Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. You're missing 2 important points with that line. The first is that BAE are not the OEM of the MCT-30. It's not their design to modify, that's Kongsberg's job. BAE are offering integration onto the CV90 they sell. The absence of APS integration on current-production MCT-30 does not prove it to be impossible. The second is that the D series is not ready for mass production. At all. They say it'll integrate APS, but they don't have anything more than mockups of Iron Fist on the thing. And Iron Fist is also not production ready. I want a source on the claims that the MCT-30 is too small and doesn't have enough power.
  3. It appears that the MCT-30 either cannot accept an APS, or will have a very hard time doing so. BAE is offering its CV90 Mark IV IFV to numerous customers in 2 versions. One version using the MCT-30 turret without an APS, and one with an in-house developed D-series turret with an integrated APS. The main difference, though, is that the MCT is unmanned while the D-series turret is manned. I believe the main issues were that the MCT-30 was too small and had low power output for external systems. This is the same problem the Bradley faces right now (albeit in a different magnitude). If BAE could not integrate the Iron Fist LC, which is tauted as the least power consuming system out there, and definitely the smallest one, on the MCT-30, then it has quite a problem my dude.
  4. 1. To the best of my knowledge the current projected future versions of the Brad (A4, and perhaps A5 as well) are intended to retain the existing turret. While a testbed with the MCT-30 exists, the thousands-strong fleet will not be rearmed any time soon. 2. The MCT-30 has been successfully integrated on the Stryker. The operational requirement was to get that into service ASAP, and that seems to have succeeded. The MCT-30 can probably be modified later to carry APS equipment, if the designers were even semi-competent (and I believe they are competent). What turret with integrated APS existed at the time of selection? How many could be fielded right now? MCT-30 was the right choice at the time and still is. 3. The MCT-30 is now in the army's supply train and training. They know its quirks and it's cleared for service. So why wouldn't the Marines go for that for the new ACV? Again, i'd be very surprised if it isn't upgradeable. No, the US Army is trying to get results fast and at low cost. The Brad turret is going to be around for quite a while, so integrating an APS on it is important; but it is getting old and a bit outdated, and the MCT-30 is the best option available to the US for quick fielding-there are already active Strykers with the things in Europe. No turret currently in mass production has integrated APS, so getting turrets now and fitting APS later isn't a bad choice.
  5. Today
  6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_welding
  7. But funds for a turret clearly exist. They went with the MCT-30 first, which is fine even though they were already committed to the APS program. Now they spent even more money integrating that same turret on an ACV, which is a bad call IMO. They only have one brigade so far getting that turret. It's still not beyond the point of no return to switch to a more capable one. The way I see it, the US Army is taking a somewhat of a British approach by trying to score short term savings by undermining long term efforts, while I believe they should take the hit once, and save big time in the long term. EDIT: Come to think of it, it may be best for the US Army to go for just low cost incremental upgrades to the Bradley. As the OMFV gets preferential budgetary treatment, the idea that an AMPV will ever replace a Bradley seems unlikely.
  8. There are a few tricks that separate gasoline and diesel (and AFAIK supercharged and naturally aspirated) 2 stroke engines. The problem with 2-stroke engines is that the moment the down-stroke is done, the entire cylinder has to be scavenged and filled with clean air (and fuel, for gasoline engines). And the cylinder is full of hot gas above atmospheric pressure. So on small engines, the crankcase and piston are used as a pump, with the piston sliding also playing the role of the valves. On the up stroke air is drawn into the crankcase, on the down stroke it gets pressured and then pumped into the cylinder, ready to work. This of course means you have a lot of air going through your crankcase and can't just spray oil on it, but mix it in with the fuel. You can also get iffy performance thanks to questionable scavenging, rich mixture (if its a diesel, the fuel is injected directly, regardless of the scavenging efficiency), and so on. In larger 2-strokes, the overpressure problem is solved with a blower of some kind, usually an engine-powered supercharger (turbos don't work at low speed, but external blowing is also possible), which allows the crankcase to not be used for air pumping. This means it can be lubricated like a normal engine. Additionally, with some cam-operated valves, and careful arrangement of the system, good axial scavenging can be achieved. Linear scavenging is even more useful for cylinders with a high stroke to bore ratio; such as are found on opposed-piston engines. These are tempermental beasts, but when properly tuned put out a lot of power for their weight and volume. The Napier Deltic took this to a whole new level, and it worked pretty well, but was very hard to maintain. With modern CFD and CAD, the precise arrangement of ports, timing, and dimensions can be found to make this work reliably and efficiently.
  9. LoooSeR

    What are we playing?

