Polish Ground Forces Tech Tree

[NeXeS-PL@psn 270]

On 6.11.2020 at 17:20, RazNaRok said:

System rakiet artyleryjskich Stokrotka Daisy

 

 

 

System rakiet artyleryjskich Stokrotka Daisy (ZRN-01) został zaprojektowany przez polską firmę WB Group we współpracy z ukraińską firmą UkrOboronProm

ochrona obiektów wojskowych i koncentracji sił przed bezzałogowymi statkami powietrznymi oraz pomoc wojskom lądowym w ich misjach:

1. Wykrywanie i niszczenie celów naziemnych takich jak: piechota, lekkie pojazdy opancerzone, stanowiska dowodzenia, składy paliw i amunicji.
2. Wykrywanie i niszczenie śmigłowców i lekkich celów latających - głównie Bezzałogowych Statków Powietrznych.

 

 

System składa się z dwóch wyrzutni rakiet B8V20 z niekierowanymi pociskami 80 mm RS-80P. Te pociski są takie same, jak te używane w śmigłowcu szturmowym Mi-24. Pociski są wyposażone w różne zapalniki czasowe i różne typy głowic w zależności od zagrożenia (naziemne lub powietrzne). ZRN-01 ma operacyjny zasięg ognia 7000 metrów (poziomo) przeciwko celom naziemnym i 4000 metrów (pionowo) przeciwko celom powietrznym. Zintegrowany system radarowy umożliwia wykrywanie celów o niskiej skutecznej powierzchni dyspersji, takich jak UAV, na odległość do 6 km. System rakietowy jest zamontowany na pojeździe terenowym Autobox 6 × 6 Star 266M2.

 

 

 

System wyposażony jest w Zautomatyzowany System Kierowania Ogniem Topaz opracowany przez WB Group. Zastosowanie TOPAZ daje możliwość optymalizacji wykorzystania dostępnych środków ognia artyleryjskiego, aby zapewnić odpowiednią siłę ognia we właściwym czasie i we właściwym miejscu. Z trzyosobową załogą ZRN-01 Daisy korzysta ze zmodyfikowanego podwozia ciężarówki Star 266M2 6 × 6 z ośmiotonową wyciągarką i zasięgiem 700 km. System może zwalczać cele naziemne na odległość do 7000 m oraz cele powietrzne na odległość do 4000 m.

 

 

 

Cóż, jaki kraj ... taki STAR TREK ...

PGZ ... pewnie zainwestowało sporo pieniędzy podatników, aby zrobić coś, co w Syrii robi się najprostszą spawarką i niejasną szlifierką kątową w jakiejś stodole.
Co lepsze ... tego typu steampunk, stworzony w odpowiedzi na realne potrzeby pola bitwy przez siły różnych partyzantów MacGyvera często wyglądają rozsądniej niż wyroby polskiej zbrojeniówki ... nie są dziećmi udawania, że Polski przemysł zbrojeniowy i jego produkty są potrzebne do wszystkiego ...

 

Add equipment that really serves the Polish Army, not some Ukrainian-Polish project that was created by private WB companies, namely AREX!  there is misinformation itself in your post!  PGZ is not WB!

[RazNaRok 616]

23 hours ago, NeXeS-PL@psn said:

If the damage range is about 5km, it is suitable for 8.0-9.0

 

Read again... Read with understanding...

It's not BR I'm asking for...

 

Do the game have mechanics whose allow do dismount weapon system from it's carrier ?

Obviously not...

 

Can the 2x23mm of ZUR-23-2SP fire while being mounted on it's carrier ?

 

22 hours ago, NeXeS-PL@psn said:

Add equipment that really serves the Polish Army, not some Ukrainian-Polish project that was created by private WB companies, namely AREX!  there is misinformation itself in your post!  PGZ is not WB!

 

Do you know words like joke and sarcasm? 

 

You did not catch the sarcastic tone of the post...

Which was made in response to all the paper / prototype vehicles that are recently thrown here, mostly being wiki answer for a keyword: Polish Forces ?

Edited November 10, 2020 by RazNaRok

[K0cur 118]

Light Recon Tank – 1 prototype

The story behind the construction of the 4-tonne reconnaissance tank in Poland dates back to 1932. The Plan for the Expansion of Armored Weapons, Anti-Tank Weapons and Motorization developed at that time provided for the commencement of work on a modern vehicle of this type in Poland. The 4-tonne tank of the British Vickers company was to be used as a reference for it.

