Jump to content

Talk:K2 Black Panther

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Extensive re-edits

[edit]

Extensive grammatical alterations (versions 27 October 2011 - 29 Octuber 2011) for conciseness, and removal of superfluous information (mainly pertaining to unnecessary comparisons with the K1A1). I apologise sincerely for the number of edits on the history screen, as this was due to browser issues. 217.39.8.54 (talk) 16:16, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Image

[edit]

Can some one put this pic up?

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/00Zp7sr5C28tu/610x.jpg

Thanks.

copyright?
Associated Press. ): Blast [improve me] 03.05.07 0659 (UTC)

Hey, what about the pics here: http://www.military-today.com/tanks/k2_black_panther_mbt.htm

Might want to start a wikimedia commons page too. Lokster (talk) 06:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blank

[edit]

Why has the page been blanked? Darkness357 10:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blame the vandals. enomosiki 18:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tons -> Tonnes

[edit]

I've fixed the weight on the specification from 55 tons to 55 tonnes. South Koreans use metric ton system (when they say 1톤 / 1 ton, they mean 1,000 kg) and metric ton is properly spelled "tonne". 55 "tons" refers to 55 "short tons" which is the unit commonly used in the USA (1 ton = 2,000lb). Official specification states that the tank weighs 55 tonnes http://bemil.chosun.com/brd/view.html?tb=BEMIL085&pn=1&num=85755 . 55 tonnes = 60.6 tons

Dimensions

[edit]

The width (stated as 3.1m) seems too narrow for a modern tank - I've seen a source giving 3.6m (http://www.military-today.com/tanks/k2_black_panther_mbt.htm). Wonder if this can be verified and cleared up. Out of curiosity, the overall length (stated as 10m) seems short considering an L55 gun is mounted. I'd expect more like 10.5m - but perhaps its mounted further back because of the autoloader. Lokster (talk) 06:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. I checked Hyundai Rotem site, and found the data in wiki is wrong. Your source is right. Kadrun (talk) 01:10, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lock the article

[edit]

There has been half a dozen cases, just this month, where the page has been blanked, most of them possibly by the same person judging by the IP address. I request that this article be locked to prevent further vandalism. enomosiki (talk) 16:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update prices

[edit]

The USD prices reflex 2008 currency values when the won was trading around 950won to the dollar. After November 2008's currency fluxuation, the won now trades around 1350 to the dollar. Lets adjust the prices of the tank in foreign currency. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.204.51.190 (talk) 16:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

[edit]

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 13:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hyundai Rotem K2 pdf adress

[edit]

http://www.hyundai-rotem.co.kr/Eng/Common/data/k2_tramcar.pdf Kadrun (talk) 01:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No image... again!l

[edit]

Hi all, seems that the image in this article (same in the one about Tank classification) has been deleted (non-free?). Can anyone please provide a "free" one? Will tag this appropriately.
Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 23:57, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Korean Tanks are Obsolete?

[edit]

Hi, I hope I don't screw this up. The introductory sentance: "Although the K1 and K1A1 were considered more than adequate to counter opposing North Korean tanks, most of which are obsolete and aging Soviet-era equipment such as the T-34 and the T-54/55..."

Would seem to need a revision given the following news release: "S. KOREA STUDIES NORTH'S NEW BATTLE TANK - South Korean military and intelligence authorities are scrutinizing the performances of North Korea's latest main battle tank, believed to be the latest modification of the Soviet-built T-62, officials here said Aug. 17. The North's Korean Central Television made public footage of the Pokpung-Ho (Storm) days ago. The rare release of such footage by the secretive North Koreans occurred in the tense aftermath of the March sinking of a South Korean warship near the western sea border. Last month, South Korean and U.S. forces flexed their muscles during massive air and naval drills off the eastern coast of the peninsula, despite Pyongyang's warning that it would respond to the war games. "The new tank appeared to have better mobility, survivability and firepower than the existing Chonma-Ho (Pegasus), apparently," a South Korean Ministry of National Defense official said on condition of anonymity. "We're still analyzing the … tank based on the footage from Pyongyang's state television station. The release of footage of the Pokpung-Ho was quite rare, as the existence of the new tank had sometimes been regarded as a rumor." The Pokpung-Ho also is dubbed the M-2002, as the tank is presumed to have been rolled out in 2002, he added. The North Korean People's Army is known to operate up to 800 T-62 variants. Beginning in the late 1970s, North Korea started to produce a modified version of the 115mm gunned T-62 tank, and since then is believed to have made considerable modifications to the basic Soviet and Chinese designs. According to a recent analysis published by Seoul's Defense Agency for Technology and Quality, an affiliate of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, the Pokpung-Ho is believed to be armed with either a newly developed 125mm or 115mm main gun. The improved version would be mounted with a 14.5mm KPV anti-aircraft machine gun, which is more powerful than the 12.7mm gun on older tanks, the analysis states. Other improvements for the Pokpung-Ho include a laser rangefinder, an infrared searchlight and an up-to-date fire control system, according to the publication. The North Korean Army is believed to have about 3,900 tanks, and only one elite mechanized unit would operate Pokpung-Hos. The South Korean Army operates about 2,300 tanks, many of which will be replaced by the state-of-the-art K2 Black Panther main battle tank and modified K1A1 tank. (Source: Defense News)"

