Mighty_Zuk

Someone claims to be personally familiar with the incident - says it occurred in 2006 after an ATGM hit the powerpack section. Fire was put out quickly enough, engine replaced and it returned to service very shortly after.
 
I don't know what kind of data and statistics MANTAK have, and I know they make overall very practical decisions, but I think it's about time the LFP gets some armor. The hull is too tall to neglect that area and focus all the frontal armor on the UFP.

 
 

And a few photos:
 
And from a reservist brigade; a few photos of the interior:
 

And a few photos:
 
And from a reservist brigade; a few photos of the interior:
 

Below the drum we see a schematics of the hull ammo rack, along with different colors and markings to tell which shells are where. 
The controller shows the number '6', which may indicate how many shells are left in the drum.

Below the drum we see a schematics of the hull ammo rack, along with different colors and markings to tell which shells are where. 
The controller shows the number '6', which may indicate how many shells are left in the drum.

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.
Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 
 
https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html
 
It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):
 
1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)
 
Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 
However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.
 
2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)
 
Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 
The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.
 
3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)
 
Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.
 
4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)
 
Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 
 
5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)
 
Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.
 
6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)
 
Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 
 
7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)
 
Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.
 
8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)
 
Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.
 
9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)
 
Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.
 
 
 
Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
 

"Bombekaster på belter
Hæren og Forsvarsmateriell demonstrerte den nye CV90BK (bombekastervogn) på Rena. Digitalisert kommunikasjon mellom våpensystem er hovedstikkordet for økt kampkraft.  En stund lå tåken for tett over regionsfelt Østlandet til at demonstrasjonen kunne begynne. Det er nemlig ikke lov å øvelsesskyte uten klar sikt.
Telemark bataljon, Hærens våpenskole og Forsvarsmateriell beholdt imidlertid både roen og troen, og ikke langt tid etter lettet tåken. Dermed kunne de fremmøtte få se hva den nye CV90-typen hadde å by på.
RULLENDE BOMBEKASTER
Fire CV90 bombekastere sto klare. Alle fyrte av fem granater hver i retning av målet, som befant seg mellom to til tre kilometer unna.
Mortar Weapon Systems (MWS) er navnet på bombekastersystemet i vognen. Den store forskjellen fra eldre bombekastervogner er at innrettingen i CV90 er automatisk: MSW vet hvor det selv er, og i hvilken retning det peker.
MSW kommer dermed mye raskere til skudd etter at vognen er kjørt i stilling.
– BEDRE TREFFSIKKERHET
Fagsjef ved våpenskole, oberst Trond Haande, forteller at vognene vil tilføre Hæren en betydelig kapasitet innen beskyttelse og mobilitet.
De nye vognene gir også Hæren nye muligheter for å få ild på bakken i løpet av potensielt 1–2 minutter fra målet er observert, noe som er en betydelig oppgradering. 
– Takket være den nettverksbaserte kommunikasjonen mellom drone, stormpanservogn og CV90 bombekaster, oppnår Hæren bedre treffsikkerhet og utsetter personellet for mindre risiko enn før. Tidligere har informasjonen om målets plassering vært formidlet gjennom muntlig overføring. Nå kan dette skje elektronisk, sier oberst Haande.
– Vi i Forsvarsmateriell er glade for å ha levert CV90 bombekaster til Hæren. Dette gir økt kampkraft gjennom gode og fremtidsrettede tekniske og elektroniske systemer, sier Forsvarsmateriells delprosjektleder, Per Rune Hansen i Kampvognprosjektet. "
 
Translation:
"Mortars on tracks
Hæren and Forsvarsmateriell demonstates the new CV90BK (Mortar vehicle) at Rena. Digitized communication between the weapon systems is a important aspect of increased combat power. 
 
For awhile the fog laid too thick over the region of østlandet before demonstrations could start. It is not allowed to practice firing without clear sight.
 
Telemark bataljon, Hærens våpenskole and Forsvarsmateriell meanwhile kept their cool, and not long after, the fog lifts. This meant that the visitors could see what the CV90 variant was capable of.
 
ROLLING MORTAR
Four CV90 mortar vehicles stood ready. All fired off five shells in the direction of the target, which was between two to three kilometers away.
 
Mortar Weapon System (MWS) is the name of the mortar system on the vehicle. The big difference from the older Mortar vehicles is that the mortar system in the CV90 is automatic: MWS knows where it is, and in which direction it points. 
 
MWS comes with much faster rate of fire after the vehicle is in position. 
 
-BETTER ACCURACY
Head of weapons school, Colonel Trond Haande, explains that the vehicles will add considerable protection and mobility capacity to Hæren.
 
The new vehicles also gives Hæren new possibilities for rounds on the ground by potentially 1-2 minutes from the target is observed, which is a considerable upgrade.
 
