "PT-91 (wartime)" or similar.
Conclusion
To sum up, I think, that there should be 4 tanks PT-91:
1 - basic model, basing upon #018, available all the time
2 - basic model with Pronit sabot ammo, from some 1999 (gun may replace #161 125mm PO-1 Gun, with old sabot as AP, new 50-54 penetration sabot and old Heat, definitely no "multi-charge Heat")
3 - hypothetical wartime model, with improved gun, available from?... (gun may be, say, #130 125mm PO-2 Gun or #131 125mm PO-1+ Gun, or modified one, although obtaining of "multi-charge Heat" is doubtful)
All Polish PT-91s should have FC 35, and stabilizer 3 (the later wasn't improved since T-72M1 and is most often criticized element). AAMG should be #17 NSVT. Survivability might be improved over T-72M1 (new firefighting system). All should have more SD - 24 tubes in total (now: 2 SD, 2 VIRSS).
4 - assumed modernized model, from some 2014, with same armour, improved gun, stabilizer 4-5, FC maybe 40-45 (if PT-91 are modernized at all, it is doubtful, that FCS will be completely changed to something new, like Savan-15). Obtaining of any new Heat rounds during normal modernization is doubtful, especially multi-charge Heat (rather Sabot ammo).
Passing on to peculiar units:
009 PT-2001 Twardy - to be removed. Around 2002 there were analyses of arming PT-91 with 120 mm Rheinmetall gun, and making it more unified with Leopard 2, but it was definitely abandoned.
010 PT-91A1 Twardy - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 60/65, improved gun PO-1+, stabilizer 4 and improved FC 45, available from 110.
There are no such tanks in 112, and there's no official designation PT-91A1, so the modernized tanks shouldn't be named this way.
It can be made one of proposed modernized variants - but maybe rather this unit, high in OOB, should be removed, and units 342, 408, 409 should be converted instead.
018 PT-91 Twardy - basic variant. It should be available until 120 (now: 12/96). Notes on armour and gun in introduction part. AAMG should be #17 NSVT, stabilizer 3.
342 PT-91A1 Twardy - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 60/65, improved gun PO-2, stabilizer 4, FC 45, available from 110. To be changed to something else.
343 PT-94 Goryl - fictitious tank, existing only in sketches from early 90s.
If any new tank will be developed (and bought) by the Army, it will rather be light FSV with 120mm gun...
408 PT-91A1 Twardy - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 60/65, improved gun PO-1+, stabilizer 4, FC 40, available from 101. To be changed to something else.
409 PT-91 Twardy - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 55/59, improved gun PO-1, stabilizer 4, available 97-100. To be changed to something else.
442 PT-2001 Twardy - to be removed - as 009
Special vehicles
209 PT-91 KMT-6 (Minecl.veh) - basic variant, notes as #018. Ammo should be redistributed (now: 30 HE, 14 Heat)
222 PT-91A1 KMT-6 (Minecl.veh) - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 55/59, improved gun PO-1, stabilizer 4, available from 1/97 - to be changed according to tanks above. There's no official designation PT-91A1.
228 PT-91A1 KMT-6 (Minecl.veh) - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 60/65, improved gun PO-1+, stabilizer 4, available from 1/101 - to be changed according to tanks above
234 PT-91A1 KMT-6 (Minecl.veh) - a supposed modernized variant with front armour 60/65, improved gun PO-1+, FC 45, stabilizer 4, available from 1/110 - to be changed according to tanks above.
Regards
Michał Derela
|
Re: Polish OOB 5.5
Linear Mode