It is worth mentioning that the Cavalry Department was exerting strong pressure to start work on a modern reconnaissance tank. The aim was to equip cavalry units with such vehicles. At the same time, it was decided that 4-tonne tanks would be more effective than the available TK tankettes. The possibility of equipping new vehicles with a 47 mm caliber gun was particularly stressed. Finally, Vickers was asked to present its design. The show took place on 27 October 1932 at the Rembertów training ground.

 

 

The financial situation in the country following the economic crisis put a stop to any tangible work in this area. It should be pointed out, however, that preliminary studies on a 4-tonne tank were initiated by the Military Engineering Research Institute’s (WBInż, Wojskowy Instytut Badań Inżynierii) Armored Weapons Design Office (Biuro Konstrukcyjne Broni Pancernych) as early as in the financial year 1934/35. However, their results are not known.

The issue returned in 1935, however, when the General Staff, being aware of the low combat value of the manufactured tankettes and armored cars, considered the possibility of buying British 4-ton Vickers tanks for large cavalry units. Eventually, however, they decided to commission the design of a vehicle with similar parameters domestically. This task was given to the PZInż (Państwowe Zakłady Inżynierii, the Polish National Engineering Works) Study Bureau (Biuro Studiów) in 1936.

 

Light Reconnaissance Tank – PZInż. 140 (4TP)

The main designer of the vehicle, which would receive the factory designation PZInż. 140, was engineer Edward Habich. During the development of this tank, he used many elements from his earlier design – the amphibious PZInż. 130 tank. The project and its documentation were completed on 16th December 1936 and work was immediately started on building the first prototype. The construction of this new vehicle utilized the best and most recently available solutions observed in similar foreign-built vehicles – the light Vickers tanks developed by the engineers Carden and Loyd, especially the Vickers-Carden-Loyd Light Amphibious Tank (prototypes of which had been demonstrated in Poland) and the Swedish Landsverk 100 (L-100 – for the assessment of which a special committee had been sent to Sweden).

Design

The 4TP chassis utilized an indigenously-designed suspension in the form of torsion bars connected to hydraulic shock-absorbers placed in a horizontal position. It consisted of a front-drive sprocket, a rear idler wheel and two sets of rubber-tired roadwheels on each side of the tank. The two return rollers on either side guided the tracks, consisting of 87 cast single-pin double-wedged links with a width of 260 mm and a pitch of 90 mm.

The crew was housed in a crew compartment on the left side of the hull, with the engine compartment to their right. The crew consisted of a driver and a commander. The driver’s position was in the front of the vehicle with the transmission to his right. In front of the driver, there was a single-piece hatch which constituted part of the front plate with an additional observation hatch in the center with a viewport. The driver also had access to a rotating periscope designed by Polish engineer Rudolf Gundlach. The one-man turret was placed above the crew compartment, shifted slightly to the left in relation to the centreline of the hull. It had a two-door access hatch in the rear and an additional hatch on the roof. The turret itself was operated manually and was supposed to be equipped with another periscope on the roof which could be used by the commander. Series-production tanks were also supposed to be equipped with radio stations.

The hull was built from steel plates which were bolted together – a feature borrowed from the Vickers 4-ton Light Tank which resulted in an increased vehicle weight (by approx. 80-90 kg). Despite popular opinion, the hull was not riveted. The front plates had a thickness ranging from 8-17 mm, the sides – 13 mm, the rear of the hull – between 10-13 mm, the floor – 4-8 mm and the top – 5 mm. The turret was made out of rolled sheet steel with a thickness of 13 mm around the sides and 5-6 mm on top.

The power unit was a newly constructed carburetor engine designed entirely by PZInż. The new power unit was the brainchild of two designers – engineers Jan Werner and Jerzy Dowkontt. They began work on the engine on 1st February 1936. The assembly of the prototype was begun in mid-April and ended on 15th August 1936. The very same day, the engine was mounted on an engine test stand and, after four hours of testing, it reached its planned power output of 95 hp. The first series of these engines, as well as its derivative – the PZInż. 425 – was started soon after. One of these was used on the amphibious PZInż. 130 and another was fitted on the PZInż. 140 asymmetrically relative to the main axis of the hull, on its right side. The engine torque was transferred by the main clutch and the transmission via the driveshaft to side clutches and the drive sprockets in the front of the hull.