    Currently playing Unreal 2 singleplayer. It is terrible. I thought first Unreal had some problems with singleplayer campaign, but Unreal 2 first mission was atrocious. Will do review of Cryostasis in near future, maybe after it Unreal and Unreal 2 quick review, after it probably will update T-64 section in Communist boxes ID thread. I am enjoying this too much after playing not very good games one after another. After Cryostasis my plan is to complete You Are Empty, Metro-2 and Metro-2: Death of Leader (don't confuse those with Metro 2033 and Metro: Last light, those are separate games and studios), maybe Eastern Front 2: The Crash of Annenerbe on top of that Symbiot. A lot of screenshots, some of them will be used in review of Metro: LL.
  10. Cost. Same as with the Abrams, there are a lot of vehicles in service, and the budget isn't infinite, and therefore low-cost upgrades are desired. Low cost implies minimal changes in structure and fittings. Brand-new turrets with built-in APS are quite a bit more expensive than APS upgrade packages, and usually involve longer lead times, not a good thing for the current European focus.
  11. LoooSeR

    The interesting ship photos/art thread.

    "Lider" nuclear Icebreaker project Soviet build nuclear icebreakers Taimyr, Vaygach, Yamal, 50 years of Victory are first in this pic, Liders are last 3. There are questions about financing of this 209 meters long and 48 meters wide nuclear icebreaker.
  12. It's probably a stupid question but.... Why not move some of the Bradley's APS funds to fast track the AMPV's own APS, stick a new turret that already has an integrated APS on it, and call it an M2A5?
  13. From news report about uninteresting stuff related to UVZ they showed assembly shop with something interesting - T-90S for Vietnam, for Iraq and what rumored to be T-90Ms for Russian army. Note that Vietnam tanks have Shtora IR dazzlers. R (Russia?). Not sure if those a really T-90Ms, as frontal mudguards looks different from T-90M prototype showed to public.
  14. Mighty_Zuk

    Land 400 Phase 3: Australian IFV

    So that basically nails down the APS contenders to Elbit and Rafael, offering the Iron Fist and Trophy respectively. Farewell ADS...
  15. If my math is halfway accurate the cut is roughly 17% for the Army's JLTV in that time period. I'd imagine we'll get some clarity on what's going in the next couple of days.
  16. LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    Hezbollah is a political party, Al-Mukowama Islamia is what people refer as "military wing of Hezbollah". This organisation is semi-separate from political party and it is called Islamic Resistance of Lebanon.
  17. 2805662

    Land 400 Phase 3: Australian IFV

    Some answers provided by “the Commonwealth” to clarification questions on unmanned turrets & APS may be of interest. On unmanned turrets: “A tender proposing an unmanned turret would not be excluded, however,.... there is a high risk that an unmanned turreted IFV would not be shortlisted for Risk Mitigation Activity.” On APS: ”Defence has not yet made a determination as to the preferred Active Protection System (APS) for Land 400 Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 program. Defence has however determined that a ‘curtain-style’ APS will not be pursued for these programs.”
  18. If my math is halfway accurate the cut is roughly 17% for the Army's JLTV in that time period.
  19. USNI has the Marines prioritizing the JLTV over the ACV and AAV upgrades https://news.usni.org/2018/09/25/marine-corps-cancels-aav-survivability-upgrade
  20. 1st Cavalry Division Soldiers here completed a two-month program field testing the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV) Sept. 24.
  21. The 1000 NM cannon and FVL aren't going to fund themselves! Wonder what's up with JLTV given how much effort, how important and how good it was supposed?
  22. Looking at the FY19 budget request, the 2020 to 2023 numbers for (you can guesstimate how much 2024 would add in the FY20 budget request). Bradley A4 = ~$1.9 billion AMPV = ~$2.5 billion JLTV = ~$4.9 billion The AMPV and JLTV cuts are not small but aren't substantial relative to the overall procurement plan. The Bradley A4 on the other hand takes a substantial hit but is not kill after all.
  23. Well it looks like this notice is exactly for that
  1. Load more activity