Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. At which point GLATGM is not worth the price of the shot.
  3. I've never heard of the D 739! Is this all that's known about the gun?
  4. Maybe it would be theoretical in Ukraine. In Central Europe CR2 would spot T-14 at maximum 1500 meters. It's not hard. It's impossible because of topography. Even optical artillery observation systems placed on ground platforms are limited there to maximum 3 kilometers.
  5. Development of a 8-tonne reconnaissance amphibious tracked vehicle (ERAC) was launched in 1960. The use of a fin-stabilized shaped charge projectile as main anti-tank round was deemed obvious given the performance achieved with the 90 mm shell. The project consists of a D 739 gun firing a 105 mm projectile with a steel body designed to be fired under higher pressure (2100 kg/cm²) with a muzzle velocity of 850 m/s. The static firing trials in 1962 and the ERAC prototype the following year fall short of expectations ; the accuracy is barely acceptable and the armor penetration is mediocre compared to the caliber. Meanwhile, the ERAC project is cancelled and its successor, the ECA (Engin de Combat Amphibie : amphibious fighting machine) didn't have any more luck. The AMX-10 RC also used a fin-stabilized shaped charge projectile but with a superior ballistic performance (1100 m/s). - MAREST, M, TAUZIN, M, COMHART T9 ; L'armement de gros calibre, Centre des hautes études de l’armement Division Histoire, Paris, 2008.
  6. what was the reason to put 30mm perforated plates on front of Raketenjagdpanzer ?
  7. This is definitely the DEFA gun. Integrating a 105mm would have been impossible to keep the amphibious capability.
  8. The claimed range seems questionable. While IAI states this range on its website, it doesn't distinguish between air-launched and ground-launched ranges. Wikipedia took its infromation from an old Defense-Update.com article, which weren't the most reliable When Rheinmetall offered the integration of LAHAT into the Leopard 2 MBT, the maximum range was stated as about 6 kilometers. First of all, LAHAT can still be detected by all kinds of sensors - optical/IR/UV sensors, radars, etc. LAHAT needs the target to be illumanted in order to be a laser homing missile. Firing the missile, then hoping the tank remains in place/at a position that a last second laser illumination will allow it to hit the target is not a realistic scenario. John Cockerill and Luch of Ukraine also have developed the laser beam-riding Falarick ATGM in the calibers 90, 105 and 120 mm. The 120 mm Falarick has a range of 5,000 meters, but with just 630 mm penetration against steel armor protected by ERA, it has more of a multi-purpose warhead than an anti-tank one. There is also Luch's Konus ATGM for the T-72-120 and T-84-120 Yatagan, from which the Falarick was derived. It has a slightly more powerful warhead (minimum penetration of 700 mm steel after ERA), but that still falls short by quite a bit from being a threat to the T-14 Armata tank.
  9. Some people know about the French ERAC (Engin de Reconnaissance Amphibie de Combat), not to be confused with Engin de Réaction Anti-Chars: It's an amphibious light tank from the early '60s, but apparently it didn't end with this vehicle. New photos have been added somewhat recently on chars-francais.net of a second, albeit similar vehicle: No additional information is revealed, but the mounted gun is quite obviously larger than on the first one. Both vehicles are labeled "ERAC 105mm", yet the website claims the gun to be the 90mm DEFA D 914.
  10. Lahat is still a very good option though and the only GLATM available in 120mm. While i doubt its effectiveness against T-14 i do see it´s usefulness against the much more numerous against T-72 and T-90 models
  11. Yesterday
  12. Hasaka, Syrians turned around US troops
  13. Actually the scenario I was picturing was more the t-14 being lazed by a drone overhead or something, rather than the tank itself - although iirc the sights it uses are capable of laser designating. Also I was just spitballing what the guy might have meant. Its certainly possible he was just using the term missile to refer to the L55A1 apfsds round being developed to counter the newer soviet armour.
  14. Sorry for the double post. It´s not that hard. Lahat travels at 250-300 m/s. During that time, the shooter has to be static in position. That gives the T-14 up to 20 seconds to locate the shooter in a straight line. Depending on the range characteristics of the T-14 radar (of which we can only speculate) it may even track the Lahat since (or shortly after) the launch. However Afghanit not only detects ATGMs via radar, there are also visual detection devices, which could make locating the point of origin even easier (and this without accounting for the automatic target recognition capabilities claimed for the FCS). All this, while valid for ATGM, is also valid for any kind of ammunition shot at the tank. As an israeli tank commander said in an interview last year: an APS isn't really a defensive system.
  15. I didn't notice them. Only smoke launchers.
  16. The vertical launchers are for multi spectral smoke and soft countermeasures against top attack. Against Lahat, normal horizontally launched smoke grenades will do the job. Perhaps in the future one one of the two vertical smoke launchers could be replaced with other hard kill interceptors (just like the ones of the Arena-M, cassettes that launch vertically and rotate mid air so that the explosion and fragments go upwards). But i digress, people often forget that APS also comprises softkill measures.
  17. Moreover you have to try really hard to find a spot where you have a 5 km line of sight in Europe. That's possible basically only in deserts or if the enemy is completely stupid. The Drozd-like APS rockets are not meant for top attack missile defence. On the turret there are 24 smaller vertical launcher tubes likely intended for that (aside of another 24 rotating smoke grenade launchers). What they atually launch is another question.
  18. Indeed. Thing is that there are not many tanks out there with radars.
  19. Any tank with radar can do it
  20. I didn't mean a hardkill interception. Just by popping smoke the missile is useless.
  21. I've seen it mentioned that "missile" could simply mean a tank round projectile. In English a missile is "an object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a mechanical weapon". However the CR2 Streetfighter concept with Brimstone launcher shows the Army is interested in under-heavy-armour ATGM ability.
  22. Lahat can be detected only when target is illuminated by laser (at the end of the flight). And effectiveness of Armata's APS is questionable. It looks like old Soviet Drozd APS, and we don't know if it can be effective against top attack missiles.
  23. I don´t understand how they believe that Lahat is gonna give them overmatch vs the T-14. Lahat may have a very good maximum range (8km) and top attack but its not fire and forget and the missile is fairly slow, meaning that the tank has to be exposed to enemy fire during a long time. If the gunner loses visual on the target, the missile is useless. How its going to go in a theoretical scenario? Cr2 spots an advancing T-14 at about 5km and fires Lahat. T-14 APS detects the missile and the point of origin, Cr2 turret is then spotted by the gunner. T-14 loads Sokol, locks the target and fires. T-14 deploys smoke and countermeasures and reverses to cover while Sokol flies on his own and hits the Cr2.
  24. Quick update on the Argentina-Stryker thing: as i suspected from the beginning, its not gonna happen. Turns out that it was the previous, shitty M*cri administration (not gonna write his name, brings bad luck) which during literally its final hours requested the Strykers. The current Fernandez administration (which has not yet proven themselves to be any less shitty) stopped the whole thing. Word now is that the government wants to buy chinese VN-1 instead which are more modern than the Stryker while costing a fraction of its price. Perhaps there is a chance for some local manufacturing of parts. https://www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/agustin-rossi-frena-compra-vehiculos-armas-militares-nid2394387
  25. LAHAT is also a laser-homing missile, so it is not really suited for use against modern tanks with laser warning systems. Aside of that, the system isn't being used on tanks anymore.
  26. Yes, but only about 40 degrees angle
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...