Out of Mothballs: Antiquated Weaponry on the T2k Battlefield

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I statted those out:

http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm
I didn't know it was called the Pioneiro, but I have it.

There are some engineer vehicle variants here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_engi...zilian_tev.htm

A mortar carrier version here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/mortar_carri...r_carriers.htm

Just sayin...

I had missed that because I was looking under tanks instead of light combat vehicles.

A couple notes on the X1A2:

1. It's not a rebuilt Stuart, it's an entirely new vehicle based on the Stuart (likely because Brazil already had some tooling that could be used from the Stuart upgrades).
2. The removed crew member was the assistant driver/machinegunner, not the loader. It did not have an autoloader, and the commander was the loader.
3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
4. The unit price was approximately $400,000 in 1980. That (relatively) high price was why Paraguay bought the EE-9 instead, because it cost $243,600 in the late 1980s.

For the X1, despite being the "not produced in numbers" variant, it's actually the most common, since there were 52 X1, either 1 or 2 X1A1, and 24 X1A2.

Edit: and the first two versions should have a pair of .30 cal MGs instead of the single MAG, since there was one coaxial and one in the hull front for the assistant driver to use.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

I had missed that because I was looking under tanks instead of light combat vehicles.

A couple notes on the X1A2:

1. It's not a rebuilt Stuart, it's an entirely new vehicle based on the Stuart (likely because Brazil already had some tooling that could be used from the Stuart upgrades).
2. The removed crew member was the assistant driver/machinegunner, not the loader. It did not have an autoloader, and the commander was the loader.
3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.
4. The unit price was approximately $400,000 in 1980. That (relatively) high price was why Paraguay bought the EE-9 instead, because it cost $243,600 in the late 1980s.

For the X1, despite being the "not produced in numbers" variant, it's actually the most common, since there were 52 X1, either 1 or 2 X1A1, and 24 X1A2.

Edit: and the first two versions should have a pair of .30 cal MGs instead of the single MAG, since there was one coaxial and one in the hull front for the assistant driver to use.

Thanks for getting me looking at that page again. I'm working on an update now. I don't completely agree with you on some points, but I have some new and updated information to work with. I haven't looked at my page on the X1 in years -- it's nice to take another look.

[pmulcahy11b]

OK, I've done some more research and rewritten the X1 entry. It's here:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm

It has corrections, new info and a new X1 subtype.

[Raellus]

Although not weapons, per se, horses still apparently have a military application, as far as the Russian army is concerned.

https://defence-blog.com/russia-send...of%20Bashkiria.

-

[Ursus Maior]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

3. The gun's actually an EC-90 (the same as on the EE-9 Cascavel), which is a license-built Cockerill, but was unable to fire APFSDS because of the muzzle brake.

Snap-shot comment on this: The EC-90 gun, like the French 90 mm D-921, is a low-pressure gun. So APFSDS is not an option anyway. The gun doesn't have the V(0) to make this a viable projectile option. HEAT remains the only anti-tank or anti-armor option.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Ursus Maior

Snap-shot comment on this: The EC-90 gun, like the French 90 mm D-921, is a low-pressure gun. So APFSDS is not an option anyway. The gun doesn't have the V(0) to make this a viable projectile option. HEAT remains the only anti-tank or anti-armor option.

There is picture on a page I cruised into (I'll find it and edit -- but its nearly dinner for the guys right now) where there are some Brazilian officers holding an APFSDS round for an EC-90 gun. But the text of the article does describe EC-90 APFSDS as being no more effective than HEAT upon striking the target.

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldw...a2-carcara.php

[Vespers War]

APFSDS for the EC-90 was being looked at in case the vehicles went up against opponents who had been provided with ERA. Even without APFSDS being any more effective than HEAT against steel, early ERA was only effective against HEAT and not against kinetic penetrators, so a vehicle with Kontakt-1 might be immune to an EC-90 HEAT shell but get penetrated by a (on paper) weaker APFSDS shell. Brazil eventually gave up on its development, probably because of the odds of that happening went way down after the breakup of the USSR.

[Ursus Maior]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

APFSDS for the EC-90 was being looked at in case the vehicles went up against opponents who had been provided with ERA. Even without APFSDS being any more effective than HEAT against steel, early ERA was only effective against HEAT and not against kinetic penetrators, so a vehicle with Kontakt-1 might be immune to an EC-90 HEAT shell but get penetrated by a (on paper) weaker APFSDS shell. Brazil eventually gave up on its development, probably because of the odds of that happening went way down after the breakup of the USSR.

As quoted above, there was development going on, but the tank lacked the necessary configuration (muzzle break) in addition to the pure development necessary. The USSR breaking up, did not have much influence on Brazil in that regard. However, by the time the project could have concluded, Brazil was looking into buying the M41C as a replacement and procure a true MBT from an indigenous design, either Osorio or Tamoyo.

[Raellus]

A column of Russian ZIS-151 trucks, manufactured between 1948-158, has been filmed by a Ukrainian drone whilst moving towards the front line.

https://truck-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/ussr/ZIL-151.php

I wonder when we're going to start seeing Lend-Lease Studebakers.

-

[Raellus]

...entered production in 1943.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=4ab6522a7c50

-

[Ursus Maior]

Originally Posted by Raellus

A column of Russian ZIS-151 trucks, manufactured between 1948-158, has been filmed by a Ukrainian drone whilst moving towards the front line.

https://truck-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/ussr/ZIL-151.php

I wonder when we're going to start seeing Lend-Lease Studebakers.

-

The ZiS-151 (the factory it was only renamed ZiL after Stalin's death) was also the basis for the baseline BTR-152 as well as the ZIL-485 BAV-A, a Soviet knock-off of the DUKW. The 151 was built between 1948-1958, when it was replaced by the ZiL-157, which was also used as basis for the improved BTR-152V.

The Chinese copied it as the Jiefang CA-30 though and kept on building it until 1986. Both, the original ZiS-151 and the CA-30 are still in active service, though the former only in North Korea and the latter only in Bangladesh. During the Twilight War, these would see massive service on both sides of the Soviet-Chinese theater of war and probably all across Asia and Europe.

Additionally, the Soviets could restart the production line, should they want to. Not a lot is needed.

[Ursus Maior]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

There is picture on a page I cruised into (I'll find it and edit -- but its nearly dinner for the guys right now) where there are some Brazilian officers holding an APFSDS round for an EC-90 gun. But the text of the article does describe EC-90 APFSDS as being no more effective than HEAT upon striking the target.

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldw...a2-carcara.php

Here is the text that explains the ammo question for the EC-90 in the article you linked. The encyclopedia generally does good work, in my personal opinion.

ontrary to common statements, the X1A2 was thus not able to fire APFSDS rounds in the configuration it used at the time. Not only were they not available at the time when the X1A2 was in service, the development of the APFSDS round was never completed by Engesa. It also did not have a muzzle brake that would support the APFSDS round. Since neither requirements were met, the X1A2 never used APFSDS in its loadout. In addition, by the time the APFSDS round could have been ready, interest had already completely shifted to the M41C and the main battle tank projects like the Osorio and Tamoyo.

The X1A2 had access to HEAT, High Explosive Squash Head (HESH), and High Explosive (HE) rounds. The HEAT round was meant for anti-armor purposes and was the X1’s anti-tank round. The HESH round was mainly meant for bunkers, walls and light vehicles, and not as ‘anti-armor’ ammunition. The HE round was used as a general purpose support round. The X1A2 also had access to a white phosphorus smoke round and a HEAT practice round.