Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Mighty_Zuk

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    1,468
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Mighty_Zuk

  1. Again, Kaliyah or FGCG, not Carmel. And you're taking this photo and early parameters at face values. The FGCG program was supposed to be a decision between a wheeled solution or a tracked solution. The Eitan was a byproduct of this program, so things obviously change. The 30 ton weight category probably talks about the core family of vehicles which will center around the APC variant. An MBT is part of that program but not yet developed, or shown, because as they've said, they don't know what kind of requirements they want to put forward. Yet. The requirements will be worked out when the key technologies of the FGCG are further developed, and alongside them the concept they want to build a new MBT around. The same approach is taken by the US. Develop a whole bunch of relevant technologies, bunch them all up, try to build a viable doctrine that takes all of them into account, then try to build a chassis and turret that would fit them all. There is absolutely no sense in starting an MBT development program either in the US or in Israel, right now, when there is already a lot of progress being made in the NGCV and FGCG projects respectively. As soon as these are done, run a short program to design a hull and turret, and that's it. Again, just because an official program doesn't exist, doesn't mean there's no progress being made that is specifically relevant to it.
  2. They're showing multiple options the customer can go with. The focus on this one is killer-killer capability. They're also offering the turret with a COAPS with a hunter-killer capability instead. A smaller looking sight only indicates it's a day channel. They showed the RWS in one configuration with a night channel as well.
  3. This is the sight they're using: https://elbitsystems.com/media/COAPS_2016.pdf
  4. I disagree with your disagreement. This is an entirely new turret from Kongsberg.
  5. The Carmel program seeks to create a family of vehicles by 2027. Much like the NGCV, the star of the program is an IFV, because it is the most prone to doctrinal changes and thus required to be the most adaptive combat vehicle type. And again similar to the NGCV, a tank development program is included there. And I should clarify again that Carmel is a program for technology demonstration and cockpit concept design. It ends in 2019. The full program is named Kaliyah (bullet). It stands for Future Ground Combat Group.
  6. I don't think it's a terrible vismod but just a cheap one: FYI, these are definitely not new. They've been around for a very long time.
  7. The MCT-30 is not suitable for integration with ATGMs. If you want a Javelin or any other ATGM, you gotta either mount it on the side of the turret like this: or like this: Both of them are absolutely terrible options, because it makes them highly susceptible to damage from environmental effects and weaponry that would not really bother the turret's armor. Additionally, the US Army may want to couple this effort with the APS program.
  8. It could be good for Norway. Despite having a large users' club, the Leopard family has not seen anything but incremental upgrades at best. On the other hand, no country is currently running an MBT development program in which the timetable defines operational capability in 2025 or earlier. For Israel it could be 2027-2030. For the US we can expect a similar timeframe, perhaps closer to 2030. For Germany and France it's going to be 30's (with France delaying their purchase til 40's). So they'll just have to buy the latest iterations of the current gen solutions. It'll essentially be buying tanks with a standard service life of 30-40 years, but only a few years before the big tank makers make the giant leap forward.
  9. Exactly how old is this one? Was it part of the recent exercise with the 401st? EDIT: Seems to be at least somewhat new, but the really new variants do not have flat sides, even though they have the same crane.
  10. It does have it locked in, but buying at least a couple armed AMPV would make sense, considering the OMFV won't enter service until 2027.
  11. They don't give us anything, and certainly don't owe us anything. Have some humility. This sense of entitlement will do you no good.
  12. Why don't you give us 50 million dollars so we can do that?
  13. There doesn't have to be any difference. That's the whole point - utilize existing components to create a tactically more suitable solution. All cars everywhere around the world are not much different from one another. And yet you see people driving smart cars, SUVs, pickup trucks, minivans, etc etc, because each one has a different need. One may need to just drive small distances and fit in tight parking lots. Another one may need to carry medium sized cargo over long distances. And another one would need to haul a lot of cargo in urban settings. Similarly, the IDF needs systems that can defend cities, bases, FOBs, national infrastructure and other static installations, and it also needs a system based on the same principle or components, that would be able to protect moving forces while itself being on the move, or with very short preparation time. I don't think you've ever seen a 'normal' Iron Dome battery. It takes quite a while to set up. Not something ideal in a combat situation where you need to care about 3 things simultaneously: Staying far enough behind to lower the risk of enemy skirmishes. Staying close enough to provide sufficient protection to all elements of the brigade. Being able to deal with a sudden volley, as artillery fire is typically concentrated in short but powerful bursts to inflict damage before troops dig in. A system as bulky and complex as the Iron Dome is not capable of doing all three at the same time. That necessitates new development, which merely bunches up all the components on one truck. Of course, we don't see the control room, so that may be part of the HQ unit. When you have not one radar, but many radars, split between each launcher vehicle, you can, for example, maintain a constant situation of 2 launchers static and defending the brigade while another 2 are driving alongside the forces, and then switching roles every couple minutes. In a typical Iron Dome battery, though, if you move the radar, the entire battery shuts down. You may say "Why not just buy 2 radars and that's it?", and to that I will say the MMR (Raz - Rav Zro'i), is too expensive. What you see mounted on these trucks is just small blocks taken from that radar and fitted in a dome structure. It lowers the detection range quite severely, but it still allows full utilization of the Iron Dome's energetic envelope, and significantly lowers costs (imagine it being only 10% of the Raz radar).