-Because of the network based communication between drones, IFVs and CV90 Mortar vehicles, Hæren accomplices better accuracy and exposes personnel for less risk then before. Earlier, information about the target whereabouts had to be communicated verbally. Now it can happen electronically, says Colonel Haande.
 
-We in Forsvarsmatriell are happy to deliver the CV90 mortar vehicles to Hæren. This gives increased combat power through good and futuristic technical and electronic systems, says Forsvarsmateriell's part project leader, Per Rune Hansen in the Tank program."
 
 
Source:
https://forsvaret.no/aktuelt/testet-ny-cv90-bombekaster

*cracks fingers*

Something that has interested me for a while, are shape stabilised projectiles. As in, projectiles that are stable due to their shape. Everybody has heard of rotation stabilised and fin stabilised projectiles, but shape stabilised is kind of different. I guess most of you here have seen shape stabilised projectiles without actually knowing how and why they work.

Geek sidenote: Fin stabilised projectiles are actually fin and rotation stabilised.

As I said, shape stabilised projectile have a stable flight path due to their unique shape.

Figure 1: A 84mm Carl Gustav shape stabilised HEAT-round

Note the slightly ogive front and the stand-off, which are characteristic of shape stabilised projectiles (SSP). Both features are absolutely crucial for the SSP to work.
I'm going to throw you guys into the deep end by showing a .gif of the airflow in front of an SSP.
Here's a link because I can't embed .gifv apparently
The first thing you should notice is the air circulating in some-sort of pocket, and that this airflow is subsonic. Before I continue, here's the airflow in front of a blunt projectile: Clicketyclick
While that projectile has a subsonic airflow in front of it as well, it is not circulating.

Here's the airspeed of both projectiles as a normal picture:

Figure 2: Airspeed in front of an SSP


Figure 3: Airspeed in front of a blunt projectile

It's clear that an SSP has a ogive-shaped subsonic airpocket in front of the projectile. This basically emulates the ogive of a normal rotation stabilised projectile. In other words, it makes it more aerodynamic. But does that airpocket stabilise the projectile?
No it does not.

So why is this projectile stabilised? The key is in what happens when it starts to tumble. Right now, there is nothing stopping the projectile from tumbling, and that's the interesting thing. There is literally nothing stopping the projectile from tumbling, except...


the projectile itself.

Lets take a look at what happens when an SSP starts to tumble. (If I remember correctly, I rotated the projectile 10 degrees)
First off, the airflow in front of the projectile. It's fairly obvious that the airflow has changed. Lets check that again, but this time as a picture.

Figure 4: Airflow in front of a tumbling SSP

Again, it's obvious that the airflow has changed. The subsonic pocket has mainly shifted to one side and the air itself isn't really circulating in the pocket. This change causes a huge change in the Cd of the projectile. Let me show you why.

Figure 5: Pressure in front of a tumbling SSP

Next, the pressure in front of an SSP flying straight.

Figure 6: Pressure in front of an SSP flying straight

Please note the approximate pressure in front of both projectiles. The tumbling projectile has, on one side, twice the pressure as the projectile that's flying straight. Very interesting. What's even more interesting is that the pressure occurs on the opposite of the side it's turning to! The projectile is turning upwards, but the pressure builds up at the bottom. This pressure forces the projectile to start turning down again, forcing the projectile in a state where the pressure on all sides is equal.

Voila, a shape stabilised projectile.


But... why does it work?

The subsonic airpocket is created by the stand-off and that little flange, or whatever you want to call it. The dimensions and placement of both are equally important. The stand-off and its side create the airpocket and the flange give the airpocket the required shape. The stand-off size can vary, but the flange size and placement is very important. If the flange is too far forward or too far back, the airpocket will be either too small or too big. Why does the size of the pocket matter? Because of this:

Figure 7: Subsonic pocket in front of an SSP

I changed the parameters slightly and made all airflow above Mach 1 red. Whatever is not red, is trans- or subsonic. The interesting thing to note here, is the pocket extends to the edge of the projectile (if I made the projectile better it should be exactly on the edge). (Sidenote: Here's the same picture of an SSP at a 10° angle)
While the airpocket does not start at the flange, the flange determines where the pocket starts. If, at this velocity, the flange was further back, there would be supersonic flow hitting the front of the projectile, massively increasing drag. If the flange was further forward, the airpocket would be further forward too. This would mean the airpocket would not end at the edge of the projectile, but further out. Creating an airpocket which is wider than the projectile. This would allow the projectile to tumble a bit, because pressures wouldn't change much unless there is supersonic flow hitting the projectile.

It is also possible to change the size of the airpocket by changing the front of the projectile itself. If the radius connecting the front and the stand-off is too big, the airflow inside the pocket would disrupt the circulation. The same would happen if the radius is too small. The angle of the front is important as well, but I haven't expermented that much with it so I don't know how important it exactly is, but it has an effect on the airflow.

