Yeah, and what happens if they don't properly maintain it after firing so many rounds? Like I said we don't know what happened
Well, I'd like to know more about the 'proper' maintenance of the main gun, since it's tentatively the problematic piece.
It could be any 125mm smoothbore ammo. It might be Norinco, but we don't know.
Sure, the other option is most likely Ukrainian, since Thailand also have BM Oplot that uses 125mm.
We'll just have to ask and see if the crew will tell us who made the ammo, based on the manufacturer's markings.
Stop with all the speculations because it could literally be anything.
I mean, the whole reason there's so much speculation is because the photo of the accident looks really ugly. Let's review the supposed photo.
From the photo, the 125mm gun doesn't just have its barrel going banana peel, the whole thing looks dislodged from its trunnion, with significant discolouring around the trunnion area.
Unless the reason is because the crew & recovery team removed the whole gun for replacement after the accident, that meant there's a significant explosion that took the gun off its mountings.
The ERA on the hull & the turret seems intact, so I think we can discount the probability of the tank taking a hit.
That leaves 2 possible issue, either the barrel burst from overuse/blockage, or the ammo malfunctioned and exploded while in the barrel. Unless the crew is really unlucky and happened to fire a malfunctioning round, the focus will be on the gun and its usage.
I'd say the main questions I have are:
- Did they exceed the barrel life round count?
- Is there a firing rate limit after a period of high intensity firing, the same way 155mm Artillery have fire rate limit?
- If there's any firing rate limit, was it disclosed in the technical & training documents?