Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DarkLabor last won the day on June 11 2018

DarkLabor had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About DarkLabor

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. A former worker is much more credible when he, unlike any parties in presence (competitors + judge) , did show me his videos of the competition. The tank losing the accompaniment vehicle. The fixing process on the hull, etc. In addition, the guy who supposedly leaked info on the armor protection said that they made, on their own, some changes to the armor protection of the Leclerc. Yet the 3D model shown was a Giat Industries one used to make a counter proposal on the protection requirements of the swedes. Regarding the suspicion of bribery with the aid of Al Yousef, this has been under reinforced investigation and nothing has been found so far. Giat Industries continues to abide french laws wich led to the dispute in the first place. Do not mistake lobying with corruption. But I give you that the comissions made are sickening for business reporting and marketing...
  2. I am in touch with some former worker of Giat Industries and have some details on what happened. That's how I know one of the Leclerc got its chassis damaged and not the suspension (as claimed the swedes...). I also have the confirmation that, at the time, the Leclerc performed poorly in mobility due to the defect of a temperature sensor that induced surging on multiple occasions. In addition, the tanks sent there were NOT prototypes, they were batch 1 tanks (a pre-series despite what say the engineers). I still maintain that weight is not a gage of efficiency of the armor. There is so many mecanisms that enter into play to defeat a penetrator that it is difficult to make a clear statement. But the example of a large slab of a dense material compared to an array of same thickness having a succession of sandwiches (dense material + rubber + dense material). Overall the slab of dense material is more dense than the array having rubber and air inbetween the sandwiches. Yet the array will be more efficient to defeat a penetrator, because it will disrupt it. The succession of different densities will also reduce greatly the kinetic energy.
  3. They asked for quotations, and maybe got demoed a live fire of said protection in each country. But they did NOT use the different packages for their own testings... They got rigs to put THEIR OWN layouts so they could test on their own but that's about it. NOTHING developped by the different competitors have been tested BY THE SWEDES THEMSELF. What do you want? A full volume made out of the strongest/the most dense alloy you can ever make? (yay, check mate engineers!) That is silly! You have sandwiches that can shear the penetrator (presenting fresh armor as the penetrator is advancing). You can set up your layout so that a large dense chuck can deform the penetrator, backed by a set of disruptors that will shear the penetrator in a different direction, backed by a lightweight high tensile buffer... In the age of composite armor, the mass is nearly irrelevant (totally regarding HEAT protection; a little less for KE protection).
  4. Your lack of knowledge regarding the different stages of the trials is kinda cute. That's not a pure competition à la Strong Europe Tank Challenge where the winner is designated at the end of the "field activities". Nor the competitors have eyes on what could happen behind the rug. They don't clearly know what other competitors have put on the table. Never been educated with crayolas, always pencil and eraser. Never stated that the Leclerc was "perfect" far from it. That is one of your inventions to drag the argument where you want it to be. The Leclerc is a compromise that suited the french army at the end of the cold war (sadly not anymore). It's greatest drawbacks are : -Complexity to use (complexity that serves as anti-theft and complexity induced by the system of systems) -Low ground footprint (forcing to weight every evolution to minimize the increase of ground pressure) -Of course the ridiculous number produced and the lack of family to drag down the prices on "consumables"... The designers of the Leclerc have set every armor modules with a set of mass efficient // volume efficient materials it's protection efficiency varies independently of the thickness. Nothing like what the swedes did with their simulation. The Leclerc has smaller armor packages with more dense materials. In that case, the weight of the turret itself is not a good indicator...
  5. KMW already showed evidence of corruption during the greek trials; that would not be impossible that they did the same thing with the swedes... But yeah keep drawing sunshine and rainbows with your crayolas...
  6. In what world do you live? The Swedes had the opportunity to add "production under license" in their requirements yet they ignored the propositions and threw their industry under the truck by just buying from the germans (the trials in itself was a mean to appease the industrials that were complaining). In addition, they managed lose the accompaniment vehicle of Giat Industries and during that time, they managed to damage the hull of a Leclerc... It was written that the suspension was damaged yet those fools didn't even managed to damage it. The impact was so strong that the nitrogen spheres went up to 1400 bars (were the french STAT managed to go up to 900 bars with their testings) and the bolt holes of the suspension units had been deformed... Hell, even recently, the "armor assessment" "leaked" is just BS. The swedes just 3D modeled however they wanted and put their armor composition in their simulation. Apparently from what I'm reading, you live in the world of care bears & Co...
  7. Well, I never heard of it. This doesn't mean that it never happenned. It could have happenned in punctual manner to validate or gather additionnal data... There is A LOT of things that the constructor (or the DGA!) experimented that has not been revealed to the public.
  8. While there is no radar on this photography, the MSC used to carry a ballistic radar to collect data. Never heard or seen anything like this on the prototypes or the first batches...
  9. Alright! Thanks for this precision! Not the first time eSim Games writes down wrong stuff...
  10. Errr... Welcome in the 1990s... Congrats! More seriously is this a full switch from hydraulic to electric or a just a handiwork to ease the power management? The ideal situation would be to remove all the hydraulic system to replace it with batteries accumulators and the double set of electric motor + gearbox (traverse & elevation). But who knows their limitations in space & budget...
  11. Er... No, it is just a forward-facing camera. You said antenna based on certain claims made by the koreans with their K2 (I also was fooled once when they presented their prototypes)?
  12. https://imgur.com/a/rvwc31g Well the history of the AMX 10 program is quite complicated (at least for the AMX 10 RC). At first (1960) it was planned to have an all tracked family with the ERAC (Engin de Reconnaissance Amphibie Chenillé == Tracked Amphibious Reconnaissance Vehicle) as a recce vehicle with a 90mm gun fitted in an oscillating turret. Studies were pushed towards a 105mm gun system with an ongoing competition between the APX and the EFAB engineers teams for the ammunition. The ERAC was dropped when the specifications were more demanding and other weapon systems were considered. The ECA (Engin de Combat Amphibie == Amphibious Fighting Vehicle) did not last long (mid 60s) but was considered with a wide range of weapon systems ranging from conventional 105mm gun to conventional anti-tank missile with the tube launched ACRA missile system inbetween. In the end, the development of the AMX 10 P seems to be uneventful compared to the AMX 10 RC which ended up being based on the AMX 10 P in order to reduce possession cost and ease of maintenance.
  13. Whut? The cooling unit is right behind the UFP, you can see the air intakes on the pictures. The UFP just carries the main air intake (plus the air filter, I believe).
  14. At the start of the production of the UAE tanks, the armor packages volumes were similar to the french série 1 : But at the end, they all ended up with the same armor packages volumes as our série 2 tanks : Even old ones were retrofitted (as you can see with the apparent gap between the storage boxes) : https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLeT2-6VAAAgSPh.jpg:large
  • Create New...