Thank you, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.136.15.149 (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC) Also, and I am not sure if this is considered 'continuity' but the 88 Tank article starts out as follows: ...North Koreans had both numerical and technological advantages over the South Korean armor with their T-62 main battle tanks. This seems confusing because on the one hand the North either has obsolete T-34 & T-55's or is armed with T-62 (that pose an increaded threat) - these statement almost contractic one another. It also seems like the statement is on the verge of being an opion - is there a refference that can be sited that confims that the existing 88 Tank is 'more than adequite'? - can it just be dropped, or replaced by a reference on why they Korean's think they need a better tank? For instance: "General so-and-so stated that the increase in armored capability was needed to meet the such-and-such threat..." Would it be ok if tried to get the refence and reword? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.136.15.149 (talk) 18:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be or not to be...

[edit]

The intro to the article states that the K2 is not going to be mass-produced due to design faults, while the body of the article informs us that the ROKA is expected to take delivery of at least 206 of them. Whatever threshold of "mass-production" one takes, that would seem to meet it, so is the K2 going into service or isn't it?--172.162.44.86 (talk) 02:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://news.donga.com/3/all/20130930/57904592/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.144.188.111 (talk) 10:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC) Has already entered deployment. The Korean powerpack has passed the entire test phase after all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noob2013 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on K2 Black Panther. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on K2 Black Panther. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:46, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Any sources for PIP program?

[edit]

I have attempted to find a good citation (preferably something from the South Korean army or from a manufacturer) that actually mentions the Product Improvement Program. I've encountered a great deal of circular references that seem to quote the Wiki article verbatim, but nothing that is verifiable. It may be the case that some details of the PIP have been invented wholesale. That said, my search is obviously stymied by my lack of fluency in Korean. LonelyProgrammer (talk) 19:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Future Altay operators in operators section/map?

[edit]

I believe it could be a good idea to have information about Altay's operators in the operators section in this article, as that tank is based on the K2. In that case they would be separated into an Altay operators subsection, and they would be presented on the map in a different color, for example cyan, to note that it is the Altay and not the K2. Some military equipment pages, such as the AK-47 or Sukhoi Su-30 pages, different versions of equipment are mentioned in both text and maps, but in both cases the "branding" of the variants does not separate them wholly from the original. As someone who is not a professional, I am unsure if the Altay development can be considered a variant of the K2, with significant changes but a variant nonetheless, or a completely separate tank of its own with some shared tech.

I would appreciate it if someone who is better informed could chime in and let me know if it would be a good fit for this article to have Turkey and Qatar listed and colored in on the map as operators of Altay tanks. SharkyIzrod (talk) 12:57, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

K2PL configuration

[edit]

Are there any reliable sources for the changes listed in the K2PL subsection of this article?

Because I've noticed multiple mistakes there when listing the changes, most of which are unknown yet - it's unknown what kind of APS will it have, both Trophy and KAPS are considered, the same with the RCWS,, the most likely candidate here is a Polish one from ZM Tarnów, the hull ammo rack being isolated is also not certain (though unlikely). Not to mention the fact that Poland will not produce 820 of them, but 500[1]. Olekz17 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "https://twitter.com/ObaraMarek/status/1657085326173646848?s=20". Twitter. Retrieved 2023-06-18. {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help)

Altay

[edit]

I removed the Altay from the operators section of the article because it suggests that the Altay is a K2 variant, which it is not. Altay is a completely separate tank, with major differences in both turret and chassis design - it has one more pair of roadwheels (a change that alone would require a major redesign), driver seated in the centerline of the vehicle instead of to the left, 3 man turret (again, a change so significant that it requires completely new turret design), no autoloader, composite armor on the turret sides, indigenous hard-kill APS and so on. Yes, Hyundai Rotem aided in the design process, but that does not make the Altay a K2 variant, the same way being designed by Chrystler/GDLS doesn't make the K1 tank an Abrams variant. They are two completely different designs, which means that Turkey can't be listed as a K2 operator. The only place Altay should be mentioned here is as Hyundai's export success. Olekz17 (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed verifiability and collaborative editing being mentioned in the edit history, so I feel like I need to clarify it. None of the sources in the paragraphs I removed state that the Altay is a derivative of the K2, so removing them doesn't violate that principle. One of them, the ADD website (number 125 in that version of the article) even states specifically that what was exported to Turkey was "K2 MBT Technology", and not the K2 tank itself.[1] Olekz17 (talk) 10:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "국방과학연구소". www.add.re.kr. Retrieved 2024-11-20.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:K2_Black_Panther&oldid=1263396938"