  14. I think it's important to show residual damage caused by the defeated warhead, and demonstrate that external and sensitive equipment on the turret will not be damaged, or at least its damage can be prevented with a very minimal level of armor.
  15. Just because the components are moved by truck, doesn't make it fully mobile. A truly mobile system is what something along the lines of the Soviet Pantsir, Tor, or M-VSHORAD of the US Army. Something you mount on one truck and can respond within seconds, or at worst a minute or two, to incoming fire. A typical Iron Dome battery takes several minutes to set up each component, and is thus suitable for defense of cities, strategic installations, or FOBs, but not mobile troops.
  16. Export.... to whom? Most countries who would choose to buy a Rafael IADS would either buy a SpyDer or a David's Sling, but not the Iron Dome, because these are designed from the beginning to be more suitable for a conventional threat rather than artillery and the likes of it. The US is the only customer so far, and they're going for the static version and an eventual integration with the MML. The only customer that specifically requested a completely mobile unit, is the IDF. Which makes sense because Rafael released this image when the IDF declared its intentions to purchase a mobile Iron Dome dubbed iDome by Rafael.
  17. Someone needs to fucking DAB on the British MoD.
  18. From a couple months ago: Just replace the MAN truck with an Oshkosh.
  19. Nope. Not this. What you see here is merely the launcher of a static system. The mobile version will have only 10 missiles and not 20, will have its own radar on the same vehicle, and I assume also a control room in there as well.
  20. Yes, the IDF will have mobile IADS systems like the several decades old Vulcan, it will be called Gideon's Shield and will include a mobile Iron Dome battery and an unspecified laser-based weaponry, could be Iron Beam or a low powered laser to down quadcopters. And it won't buy the SpyDer because it already has the Iron Dome instead, and because these two systems fulfill two very different needs. Iron Dome is an extremely versatile system with a focus on very cheap operation that is excellent against ballistic threats and adequate against other threats, while the SpyDer utilizes substantially more expensive components that increase its capability specifically against fixed wing aircraft and distant cruise missiles, but completely invalid against ballistic threats due to its cost. When it comes to intercepting aircraft breaching Israeli airspace, the IDF already possesses plenty enough IADS systems that are extremely capable in that role, such as the PAC-2GEM, David's Sling, and a well dispersed aerial fleet. It's true that Rafael and IAI are government-owned, and design and build things based on IDF requirements, but they too develop technologies and weapon systems geared for export.
  21. IAI's ADA family of products now reaches ground combat vehicles in the ADA-O version. It's a device that enables maintaining the GPS link even in environments with intense jamming. It goes without saying that operation in GPS-jammed environment has been a major capability desired, and thus reflected in R&D of many pieces of equipment, for a few years now. Rafael has also chosen to start marketing its FireWeaver system, a major evolution in the architecture of BMS, and now says it is the world's most mature system, following successful field trials with the IDF.
  22. The M113 are too old, too poorly protected, and too underpowered, to have any significant capability upgrade without creating an entirely new vehicle. These turrets will be mounted on Namer and Eitan IFVs. As for the Yagu, there is currently no plan to purchase them. The niche it fills is not ideal for the IDF. It is suitable for a small crew and small capacity. Protection is limited and seems to be fitted far more for special forces rather than regular forces. Plasan offers, other than the Yagu, the Hyrax and the Sandcat, which can replace the David and HMMWV respectively.
  23. It's called "Panther" (with a hard T), based on the FMTV as I've guessed, and is quite ugly, keeping with the Ze'ev's legacy. It weighs in excess of 10 tons, built for peacekeeping operations, and is the 2nd prototype. A final prototype will include 2 collapsible seats for arrests. It is said that equipping it with light Trophy is too expensive (duh), and not required for its mission parameters anyway.
  24. Is that like an aura effect for Indian modes of transport, or are they intentionally trying to boost some stats on the Arjun?
×
×
  • Create New...