N-L-M

Improved hull:

 
Currently 5,38 Metric Ton.

Mock up is coming along:

 
 

Many missiles are axi-symmetric. In particular those which spin in flight have to be. Therefore, in order to generate lift for horizontal flight they must fly at a positive angle of attack. Examples of such missiles include SS.10, SS.11, Swatter, Sagger, Spigot, Spandrel, Metis, Kornet, HOT, MILAN, and others.
The TOW also has entirely horizontal wings, but as it does not spin in flight the horiz tail is canted at 2 deg down to raise the nose for positive AoA, and can then vary from +2 to -6 deg, unlike the vertical tail which goes symmetrically from -4 to +4 deg.

If that's what you feel best suits the needs of the Lone Free State, go for it.

Yeah that's the new suspension test bed
Note the 5 in arm hydro pneumatic stations as opposed to 6 torsion bar stations on the regular Brad.
In testing now IIRC.
Also note the weight simulators on the turret cheeks.

Yeah that's the new suspension test bed
Note the 5 in arm hydro pneumatic stations as opposed to 6 torsion bar stations on the regular Brad.
In testing now IIRC.
Also note the weight simulators on the turret cheeks.

From the discord:

Working prototype to production is a non negligible step.
Other than the refit market for vehicles using the AVDS already, yes. The MTU engine is sufficiently different in shape to make integration into AVDS tailored spaces... annoying. Boat-hulled Pattons come to mind.
 
I'm not absolutely sure the thing isnt fully production ready, just smells to me like it.
 
If it is indeed fully ready, then yes L3 has managed to develop one AVDS upgrade since they bought the IP and plant.

{Drums, sounds of chanting in distance}
"Rooikat, Rooikat, Rooikat..."
 
{Opposing chanting begins, in counterpoint}
"Ratel, Ratel, Ratel"

The Lone Free State of Texas needs YOU!
The year is 2255, and the Lone Free State is still recovering from how hard it got hit during The Big One. The geography and politics of the local area are such that borders are very hard to draw, movement ranges are long and points of contact may shift at any time. The Lone Free State Rangers require a new family of vehicles capable of keeping the peace and moving forces safely in the presence of both light irregular forces and thin skinned improvised armored vehicles. 
More details to follow soon.

So, this is objectively wrong.

From the Swedish trials doc, note the side protection of the ammo bustle.
And note that that was a downgraded armor package.

So, this is objectively wrong.

From the Swedish trials doc, note the side protection of the ammo bustle.
And note that that was a downgraded armor package.

There is no reason to believe ARAT 2 has ceramics, it's a single curved ERA tile.
To clarify, M32 is the ARAT 2 reactive tile.

The Lone Free State of Texas needs YOU!
The year is 2255, and the Lone Free State is still recovering from how hard it got hit during The Big One. The geography and politics of the local area are such that borders are very hard to draw, movement ranges are long and points of contact may shift at any time. The Lone Free State Rangers require a new family of vehicles capable of keeping the peace and moving forces safely in the presence of both light irregular forces and thin skinned improvised armored vehicles. 
More details to follow soon.

The Lone Free State of Texas needs YOU!
The year is 2255, and the Lone Free State is still recovering from how hard it got hit during The Big One. The geography and politics of the local area are such that borders are very hard to draw, movement ranges are long and points of contact may shift at any time. The Lone Free State Rangers require a new family of vehicles capable of keeping the peace and moving forces safely in the presence of both light irregular forces and thin skinned improvised armored vehicles. 
More details to follow soon.

Ikv 91 appreciation post.  Vehicles and crew here are participating in training exercises, 1978.  Photos from the Swedish Arsenalen museum archive.  Link to a few more.  The infantry rider photo is separate from the others in both setting and photo collection
 
 
 

 

 

 


 

@N-L-M Time to prepare your wallet, kek
 

5km is approx 16000 ft. At that altitude, good luck hitting anything without a fire director.
In WW2 manual aiming was used only for short range close in air defence, anything longer ranged than a Bofors 40mm was directed, and even those got mk 51 directors by 1944. The need to accurately calculate lead and drop on a moving target is essential, unless the target is within tracer range- typically less than 5k yd.

5km is approx 16000 ft. At that altitude, good luck hitting anything without a fire director.
In WW2 manual aiming was used only for short range close in air defence, anything longer ranged than a Bofors 40mm was directed, and even those got mk 51 directors by 1944. The need to accurately calculate lead and drop on a moving target is essential, unless the target is within tracer range- typically less than 5k yd.

5km is approx 16000 ft. At that altitude, good luck hitting anything without a fire director.
In WW2 manual aiming was used only for short range close in air defence, anything longer ranged than a Bofors 40mm was directed, and even those got mk 51 directors by 1944. The need to accurately calculate lead and drop on a moving target is essential, unless the target is within tracer range- typically less than 5k yd.

Thanks for posting, I would appreciate it if you could kindly edit out the various video game references.
Regarding the above, the numbers for the M60 and vanilla M1 are both high, as is the number for the T-62. The rest of the Soviet numbers appear to be similarly made up, so expecting the late model (at the time) Abrams numbers to be anywhere near accurate is... hopelessly optimistic.

Thats quite the bold assumption to make regarding ease of retrofit of armor package upgrades, should they even be the case.
 
Considering how that turret has Trophy electronics boxes on it, as well as the cheeks, but for example still only has the older CROWS- I consider it more reasonable to assume its the counterweight for a few reasons-
1. If that isn't the counterweight, what is? Considering how the Trophy installation is biased aft, youd need a counterweight fore.
2. A frontal turret armor upgrade, alone, of all the M1A2C upgrades, doesn't make much sense.
3. While trophy counterweights are known to exist, retrofit armor improvements to older Abrams aren't.
4. This turret add-on looks substantially different from M1A2C turrets seen. For a start, on those the actual armor cavity was extended forwards, whereas this lump is clearly welded on to the existing turret face, which would mean very poor actual volume for armor inside it.
 
5. These cheek expansions only appeared after initial Trophy testing which showed turret imbalance issues.
 

Thats quite the bold assumption to make regarding ease of retrofit of armor package upgrades, should they even be the case.
 
Considering how that turret has Trophy electronics boxes on it, as well as the cheeks, but for example still only has the older CROWS- I consider it more reasonable to assume its the counterweight for a few reasons-
1. If that isn't the counterweight, what is? Considering how the Trophy installation is biased aft, youd need a counterweight fore.
2. A frontal turret armor upgrade, alone, of all the M1A2C upgrades, doesn't make much sense.
3. While trophy counterweights are known to exist, retrofit armor improvements to older Abrams aren't.
4. This turret add-on looks substantially different from M1A2C turrets seen. For a start, on those the actual armor cavity was extended forwards, whereas this lump is clearly welded on to the existing turret face, which would mean very poor actual volume for armor inside it.
 
5. These cheek expansions only appeared after initial Trophy testing which showed turret imbalance issues.
 

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=iw&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.israeldefense.co.il%2Fhe%2Fnode%2F41914