Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kal

  1. That exhaust could, should be fatal for their chance of winning land 400 phase 3.


    However there are ways to ameliorate it, for instance puma has its exhaust in same spot, and they pre cool the exhaust.  T-15 also have their exhaust in the same spot, but covered by some type of angled reactive armour.


    Even an old school diesel's wet scrubber will reduce temperature from 300 Celsius down to 60 Celcius. 


    So lots of options, but something needs to be demonstrated by Hanwha, or else...

  2. 9 minutes ago, Calicifer said:

    With the advent of drones, we will be going backwards technologically. AA guns placed on tanks, low caliber AA guns, low caliber missile launchers. These kind of weapon platforms should see comeback as a lot of drones do not require high capability, heavy equipment to beat. Though, it will be good decades until drones will mature technologically enough to pose real battlefield combat threat on their own. At the current moment, they are little more than a cool hype. 


    Drones are not hype, even a basic drone can provide profound real time reconnaissance for artillery.

  3. The full 57mm seems more future appropiate to me, as rounds get more electric and high tech, the bigger round becomes more sensible, and the full 57mm is more of a antiair/naval round.


    Future threats of drones and atgm will be easier to defend against using the full 57mm.  Particularly the army can share a programmable airburst with the navy.  (Or even a hypothetical steerable round)


    Think syria/libya/ukraine.  

    Good accuracy at limit range of atgm is good.

    Valid airdefense capacity against uav is good.

    Indirect artillery support based on uav spotting is good.


    The short 57mm in can is also a valid round, cheap and cheerful. A different class of cost, a different class of use, more of a see it with naked eye type range use.

  4. This time around, “the Army is not requiring any bid samples prior to contract award,” yesterday’s release makes clear. “The Army is still drafting the M&S [Modeling & Simulation] test plan which may require vendors to build early surrogate platforms” (emphasis ours), but any “surrogate” will be only “a low-level mockup (e.g., digital, wood, etc.),” not anything nearly as expensive as an actual drivable vehicle.



    Sheeesh, paper tigers

    There should be enough mostly real, very current options available now to test, (and americanise) including





    All of these probably have significant surviveability vs other IFVs and infantry.  And are either real, demonstrable or approaching demonstration


  5. On 4/7/2020 at 1:00 AM, Jackvony said:

    Also, is the armor of the Merkava's especially fragile compared to other vehicles? This seems like a lot of damage to the armor for a single hit.


    Kinda, but plenty of those images are where other tanks have even less armour.


    but for the turret, the sloped geometry allows Merkava to omit the buster plate (Challenger, Abrams) and use a thin N?RA instead.  It appears optimised for precursor/RPG 7 size, and when main charge goes off, it is trashed.


    thing is, Merkava armour modules are field swappable,  same level of repair for Abrams/Leclerc would require the tank sent back to manufacturer in a different continent.  high cost in availability and time.

    After about 4 years, an Abrams tank needs about $1m in field repairs in that year (and increasing each year), vs a reset is also about $1.2m.  they just expensive to maintain, it doesn't take much Abrams maintenance to fund new tanks from alternatives

  6. That is not perforated armour, its a modesty bra for merkava N?RA.


    Its a type of NERA, each line of slots presume an airgap between sandwiches. So 4 rows of slots indicate 5 NERA sandwiches. 


    Good thing about Merkava iv, no other tanks visually exposes so much of whats underneath as a merkava iv.  Cant really tell whats in a forty year old abrams, but merkava is really unmodest.


    Israels need to recycle tanks and crew if yom Kippur war re-occurred.  Merkava iv is optimised for field repair.

  7. 1 hour ago, Lord_James said:

    After getting some time to read through the article provided by @Militarysta (thank you), I can sorta see how they can pull it off: Manganese and Silicon are both great for making strong steel, manganese increasing the harden-ability of low carbon steels, and silicon also increasing the harden-ability

    No, that is not how it works in this case.  by far the greatest source of the strength is the fineness of the structure, which is depended upon carbon to drive it, silicon to stabilize it, and soak time at a suitable temperature to let it occur.


    This stuff really is the steel matrix from Austempered Ductile Iron, but soaked at around 200 to 300 Celcius, thus the name pizza because it cooks really well at 200 celcius.


    (and usefully, a 200Celcius cooked bainite retains its strength to temperature like 500 Celcius,  which is different to how QT steels work)

  • Create New...