 

 

Armament

The tank’s turret was structurally similar to the Bofors turret on the 7TP tank, the only difference being its smaller size. The armament was to consist of a 20 mm autocannon with a 7.92 mm coaxial machine gun (most likely the ckm wz. 30 – an indigenous unlicensed clone of the American Browning M1917 heavy machine gun) or even a 37 mm gun in place of the 20 mm gun. During the construction of the 4TP prototype, the Armored Command, under the order of the Ministry of Military Affairs, was considering arming the tank with a stronger gun, the 37 mm wz. 37 tank gun (the same as one the 7TP).

At the beginning, the use of the 7TP turret was proposed, but it proved impossible due to the turret ring diameter being too large. In July 1937, engineer Edward Habich designed and presented a new, slightly modified variant of the 4TP with the factory designation PZInż. 180 and a modernized turret, with a shape resembling a truncated prism. Compared with the original variant of the 4TP, this version was slightly heavier and larger, and armed with a 37 mm gun, used so far solely on light infantry support tanks.

Rejection and Further plans

The project was examined by BBT Br. Panc. at the beginning of August 1937, even before the prototype was completed. The vehicle’s fate was decided by the fact that the gun could only be operated by one crewmember – i.e. the tank commander. It turned out that the tank commander would be incapable of properly carrying out all of his duties (i.e. commanding the tank, observing, aiming, and loading). Building a larger, two-man turret was out of the question as too many modifications would have to be made to the vehicle. An additional drawback was that only some of the parts of the gun would fit in the proposed turret – the barrel with the breechblock and the hydraulic recoil mechanism; the other mechanisms would not fit in the turret and would have to be specially constructed.

Because of all these drawbacks, the proposal failed. Later on, arming the 4TP tank with a locally-built flamethrower designed by the Sappers Development Office (Biuro Badań Technicznych Saperów – BBT Sap.) and the Institute of Armament Technology (Instytut Techniczny Uzbrojenia – ITU) was considered, but this proposal was also never realized.

Ultimately, the finished prototype, the PZInż. 140/4TP, had a turret adapted to use a 20 mm autocannon and a machine gun. It was never armed because the Solothurn and Madsen guns available at the time were ill-suited to the task and there was no indigenously-designed weapon of this type in the Polish arsenal yet.

 

Trials

On 15th August 1937, the PZInż. 140 tank was delivered to the military after factory trials. It was tested in the “Autumn 1937” (“Jesień 1937”) rally along with other prototypes. After its completion, it was sent back to PZInż. for repairs, removal of faults, and technical modifications to the design.

In May 1938, the PZInż. 140/4TP was put through more trials. The members of the committee of military experts decided that, despite several technical shortcomings, the tank was a modern design and, following several improvements, was fit for serial production.

 

Further development

The main feature warranting redesign was the suspension. Despite the fact that it worked well and was flexible, the variant used in the prototype was too “soft” – which caused too much swaying motion on its transverse axis. As a consequence, the gun could not be properly aimed while driving, which was always a requirement of Polish tacticians and would be very important for reconnaissance duties. As well as this, individual parts of the prototype’s suspension were made of a not particularly strong material, which caused quite a lot of damage. It was planned that, in the future, materials of higher quality and durability would have to be used.

Fate and Conclusion

The armored development plan for the years 1937-1942, adopted by the Armament and Equipment Committee (Komitet do spraw Uzbrojenia i Sprzętu – KSUS) stipulated the replacement of the TK and TKS tankettes with a 4-tonne reconnaissance tank. The programme expected the production of around 480 vehicles of this type to equip 18 tank reconnaissance companies as part of infantry divisions as well as four so-called Motorised Units (Oddział Motorowy – OM) part of a motorized brigade.

The final trials of the 4TP tank before the start of the war took place in May 1939. After their completion, the tank had driven over 4,300 km without any major malfunctions.

The fate of the tanks was discussed for a long period of time. In the end, the General Staff decided that the time needed to set up production for the tank would cause significant “aging” of the design, especially given the apparent low usefulness of light tank designs following the analysis of the use of tanks in the Spanish Civil War. Ultimately, the tank was never ordered into production.

