Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

7PIyC2jhlXg.jpg

     Crew hatches are not very thin, which means they offer some level of protection. Although, Merkava Siman 4 have thicker crew hatches. Also, hull roof is spaced with unknown material between external and internal layers. I hope they will increase protection of hatches and roof overall.

 

Merkava 4 hatches (2006 model of the Merk 4).

f949727e138a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From certain comrade at otvaga forum.

 

"About capsule.

  Even students were drawing them in 80s)))

 

Tasks: 

          - protect crew from splinters from penetration, fuel fire and ammunition fires...

          - possibility of effective fire suppression/extinguishing without the risk of killing the crew.

          - сreation of comfortable conditions ..

 

Shortcomings, such as:

                   - complexity of access to parts and aggregates inside of the machine

                   - A person needs to work [there] and living space. Claustrophobia)))

                   - no "sense of community" members of the crew. ..

     All this is true for the old layouts when everything was crammed in one volume [space].

 


     Today - vehicle is partitioned [sectioned]. There is no fuel in crew compartment, no ammunition. There is comfortable, well protected working and living space for whole crew, with the conveniently placed control aggregates and management systems.

     This design solves the problem of protecting and ensuring the crew work space and has no past deficiencies.

     Serious disadvantage - reduced overall "density" of layout. But, given the modern means of protection and [engine] power, designers decided to do this. Dimensions of the vehicle are not small."

 

 

 

"    About the roof. It is THICK. And double [spaced]. Top, then a gap, it is possible to cram something there...)))

Anything that gets in above UFP module (from the camera unit and higher) will go into the body of the roof.

Anything that gets in the side above of protection modules - will hit body of the roof. "Deflectors" at upper side will detonate HEAT ahead of time.

Hatches -  layered. Protect from EFPs and similar from upper hemisphere. From serious "roofhitters" it certainly will not save, but this is not necessary. For hatches. [There are] unlikely [to be hit].

 

     Traditional weak spots - eliminated. ....[skipped].... Once said about merging reactive and ballistic protect..."

 

Unrelated to posts, UFP external schematics.

1stMv.jpg

 

2 hatches visible, on left - driver, right hatch is commnader's exit. between them you can see one small periscope for a gunner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more:

 

Xy9zv.jpg

Boomerang APC

 

Kurganets-25 IFV. One block of side armor have a cut-out section for videocamera.

eXpNwAWwiuk.jpg

Active protection system launchers are covered by canvas, 4 those launchers are mounted on UFP.

 

APC based on Kurganets-25 B-11 chassis. I think this vehicle will replace some APCs like MT-LB, some BTRs and partially old BMPs.

VI7Aku6WMGI.jpg

 

Koalitsiya-SV.

p-3222.jpg

Driver is in the center, while T-14 have driver in the left part of vehicle. It looks like Armata chassis was developed not fast enough for SPG to be made on top of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

b0d213f1fad6d7b45e853602b497a2d5.png

 

84cc24ebec35a06c9b242bb290937117.png

 

T-15 with some sort of cover for exhaust and air intake for engine cooling. Active protection module is exposed on top of the hull sponson.

 

Similar device for T-14:

a0qPv.jpg

 

 

NSHtx.jpg:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PDN_5587.jpgBigger picture of the T-14. Note a small box mounted on UFP - this is observation camera unit. Another thing that catches my eye is antenna in front of the big boxy device on top of the turret - this fact may suggest that this box is not a AA HMG RCWS, as some people believe.

 

xQBSoaU.jpg

T-15 Heavy IFV, with full ERA and visible parts of acitve protection system "Afganit", mounted on vehicle sponsons.

 

cS4LG2W.jpg

 

BlpOCXR.jpg

I don't know why UFP of that SPG looks so thick. ERA?

 

Boomerang APC with more exposed parts.

tgdjhNV.jpg

 

rgnLnoU.jpg

 

A detail between second and 3rd wheels is just a box for crew stuff, AFAIK it is not connected to internal hull space.