By the way, if the flange did not exist at all, the airpocket would start at around a third to half of the stand-off. Which would completely ruin the airpocket. Without a flange, the stand-off itself would have to be way bigger and longer to create the same kind of airpocket.

But Bronezhilet, I hear you cry, if the airspeed changes, the pocket changes as well!

I'm glad you brought that up, because you are right.

A shape stabilised projectile only works properly within a certain flight envelope. If the projectile is moving too fast, the airpocket would compress allowing supersonic flow to hit the front of the projectile. Which in turns increases drag. By a lot. If the projectile is moving too slow the airpocket widens, allowing the projectile to tumble a bit before it would stabilise.

I've been brainstorming with Colli a bit, and we've come to the conclusion that is why some projectiles are both shape stabilised and fin stabilised. When the projectile is moving too slow for shape stabilisation, the fins would keep it pointing in the right direction.



And that concludes today's lesson. Thank you for reading.

Maybe this would also fit into the German armor topic...
 
Rheinmetall still plans to build the Agilis vehicle in Romania, which was developed in cooperation with the local (AFAIK state-owned) industry. They are expecting a contract worth €234 million.
 



 
https://www.armyrecognition.com/november_2017_global_defense_security_news_industry/rheinmetall_could_manufacture_agilis_new_8x8_armoured_in_romania.html
 

Nope. They write APC instead of APS.
You can understand this when they say "Afghanit APC".
 
The 100mm ammunition is for the Afghanit APS of course.
 
But the interesting part is that they list 2 separate designations for the Afghanit's ammo, meaning there are probably 2 variants - 1 for the Armata family (T-14 and T-15) and 1 for the lighter Kurganets.
 
If I were to guess, the Kurganets uses fragment-free munitions as it will face a lower threat of top attack munitions (fragments help the Afghanit's horizontal launchers reach fairly high) and needs more focus on dismount protection.

UPDATE:
In light of a low profile "scandal" in the Artillery acquisition program, to replace the M109 with an Elbit's solution, a commission was set in May this year, to debate the issue as well as the future needs of the artillery corps. Among the topics were also the number of artillery pieces eventually required by the IDF, in this 1.5 billion dollar program (likely price for first batches, as usual).
On 03/08/17, the commission brought its recommendations to the Minister of Defense and were approved. 
 
The recommendations were not released and are still classified, however it is assumed that some of them were to go ahead with Elbit's proposal and not renew the bid, in which South Korean and German firms were also involved, in cooperation with Israeli companies IMI and IAI. 
 
Approval of the recommendation allows to continue the development work of the Elbit's artillery piece, to be constructed in Soltam facilities in Israel.
 
Reasons for the necessity of the commission, brought by other Israeli defense companies (IAI and IMI) and various sources:
Elbit's solution is still developmental and not yet fielded elsewhere, whereas their solutions are proven and fielded, or no longer developmental. Their solutions technically do meet all IDF's requirements for an artillery system, thus should not be so quickly disqualified. The IMoD was not transparent with them on several topics including the decision to disqualify them. Meanwhile the IMoD had been in constant talks with Elbit without the knowledge of these companies, and while the process with them was practically frozen due to lack of communication on IMoD's part.  
TL;DR
The plan to equip the IDF with cannon artillery has been approved and embedded into the Gideon multi-year plan. However there's something fishy in this program, and I would not be surprised if we'll hear a corruption case eventually.

New images.
Turret details:

 
Clockwise from the top:
1) Commander's sight.
2) Dual missile launcher.
3) 4x Trophy radar.
4) 60mm mortar.
5) Gunner's sight.
6) 30-40mm cannon with dual feed, 400 bullets.
7) Smoke grenades.
8) Coaxial machine gun 7.62mm, 700 bullets.
 
Illustration on the Eitan. Presentation had low res unfortunately:

Defense-Update take decades to post new content, but when they do, they always add some nice new details:
http://defense-update.com/20171010_aps-3.html
http://defense-update.com/20171010_maf.html
Prime example is this new photo of a test rig.

To be fair, it might not be too wise to put the Oplot-M into mass service.
Best course of action IMO would be to give just a handful to an experimental weapons unit, pair a few military photographers to them, and send them off to limited operations. Then market them as combat proven, with combat footage being made available to top military brass tasked with procurement. Boost sales and for every sold piece, buy several cheaper derivatives for the Ukrainian army. They can make do with what they have.

I didn't say anything about penetration either.
 
 
See?  That's what I said.  I never claimed that HESH is impotent because it cannot penetrate.  I am saying HESH is impotent because it's impotent.