 

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W)	3.84 x 2.08 x 1.75 m (12.60 x 6.82 x 5.74 ft)
Total weight, battle-ready	4.33 tons (8,660 lb)
Crew	2 (commander/gunner, driver)
Propulsion	PZInż. 425, 6-cyl, 95 hp, 22 hp/ton
Suspension	Torsion bar, leaf sprung bogies
Speed (road)	55 km/h (34 mph)
Range (road/off road)/consumption	450-240 km (280-150 mi)/60 l/100 km
Armament	20 mm autocannon (proposed Nkm wz.38 FK), 7.92 mm machine gun (proposed Ckm wz. 30)
Ammunition	200 rounds for 20 mm autocannon and 2500 rounds for machine gun
Armor	4 to 17 mm (0.16-0.67 in)
Sources Czołg rozpoznawczy PZInż. 140, Piotr Zarzycki (Wielki Leksykon Uzbrojenia Wrzesień 1939, Tom 141 Prototypy broni pancernej, 2018) Czołgi rozpoznawcze PZInż.-130 i PZInż.-140, Janusz Magnuski (Nowa Technika Wojskowa nr. 11/93, 1993) Leksykon pojazdów mechanicznych Wojska Polskiego 1918-1939, A. Jońca (Edipresse, 2018) Nowe rozdanie, czyli TKS wersji 2.0, Jędrzej Korbal (Technika Wojskowa Historia nr. spec. 6/17, 2017) http://derela.pl/tkdpl.htm Pojazdy Wojska Polskiego 1939, A. Jońca, R. Szubański i J. Tarczyński (Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Komunikacji i Łączności, 1990)

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

Gas 69 2K15 - anti-tank off-road vehicle.

The Military 3M6 "Trzmiel" self-propelled anti-tank guided missile launcher belongs to the 2K15 complex. The 2P26 anti-tank guided missile launcher, equipped with 3M6 "Trzmiel" ATGMs with an armored cabin, was mounted on the GAZ-69 off-road vehicle.

Poland has purchased a license for the production of "Trzmiel" missiles.

[Milocat 4,857]

+1 for an independent Polish tree, it would be a fitting addition to the game.

[NeXeS-PL@psn 270]

ZSU-23-4MP "Biała" 

4×23 mm AZP-23

2x "Grom" range:  400-5500 m

[RazNaRok 616]

ANTI-TANK SELF-PROPELLED GUN PZInż. 160

 

The dynamic development of armored forces in neighboring countries, the weakness of Polish armored weapons

and anti-tank defense prompted in 1937 Eng. Edward Habich to develop a high-speed,

armored vehicle, armed with a cannon. and capable of destroying enemy combat vehicles.

 

The immediate initiator of starting work on this project was the Minister of Military Affairs, Maj. Gen. Tadeusz Kasprzycki.

After getting acquainted with the project of the PZInż. 140 (later 4 TP) decided that its

armament consisting of 20 mm cannon may prove too weak to destroy the enemy's larger tanks. Therefore, he proposed

using the chassis of this vehicle to develop a self-propelled al. 37 mm anti-tank gun.

 

After receiving the command of Ing. Habich started design work. The constructor used tractor as a chassis

a PZInż. 152, based on elements of the 4 TP reconnaissance tank. The first version of the vehicle was characterized by

an extremely low silhouette, a crew of three and was armed only with an anti-tank gun. cal. 37mm.

Because since 1936 BBTBr.Panc. worked on the motorization of 37 mm. parcel of the anti-tank office on the TKS courtyard, the presented

design was subjected to a comparative analysis in March 1937 by the head of the Design and Construction Department of BBTBr.Panc., Maj. R. Gundlach. It showed the enormous superiority of the project of Eng. E. Habich over the TK-SD vehicle. Maj. However, Gundlach pointed out that the vehicle should have at least one machine gun for self-defense. Thanks to the relatively large dimensions, Eng. Habich redesigned the concept by introducing a 4-man crew, an anti-aircraft machine gun and a machine gun to counter ground targets.

 

Compared to the vehicle based on the TKS chassis, PZlnż. 160 had much thicker armor and could take much more ammunition. Its only drawback was the high cost of production, estimated at around PLN 95,000 (PLN 60,000 for a vehicle and around 35,000 for weapons), while the TK-SD cost a total of around PLN 68,000.

Most likely, due to the high cost of the vehicle and the fact that no other cars from this family were built, it was not approved for production, even in the form of a prototype, and it ended up only with the construction of a wooden model.

 

Specifications:

• Weight in full combat readiness - about 4,300 kg.

