Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Sovngard

  1. I read somewhere that there will be a new book on the Challenger 2 MBT, can someone confirm this ?
  2. Does it also concern the AVDS-1790 1500 HP ? https://www2.l3t.com/cps/products/1500_hp.htm https://archive.org/stream/AVDS17901500HP/AVDS 1790 1500 HP?ui=embed#mode/2up
  3. This helps the digestion of its prey. Fortunately.
  4. Old documentary on the Merkava, including some factory footage (turret mold, suspension units, driver's compartment, ...) and of course, featuring Israel Tal :
  5. Annual report (2017-2018) of the French-German Research Institute of Saint-Louis (ISL), it speaks of the MGCS and all the new technological challenges related to MBTs : https://www.isl.eu/documents/annual-reports/isl-2017-2018-annual-report.pdf
  6. Two French VBMR Griffon at the Belgian national day military parade, Brussels, 21 July 2019.
  7. What were the protection requirements again ? 105 mm APFSDS fired from the German smoothbore gun and the MILAN 1 ATGM ?
  8. Apparently, its maximum gun elevation didn't exceed +15°, that's too bad, because it would have been perfect as a self-propelled howitzer. This vehicle is playable in the video game War Thunder but the ammo racks configuration is somewhat different : Regarding its armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile, was it a 152 mm APDS or APFSDS ? It's not specified.
  9. Featuring the SEPAR kit (SystèmE de Protection EEI pour AMX 10RCR), the weight is around 22-23 t.
  10. Admittedly, but Marc Chassillan isn't a mere historian. It depends if you are referring to their 1960s/70s steel penetrators or their 1980s/90s monobloc penetrators. The former weren't good against multilayer composite armor arrays. Unfortunately, this excerpt is undated.
  11. Looking at the bustle, one-piece ammunition were considered at that time ? British data about the Leclerc protection level don't reflect what we can find in the two French books dedicated to this MBT.
  12. So, it looks like an old British declassified DEFE document ...but it is not.
  13. There should be two pipes connected to the turret roof : one for the air inlet and one for the exhaust outlet (your S1 model features the S2 hot air exhaust pipe). The attachment point at the level of the gun elevation gear should be drastically improved. The hull special armor cavity extends downward from the hull front welding line (which doesn't delimit the bottom of the special armor cavity, the suspension recesses are a small clue). Regarding protection of the gun shield/mantlet/mount/square frame, there is not enough information available in the public domain to make any conclusion/accurate modelling.
  14. The bottom right picture reveals some interesting details.
  15. When the thermal sight of your Bradley is taller than the train station roof : Place and date unknown.
  16. Take a look at the Swedish STRV-103, it had the tendency to nose down after passing an obstacle. So, which Merkava Mk. 4 model features/doesn't feature the loader's hatch ? The fuel tanks within the double-bottom of the hull were also removed (air attenuates shock-waves more strongly than liquids) . I wouldn't say that, With the exception of the brackets and recesses for the special armor modules, the Merkava Mk. 3 turret is still very similar to the one of the previous models (in particular, the M60A2-style rounded bulges on the sides, above the turret ring). However, protection-wise, the armor plate separating the the driver from the engine compartment doesn't appear to have changed since the Mk. 1 and the same goes for the fuel tank in front of the transmission. Of course I agree that the glacis has changed.
  17. IIRC, the Merkava Mk. 4A has a new commander panoramic sight and lacks of loader hatch.
  • Create New...