Kal
-
Posts
347 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Kal
-
-
Aslav bar armour was made cheaply by some Locals, so no need to go plasan. The other thought is that the sides will just carry shovels and shit and if we be tricky, we mighty get a privacy sheet work to cover it, and pretend it something special.
-
Can't shake the feeling that the redback will Look more complete with side slat armour for hull, and rear slat armour for turret
-
Headlight protection installed.
Exhaust line treatment not yet installed.
Iron vision is go...
-
-
Speaking of crude armour
' In comparisons of V-50s scaled by areal density for the experimental ADI targets (hardnesses of 32 HRC and 42 HRC) and steels of MIL-A-12560 RHA (hardness range of 35.4-40.5 HRC): (a) steels have greater resistance to penetration vs. 0.50-cal. APM2 projectiles; (b) ADI has equal or greater resistance to ballistic penetration vs. 0.30-cal. APM2 projectiles.'
-
Im more familiar with the pizza bainite. It literally is the matrix of austempered ductile iron (minus the graphite nodules). Cheap simple and castable, it is a technology that could've been applied during WW2
Australia's sentinel tank is the type of design that could've been mass produced with pizza bainite, if they had known about it.
Perhaps a competition suggestion in there somewhere.
-
1:55 to 2:05
return tracks seems neat and taut
turret is quite busy, hidden by paintjob.
RWS installed, but no RWS gun yet.
-
These funky steels tend to quite similar to silicon spring steel 9260 etc. Its a tech that could have been used in WW2 if they understood it. Its using high silicon steels that are kinda like cast iron alloy compositon but with insufficient carbon for reducing the melting temperature.
-
Spaced textolite
-
-
Are there any good estimates for what a nominal 100mm armour tile consisting of
Front face (Outer shell Al + polyurea, but inconsequential thickness)
20 mm kevlar (prepreg)
40 mm alumina (small hex tiles)
40 mm kevlar (prepreg)
Rear face (same as front face -2mm Al, 0.8 mm polyurea)
Techology base is Korean/Japanese level body armour manufacturer so good precompression during manufacture but minimal obvious remainig precompression for in-use.....but use is IFV.
-
as i understand it, the vendors are allowed (not discouraged) to display various configurations, but when it comes down to the final analysis, the competition is a single variant vs a single variant, ie, the tender score normalisation is about a single offer each.
-
ADBC : 네이버 블로그 (naver.com) page 4, google foo translate
they seem to suggest, Korea can offer bomblet protection like the Germans (Puma) and assume that Lynx will offer bomblet protection.
they seem to suggest, Korea did not have the tech to have the hull blast protection required, but that only Israel's Plasan and Germany's IBD do. Obviously Plasan feeds into Redback.
seemed to suggest, Redback's 42 tonne combat weight can rise to 47 tonne.
they seemed to suggest that (주)삼양컴텍 (samyangct.com) is involved (an armour company supply both Korean tank, and K21 IFV armour 'glove')
there is also an obvious error where they mix up Rafael for Elbit.
-
latest K-rumors
-
So next question is, what are those 2 box things laying down on the starboard side of the hull?
I vote they are ports for hydraulics for ..... assembly.
-
3rd AS21's LFP is without its add-on IFV armour, which probably is installed concurrent with front camera assembly. It looks more like a specialist engineer's / fitter's variant hull...
-
-
4 hours ago, Cleb said:
Starboard side appears up-armoured. Port side left as-is.
-
First look at new proximity fuzed round - YouTube
relevence is twofold,
the XM1211 round (proximity fuse) would be usable on Redback if they placed an apache helicopter derivative gun on the RWS. (M230LF on EOS R400 RWS) which is both highly possible and unlikely because why have 2 differing 30mm cannons on same vehicle??
this round becomes the basis for a proximity ammo for the 30mm Mk44 Bushmaster II , as used accross NATO and asia, including Redback's main gun, or a hypothetical Lynx with Wotan30mm
-
>Boagrius
On the prior page of this thread (page 26) I referenced EOS's Mopoke. EOS-Mopoke-Full-Spectrum-CUAS-Capabilities-Web.pdf (eos-aus.com)
-
Each of EOS, Hanwha, Rheinmetall and presumably Elbit would have decent vehicle mounted solutions for close in anti air applications.
Russia's pantsir would be the global base reference, The Hanwha Biho is probably the western base reference https://www.hanwha-defense.co.kr/eng/mobile/products/antiaircraft-artillery-biho.do
and biho 2 would be a hard to beat next gen unit.
-
-
On 12/11/2020 at 9:24 AM, Boagrius said:
Do we have a sense of which vehicle is likely to be the better protected one? I would have expected the Lynx to have the upper hand here if only based on it being the heavier vehicle. I do wonder if domestic production of the 30mm ammunition plus superior protection levels might yet get it over the line. IIRC there was some mention of the Ph 3 vehicle needing comparable protection levels to the Abrams. Now while that may be a tad ambitious for either candidate, it speaks to the emphasis placed on that particular category.
EDIT: According to DTR, the MSV variant is now out due largely to the purchase of M1150 under Land 8160 Ph1, and an Armoured Mortar vehicle (AMV), Mortar Ammunition Vehicle (MAV) and Armoured Logistics Vehicle (ALV) are now in.Nominally Lynx is a 44 combat weight vehicle (including 6 tonnes) so perhaps 38 tonne transport load.
Nominally Redback is a 42 combat weight vehicle (including 6 tonnes?) so perhaps 36 tonne transport load.
the difference between conventional tracks/suspension VS rubber tracks/suspension is about 2 tonnes, resulting in weight parity
So the weight appear evenly matched, but perhaps Redback marketing is overstating their weight? don't know. Lynx has stated more baked in weight growth potential to 50 tonnes
for efficiency gains. rubber tracks typically are tensioned at twice the tension of conventional tracks, that could result in some structural consequences.
-
http://proceedings.ndia.org/1590/11839.pdf
The MK 30-2 is a gas-operated machine cannon recently chosen as the main armament for Germany's next-generation Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the Puma. This cannon features a double belt feed system with "first round select". A key feature of the MK 30-2 gun is its ability to fire Air Burst Munitions (ABM), using the highly precise AHEAD programming technology. Other key characteristics include a rate of fire of 200 rounds per minute, the capability to fire single shots, and the potential for an emergency firing mode.
Rheinmetall's latest development is the new Wotan 30mm x 173 machine cannon. This externally-powered weapon system has been specifically designed for use in the latest generation of vehicle mounts and remote weapons stations). The Wotan features a unique chainless bolt drive system that accepts two belt feeds and fires at an adjustable rate of between 1 and 200 rpm. Other unique new features include a 100% mechanical hang fire safety, horizontal ammunition feeding and transfer between the bolt and barrel, and the ability to use all NATO standard links, including both the US-standard MK 44 link and the MK 30-2 link.''
point is, that is a lot of vendor lockin, users of MK 30-2 links Army Guide (army-guide.com) are really sparse compared to MK 44 links Mk44 Bushmaster II - Wikipedia (yes, low effort web links, but it paints the picture)
so it appears the Lance turrets can use either Wotan30 or MK30/2 ABM
Land 400 Phase 3: Australian IFV
in Mechanized Warfare
Posted
It was in Darwin? What about Ipswich?