• Length: hull - approx. 4000 mm, total - approx. 4800 mm.

• Width - approx. 2100 mm.

• Height - approx. 1600 mm.

• Ground clearance - approx. 320mm.    

• Engine - PZinż type. 425, carbureted, 6 - cylinder, liquid cooled, 3.88 liter cylinder capacity, 95 HP at 3600 rpm.

• Maximum speed on the road - 59 km/h.

• Range - 250 km.

• Overcoming obstacles - inclines on hard ground - up to 38°, ditches - 1.6 meters wide, fords - 0.7 meters deep.

• Average unit pressure on the ground - 0.32 kg/cm 2

• Weapons - 37 mm anti-tank gun with 120 rounds.

• 2 machine guns with 2000 rounds.

• Armor made of steel plates, thickness: front - 10-15 mm, sides and rear - 10 mm, bottom - 4-8 mm.

• Crew - 4 people.

 

 

An very liberal ‘what-if’ reconstruction of the ANTI-TANK SELF-PROPELLED GUN PZInż. 160, made by J. Magnuski, based upon the PZInż.152 tractor photograph

 

 

 

A reconstructed sketch of the PZInz.160 by J. Magnuski. 

 

 

 

Based on: Wielki Leksykon Uzbrojenia - Wrzesień 1939. Tom 151. Prototypy broni Pancernej.
Published with unchanged content with the consent of the author of the study.
All rights reserved Piotr Zarzycki

 

Proper translation from Polish to English done in cooperation with Polish Community Co-Ordinator performed by Dymitr Osiński

To whom I would like to hereby thank for the help.

Edited December 15, 2020 by RazNaRok

[Bagniewski 36]

I'd love to see a Polish tree in the game. Polish community is one of the largest, and I don't understand why Ganjin do not want to profit from this.

[StaszekJones 853]

1 hour ago, Bagniewski said:

I'd love to see a Polish tree in the game. Polish community is one of the largest, and I don't understand why Ganjin do not want to profit from this.

Large of community doesn't matter. Problem with polish tech tree in my opinion, is that, poland dont have to much "original" vechicles to add. Too many of this vechicles from list is a paper concept. 

[Gniadex 48]

5 hours ago, StaszekJones said:

Large of community doesn't matter. Problem with polish tech tree in my opinion, is that, poland dont have to much "original" vechicles to add. Too many of this vechicles from list is a paper concept. 

And? Chinese tree is made from every other. Almost everything there is copy, or copy from copy. But there are in the game. Community is very big, Poland played a big role in history, there are many of planes and tanks to Polish tree, few of them are faomus, etc..

 

I know, that we are very complex and I know that many of our people still believes in German/Russian propaganda that in 09.1939 Poland only had a medieval cavalry and charge with sword against tanks, but Polish tree will be a very nice addition to this game. If someone don't want to fly with P.11c, PZL.37 or drive PT-91 that nobody tells him to, but many people want it. So don't be so grumpy and don't whine.

 

 

By the way - someone here said something about PT-17?

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by Gniadex

[StaszekJones 853]

3 hours ago, Gniadex said:

And? Chinese tree is made from every other. Almost everything there is copy, or copy from copy. But there are in the game. Community is very big, Poland played a big role in history, there are many of planes and tanks to Polish tree, few of them are faomus, etc..

 

I know, that we are very complex and I know that many of our people still believes in German/Russian propaganda that in 09.1939 Poland only had a medieval cavalry and charge with sword against tanks, but Polish tree will be a very nice addition to this game. If someone don't want to fly with P.11c, PZL.37 or drive PT-91 that nobody tells him to, but many people want it. So don't be so grumpy and don't whine.

 

 

By the way - someone here said something about PT-17?

 

Yes, and we have copy&paste China content ... Still - polish construction end with 1939. China have many more they own "variances"/changes of tanks than Poland. Poland have only changes in some equipment on tank. This is problem. You have only 2 tanks after 1939 with something created by polish constructor - Twardy and Anders. 

 

PT-17 is working concept, technology demonstrator. From my "informator" i know only it's cannot shoot, many of equipments proposed in this modernization is not installed. Technically it's to expensive to build fully working demonstrator. They still get grants from polish goverment to develop this project but for II quarter of 2020 without effect.

 

And game is not about history. It's about military machine, and polish tech tree dont have too much of them. Best solution is proposed by one of player - combined tree with other nation. 

