Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MRose

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. As far as I undeerstand, the weight is not limited as long as it meets the protection requirements. The Lynx KF41 (at 50 metric tons at most) falls quite a bit short of the Ground Combat Vehicle (the proposed designs weighed 60-70 metric tons), it is actually closer to the Griffin III (at nearly 40 metric tons with armor package fitted) than to the GCV. The original/planned requirement for the NGCV was apparently to carry at least a crew of two and five dismounts, but this was toughened to carry at least a crew of three and six dismounts. The US Army's decision makers could very well change their mind and prefer a lighter or heavier vehicle by 2026, when the NGCV is scheduled to enter service. The Lynx KF41's design is modular, so a lower weight can be achieved, but this might require lower protection levels. They can't change their mind once the RFP is drawn up without something short of scrapping the whole thing. The NGCV was supposed to be around ~25-35 tons, almost a new FCS, but I guess they moved up the IOC quite a bit so they can't do something too radical and that's how we ended up with the OMFV. Now I'm getting a clearer idea why the RCV and all the other programs were lumped into the NGCV CFT.
  2. Hardly an issue for a vehicle that is only supposed to enter service in the mid to late 2020's. And more importantly it's the size and weight the Army is looking for with the OMFV, the NGCV was suppose to be on the lighter side. Seems like the Lynx is designed for the GCV contest and not the OMFV.
  3. I wonder if the NGCV will actually get a full buy, since they definitely had something more revolutionary/transformational in mind, but couldn't make it work in the timeframe because of all the other failed acquisitions.
  4. Probably based on assumption that it is either made on base of what we had on hands in T-72B3, or that we are using Chinese export crap, both of which is a possibility. GurKhan had a comment on our thermal imagers, and he wasn't postivie in it about their capabilities. I thought it was French crap
  5. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    Definitely a possibility, but I don't see the IDF using it in a dangerous role over let's say a Robattle. I'd figure it will be something along the lines of a smaller Griffon or M-ATV, given Plasan is Israeli.
  6. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    That seems more possible, but the article is from 2015 so is it possible plans have changed? I guess if you have a 1/2 person capsule that would provide enough protection, but what role would this fill? Guarding the flank and preventing infiltration? I thought the Eitan buy was suppose to be huge.
  7. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    You have some sources? That seems like a death trap
  8. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    The IF-LD was developed with the IDF in mind?
  9. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    https://www.janes.com/article/83690/idf-to-test-iron-fist-aps Extremely doubtful the Trophy-HV will be going on the Eitan, if the IDF is testing the Iron Fist-LC
  10. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/09/the-armys-future-tank-may-not-be-a-tank/ Time for a new thread?
  11. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    The US is very happy with the Israeli APSes, and Israel now has to locate production in the US. The Israelis didn't want to rush the Carmel and I guess decided to shift away from requirements based because of how many fuck-ups and they actually have to field something now.
  12. MRose

    Israeli AFVs

    Looks like the timetable for the NGCV would prevent whatever becomes of Carmel from competing. Maybe whatever is the follow-on.
  13. "Experimentation will begin “within the next couple of years,” he said, but he thinks hypersonic cannon shells could reach out to 100 km (63 miles). At that range, Maranian said, cannon can take on targets that today require more expensive rockets. So what do the rockets do? Well, they get longer-ranged too. That means, in turn, that means rockets take over missions from the most expensive missiles, so those have to gain range as well." They're looking at 1000nm now
  14. You know you can just turn them off, right? If that's the case, and you're preparing for a near peer war, the money is better spent elsewhere...