But do you know what's funny?  We had this exact same argument two years ago, and you argued in the same cringing, cowardly manner you are now.  Also, you said some hilariously insane shit, like claiming that gun-launched HESH rounds are "30+ kg."  Bitch, an entire M830 MPAT round is under 30 kg!  RDX has a density of under 2 gm/cm^3.  A 120mm wide 30 kilogram cylinder of RDX would be 1.3 meters long, or about 30% longer than an entire round of M829.

Do you know what I love though?  That you can maintain this attitude of haughty superiority when you say things that are so easy to show are wrong.  You must slay with chicks.  I can just imagine you walking up to a woman at a bar and spitting a line of bullshit about being a space shuttle door gunner in the dinosaur wars while there's visibly diarrhea leaking down your leg.  How do you manage it?  What is your secret, great master?

So that makes you pretty much entirely vulnerable to most modern ATGMs, especially the Russian Kornet which will get a serious overmatch. 
ATGMs are something you can swarm pretty easily, and is readily available to concealable infantry. Smoke will give a chance at evading them, for a while. But it's a very limited solution.
And APS is not enough to replace passive armor modules.
 
 
Want to add missiles? Give it to the IFVs, or have a gun-launched missile. Limiting yourself to using the gun only against medium-armored targets or soft targets, and only using ATGMs (HVMs) against tanks sounds a lot like what an IFV does. 
You know what's the good thing about NOT going your way? You actually have dual capabilities. You have the freedom to fire off missiles before you have a line of sight with an enemy, softening them up, and then reliably engaging them with a powerful main gun that you can know will pierce their armor. You don't limit yourself to just one capability that greatly limits you to a very certain range of engagement. If they get point blank, you're dead.
 
 
First, that depends highly on the APS itself. Developing a tank to use HVMs as its main anti-tank weapon is a very expensive undertaking. It takes billions. Updating an APS to utilize different launchers to avoid the physical restriction in time delay is nothing in comparison.
Second, this advantage in ambush situations is dwarfed by the fact that you never send a single tank to do anything alone. You send a platoon of 4 at the least, or you send a company, and even without HVMs they can deliver a LOT of firepower in a very short time. Short enough for a whole column to not realize what's hitting them. 
 
 
Hulls are already traditionally less armored than turrets. But it probably has nothing to do with sprinting from cover to cover. If you have still plenty of targets in LoS, that can also fire directly at you, you don't sprint anywhere. 
 
 
What you're essentially proposing is another Challenger 2. Not in its characteristics, but in its design philosophy. That's shit-tier. You leave no room for improvement. The UK MoD thought they could do with a tank gun that couldn't actually pierce modern armor properly. It was okay for a couple of years. But very shortly after, still when it was young, its gun became obsolete. And because of short-sightedness they need a crap-ton of money to put the firepower at a merely adequate level, for less than half their tanks. 
Same here. You want a tank whose firepower is easily countered but NOT easily replaced. You want a tank that is only lightly protected, but still go toe to toe with modern MBTs?
 
Just a little side note; The T-14's turret can be replaced. They won't do it for now, but if they'll feel it's necessary, they can either bolt on armor or have the turret replaced with something more mechanically resilient to add armor on it, whereas changing a gun to deal with such a change would require a tremendous logistical effort.
 

I got a few more if you want.
 
Merkava 3 MRS:
https://www.idf.il/media/12069/000903698.pdf
 
Compass for Merkava 3 (also retrofitted on Mark 2, Magach 6/7):
https://www.idf.il/media/12166/000907324.pdf
 
Nagmapop long range observation system:
https://www.idf.il/media/12149/000907014.pdf
 
AFV curtain (?):
https://www.idf.il/media/12083/000904368.pdf
 
Bore-sight for 120mm:
https://www.idf.il/media/12094/000905070.pdf
 
MLRS Hull part 1:
https://www.idf.il/media/12187/000907600.pdf
 
MLRS Hull part 2:
https://www.idf.il/media/12188/000907618.pdf
 
MLRS Launcher part 1 (part 2 missing):
https://www.idf.il/media/12687/000905135-מנתץ-משגר-כרך-א.pdf
 
M109 "Rochev" hull+turret electric systems:
https://www.idf.il/media/12205/000907987.pdf
 
M109 "Doher" hull+turret electric systems:
https://www.idf.il/media/12116/000906042.pdf
 
M109 "Dores" hull+turret electric systems:
https://www.idf.il/media/12204/000907979.pdf
 
Merkava 1/2/3/4 special working tools:
https://www.idf.il/media/12702/000908169-כלי-עבודה-ייעודיים-למרכבה-סימן-3-4-בז-1-2.pdf
 
Magach 7 electric systems:
https://www.idf.il/media/12700/000908142-מגח-7-חשמל.pdf
 
Magach 7 modernized electric systems:
https://www.idf.il/media/12750/000908363-מגח-7-מערכת-חמשל-חדישה.pdf
 
That's about it for today folks.