Edited December 22, 2020 by StaszekJones

[Gniadex 48]

Best solution is Polish tree. Not some weird mix. We have here and other topics enough vehicles to build independent nation. I don't care if half of this tree will be similiar to other. In this game, in almost every nation we have so many planes, or tanks from another. So it will be no problem for me. But I really want to see Polish nations. I really want to fly Polish (not European, or something) PZL P.11, Lim-5, or go to battle with Polish T-55, PT-91, etc. If you hate our country, or simply don't want to play it - don't do it. But please, don't whine and let others have fun.

 

There was a prototype of PT-17. Like many other prototypes some equipments is not installed. But I am curious at what stage are these modernization plans and whether there will finally be a version that we could used.

[SturmWerwolf 793]

I Definitely think Poland and Czechoslovakia will both have their own trees at some point. Similar to Sweden, Large indigenous arms industries and unique enough modifications to bring some new stuff to the table.

[StaszekJones 853]

3 hours ago, Gniadex said:

Best solution is Polish tree. Not some weird mix. We have here and other topics enough vehicles to build independent nation. I don't care if half of this tree will be similiar to other. In this game, in almost every nation we have so many planes, or tanks from another. So it will be no problem for me. But I really want to see Polish nations. I really want to fly Polish (not European, or something) PZL P.11, Lim-5, or go to battle with Polish T-55, PT-91, etc. If you hate our country, or simply don't want to play it - don't do it. But please, don't whine and let others have fun.

 

There was a prototype of PT-17. Like many other prototypes some equipments is not installed. But I am curious at what stage are these modernization plans and whether there will finally be a version that we could used.

Best for you. Not for "gameplay". This game have many more problem than more nation

Ok, you really want to fly some plane - ask for add plane at event gift or premium. The same for Twardy / Anders, maybe some one - two other "tanks". But for nation tree i think is not enough.

Yes, this is prototype. Is inline evolution from PT-16 (PT-16 is not working prototype without any equipment, no armor). PT-17 is riding, have uprgaded gun (no autoloader mounted, no time). Bumar install some equipment but in "production type" PT-17 ultimately have others. 

What the problem is with PT-17 ? This upgrade is very expensive, but still dont give enough protection and firerate as upgraded Leopard 2 tank. Leopard give a more modernization variants, especially you can still upgrade Leopard 2 PL to other configuration. PT-17 is more invasive upgrade for T-72 family, and chance to upgrade PT-17 in the future is drastically decreasing. Other problem is a ammunition for KBM2 - they try to create "universal" gun but there is a lot of problems with NATO standard ammunition. I dont know what exactly problem is that, but in fact Turkey resigned for that weapon too. 

 

And, bro, i dont have problem to poland  I come from Poland

[Bagniewski 36]

I think that the creator of this thread showed that we can have an interesting tree. as he wrote himself, there are few copies and a large part is our productions or modifications. As my predecessors wrote, you don't want to play Polish tree, no one forces you There are many people who are interested in this tree, just look at the statistics of our topics. There are prototypes in every nation and we also came up with some interesting solutions nad projects.

 

ps.pt 16 and 17 is a dead end.

[Gniadex 48]

I know that PT-17 is a dead end but I am curious about the modernization of T-72 and PT-91 which the PT-17 was a proposal and which they are still considering. Will there finally be a final version that they will use in reality and that we could use in the game..

[Bagniewski 36]

The modification of the T-72M1 (A) shows that they want to maintain the efficiency of the T-72 vehicles at all costs until they introduce of a new generation tank (wolf program). I would not count on the development pt 17. More possibly is that the army will be interested in pt 91M2

[StaszekJones 853]

28 minutes ago, Bagniewski said:

I think that the creator of this thread showed that we can have an interesting tree. as he wrote himself, there are few copies and a large part is our productions or modifications. As my predecessors wrote, you don't want to play Polish tree, no one forces you There are many people who are interested in this tree, just look at the statistics of our topics. There are prototypes in every nation and we also came up with some interesting solutions nad projects.

 

ps.pt 16 and 17 is a dead end.

Intresting reserves for tank and planes. Any other is a copy & paste russian tank. 

Problem with trees is that : What we want ot call as technology tree ? This, when some country HAVE, or BUILD any machine ? That problem looking in similar C&P tree, China : China have much more modificated tanks / planes from one reason. This is China, if they cannot buy, they build own version. If they cant buy ammo for tank - they build own ammo. 