 

 

0_130362_64fc17b2_orig.jpg

 

Rear door build in ramp, rear optics and 2 cameras, one of which is looking down, more observation cameras mounted on top of the side armor in one module. Water propellers mean that this APC did not lost amphibious abilities of the BTR-80 vehicles. This APC look well protected for it's weight.

 

Kurganets-25 IFV.

1IlpPM4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2scyEaC.jpg

Observation camera units. 

 

LhhFBUR.jpg

 

Some sort of mounting/attachments points, or i am seeing more than actually is there.

 

 

Boomerang model with unmanned turret, similar to Kurganets-25 IFV and T-15 TBMP turrets/weapon modules. 30 mm 2A42, 4 Kornet-M ATGMs.

2ZCMtDz.jpg

 

You can see this APC model on that photo:

 

IRVK12F.jpg

 

 

Boomerang and other APCs.

NYtBb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

0_130368_9c8a8841_orig.jpgKurganets-25 APC.

 

0_130351_59cb33f_orig.jpg

 

Frontal and side-looking observation cameras are visible. Also, side armor have a cut-out section for driver's periscope/optics, looking to the left. Tracks have new rubbers pads.

 

0_13034f_7aed4b14_orig.jpg

 

Kurganets APC, with part of turret visible. It looks like smoke grenade launchers, or they could be part of APS. Side armor module have only one "cut out" section, for camera only. 

 

Same vehicle, another angle:

0_130350_bce94125_orig.jpg

 

I think that this 2 shot launcher is just for smoke grenades.

 

0_d6ff0_bb75930e_orig.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kurganets-25 IFV.

0_130367_80c7bd30_orig.jpg

 

Active protection system launchers and other subsystems like radars are still covered by canvas. 

 

0_130357_2e205513_orig.jpg

 

0_130356_f6cfee24_orig.jpg

 

Compared to T-15, T-14 looks uninteresting and unsophisticated  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
    • By seppo
      Hello,
      this is my first post. Please no bully. :3
       
      Panzerkampfwagen 2000
      In 1988 Germany developed a concept for a tank with two crew men. In order to test whether it's possible for only two crew men to operate a tank effectively, a Leopard 1 and a Leopard 2 were modified. 


      Field trials were held in 1990 and subsequently it was concluded to be a viable concept in 1992. The project was however canceled, because the downfall of the Soviet Union meant, that a new battle tank was no longer needed. Furthermore Israel stealing submarines and reunification meant that the budget was not sufficient either.
       
      Neue Gepanzerte Plattform
      In 1995 a concept for a whole family of armored vehicles(SPAAG, MBT, IFV) was developed, where the MBT would be manned by two man, just like the Panzerkampfwagen 2000. A prototype was build and tested in 1997. However a further budget cut lead to the cancellation in 1998. Wegmann desgin: Turret + autoloader:
      http://www.patent-de.com/pdf/DE19644524A1.pdf
      Diehl developed an APS for this tank: AWiSS


      EGS:
      Hull length = 8,67m
      Full width = 3,98m
      Width between the tracks = 3,5m
      Height = 2,71m
      The intended combat weight for the complete tank was between 55t and 77t.
      Can anyone calculate the the cross section areas and the protection levels for the front and the side, assuming mid-90s filler materials were used?
       
      Thanks for your attention!
    • By Tied
      Yes
       
      i personally support it, by finding the KGB Felix Dzerzhinsky greatly improved state scurrility both inside the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and abroad (their jurisdiction was only domestic, but they kept the internationally influential people safe at night)   a dedicated defender of both the Revolution and all the Soviet peoples     what do you think of this news?
    • By LoooSeR
      Well, we have thread about Yemen conflict and Ukrainian war, so in light of recent changes in situation in Syria, this thread became relevant enough, IMO.
       
       

       

×