In poland tree we dont have any changes from original - only paper changes. If you change machine gun, this is not major update/change. And this is in my opinion ofc, reason for that, Polish tree didnt added.

Next one - what do you expect from paper exist tank ? More than 80 % dont have builded demo tank :x 

PT-17 is not only a tank. This is something what others called "development program". It's not dead end at all - like i said, in poland goverment search way for get T-72 series tank, to get they useful, and sponsoring many of programs about T-72 upgrade.

20 minutes ago, Gniadex said:

Will there finally be a final version that they will use in reality and that we could use in the game..

Finalyl version from this Bumar program is PT-91M2 - fully working tank. But still - to expensive :P If i remember, is something like 70 % of Leopard 2PL cost, but only for upgrade, withour repair base tank. 

[Gniadex 48]

PT-91M2 is on what stage? Is there any prototype?

[Bagniewski 36]

9 minutes ago, Gniadex said:

PT-91M2 is on what stage? Is there any prototype?

Ready to bulid.

 

https://www.bumar.gliwice.pl/en/strefa-militarna/o/modernizacja-pojazdow-typu-t-72-do-standardu-m2

[StaszekJones 853]

9 minutes ago, Bagniewski said:

Ready to bulid.

 

https://www.bumar.gliwice.pl/en/strefa-militarna/o/modernizacja-pojazdow-typu-t-72-do-standardu-m2

Ready to test :P Because it's not tested. 

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

Self-propelled anti-aircraft missile launcher MT-LB 9M31 "Turkus"

 

Tank destroyer BTP-20 Skorpion

 

Poland purchased a license for an artillery tractor / armored personnel carrier MT-LB in 1975, and Huta Stalowa Wola started production the following year. The estimated production volume of about 600 units was almost entirely intended for export, however, at the on-site Research and Development Center for Earth and Transport Machines (OBRMZiT), work was undertaken to construct specialized versions on the MT-LB chassis. The first project was a self-propelled anti-aircraft missile launcher called Turkus. The vehicle was built together with the Military University of Technology in 1976-1979. Two prototypes of the missile car were built, armed with two 9M31 "Strzała 1" missile launchers (NATO SA-9 "Gaskin"), which were manufactured in Poland under license. Unlike the Soviet prototype on the BRDM-2 wheeled carrier, which had a manual drive of the launcher turret, the Polish structure received a hydraulically operated launcher. The field trials of the Turkus anti-aircraft system took place until 1979, when representatives of the management of the Armed Forces decided that the prototypes did not meet the adopted tactical and technical requirements and work on the project was suspended. The second missile vehicle, developed on the MT-LB tracked chassis, was the tank destroyer BTP-20 Skorpion (Combat Anti-Tank Transporter). The vehicle was armed with anti-tank missiles 9M14M "Malutka" (NATO AT-3 "Sagger"), also mass-produced in Poland under license. The tank destroyer was equipped with a hull-mounted MT-LB turret on a raised cylindrical base with a 9M14M single-rocket launcher on its top. The projectile was reloaded manually. In the second half of 1983, tests of the prototype were carried out and the office prepared the technical documentation for starting the production of the initial batch of the vehicle. However, as with the previous design, the military did not express any interest in the new design and the vehicle ended up in a single prototype stage.

[AftiksPL 197]

[Birdlover6989 5]

i would love to see this happen 

[NeXeS-PL@psn 270]

BWP-200  here in the picture in better quality.

On 27/10/2020 at 16:58, NeXeS-PL@psn said:

T-72M1R

As part of the renovation and modification of the T-72M1 to the T-72M1R standard, the W-46-6 diesel engines with a power of 573 kW received an additional digital start-up system.  New power systems with buffer batteries were also installed.  PCO provided passive instruments for the driver (PNK-72 Radomek in place of the active TWNE-4B) and the commander (POD-72 Liswarta in place of TKN-3), the PCT-72 Periscope Thermal Vision Sight was also installed, equipped with 3rd generation KLW-1 thermal imaging cameras  Asteria for the gunner (in place of the TPN-1-49-23 night sight).  At the rear of the tower there is a basket for additional fuel canisters, an air supply pipe to the engine when crossing water fords and a fireproof cover.  The tanks received new sets of tracks.

The modernized T72M1R is still missing from the tech tree

Edited January 9, 2021 by NeXeS-PL@psn