Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Tied

United States Military Vehicle General: Guns, G*vins, and Gas Turbines

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, ZloyKrolik said:

Well in Australia, the whole tank could be considered a boiling vessel.

 

Well, nobody wants hot beer instead of cold beer. No wonder they asked for a refrigerator. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ramlaen said:

VHaQoCA.jpg

 

  Hide contents

 

 


rSaLCQi.jpg

3LtMnxM.jpg

4M7xopv.jpg
 

 

 

This is M1A2 SEP V2? It seems, the Trophy should have been put on SEP V2 only. or I'm wrong?
And where was this photo taken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Karamazov said:

This is M1A2 SEP V2? It seems, the Trophy should have been put on SEP V2 only. or I'm wrong?
And where was this photo taken?

 

Poland. Saber Strike 2018 exercise, where a few of the Trophy-equipped Abrams have been sent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2018 at 11:55 AM, JNT11593 said:

8jg3wvc.jpg

 

M1A2 going old school.

I'd figured "Old School" would involve a few thousand sandbags stacked about, some plank side skirts and every bit of kit short of a washing machine tied, wired or taped to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 2805662 said:

That top Trophy pic looks photoshopped. We’re sure it’s legit?

Why would anyone even photoshop it if there are dozens of legit pics of the Abrams with Trophy on the internet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the growing tensions on that side of Europe and the need for an appropriate counterweight, there are a lot of armor-related developments that are being fast-tracked, the most notable being the Stryker Dragoon, which was also fielded quite rapidly.

 

EDIT: there's at least one source for this -- 

 

Edit 2: and --> https://pl-pl.facebook.com/gdziewojsko/posts/1994552590555156

 

...just by searching Google Images...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

I do believe that is an M1A2 SEPv2, not all of them have an RWS. Trophy can be mounted on the USMC’s M1A1 FEP.

but this is M1A2

I found the information. News(about USA Trophy) talking about M1A2 mbt. I think it was about all models of M1A2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*not sure whether this goes in this thread or should be posted somewhere else*
one can see in this video from Eurosatory-2018 (4:24 and later)  https://youtu.be/Vx8fiHB9H28?t=264 (which shows an Rafael representative interviewed by DefenseWebTV) 
poster on Trophy APS which among other vehicles shows this picture of Stryker with ERA kit, slat armor and Samson 30 turret:
ImYuX2v.jpg

 


there is also an article https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2018/06/11/rafael-to-demo-lighter-trophy-protection-system-on-bradley-fighting-vehicle/
which mentions this:

Quote

Rafael is rapidly driving toward a demonstration of a lighter version of its Trophy active protection system, or APS, on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle this summer as the U.S. Army continues to assess APS systems on its combat vehicles, according to Rafael’s head of its land maneuver systems directorate.

Quote

Rafael has been conducting extensive testing of its lighter and smaller Trophy system, and the company is inviting the U.S. military to attend a major test event in August in Israel to witness the capability on a Bradley, which is the combat vehicle considered the most difficult on which to integrate a system because of the current variant’s power limitations.

The company would also be capable of integrating the system onto a Stryker, but it has decided — along with its U.S. partner DRS — to focus on Bradley for the time being, Michael said.

While the current Trophy system would be too heavy, coming in at 1.8 tons as a full system, the lighter version will weigh just shy of half that, while still retaining “the same method of operations, the same logic, the same interface,” Michael said.

Rafael sees the solution not as a simple one, but a high-end one, which it believes would be needed on a platform like Bradley.

Quote

Rafael is eyeing what happens with the ongoing assessment by the U.S. Army to upgun its Strykers with a 30mm cannon. The assessment of the current configuration is expected to wrap up in the summer.

Michael said the company has spoke with the Stryker program office in the U.S. to understand what the soldier wants from a 30mm cannon with the intention to fine-tune an offering should the Army decide to assess other 30mm options in order to outfit the rest of its Stryker fleet.

And to sweeten the deal, the 30mm cannon would come with an APS system already integrated into the turret, according to Michael.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, skylancer-3441 said:

*not sure whether this goes in this thread or should be posted somewhere else*
one can see in this video from Eurosatory-2018 (4:24 and later)  https://youtu.be/Vx8fiHB9H28?t=264 (which shows an Rafael representative interviewed by DefenseWebTV) 
poster on Trophy APS which among other vehicles shows this picture of Stryker with ERA kit, slat armor and Samson 30 turret:
ImYuX2v.jpg

 


there is also an article https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2018/06/11/rafael-to-demo-lighter-trophy-protection-system-on-bradley-fighting-vehicle/
which mentions this:

 

 

Combination of Trophy and ERA is overkill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like production of the A4 Bradley is finally starting.

 

BAE Systems Land & Armaments L.P., York, Pennsylvania, was awarded a $347,999,966 fixed-price-incentive-fee contract for production of up to 164 Bradley M2A4 and M7A4 vehicles, and procurement of authorized stockage list spares, and additional packages for legacy component repair using M2A3, M7A3 and Operation Desert Storm-Situational Awareness vehicles as a baseline. Bids were solicited via the Internet with one received. Work will be performed in York, Pennsylvania, with an estimated completion date of June 14, 2019.

DRS Sustainment Systems Inc., was awarded a $192,517,762 fixed-price-incentive contract for procurement of Abrams Active Protection systems, sets of countermeasures, calibration/maintenance kits for the Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement program version 2. One bid was solicited with one bid received. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri, with an estimated completion date of March 31, 2020.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1550930/

https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1552399/

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 Sturgeon
      I'll start off with a couple Pathe videos:


       

       

       

    • By EnsignExpendable
      Volketten on the WoT forums posted some XM-1 trials results.
       
       
      Compare this to what the Americans claimed the XM1 will do:
       

       
      Seems like the XM1 really didn't earn that checkmark-plus in mobility or protection. 
       
    • By JNT11593
      So National Geographic has a mini series airing right now called The Long Road Home. I'm curious if any else is watching it right now. The show is about black Friday, and the beginning of the siege of sadr city in 2004. It's filmed at Fort Hood with cooperation from the U.S. Army so it features a lot of authentic armor. The first couple of episodes feature Bradleys quite heavily, and starting with episode 4 it looks like Abrams starting getting more screen time. It's pretty cool if you want to see some authentic tanks and vehicles as long as you can stand some cheesiness and army wife shit.
       
      Edit: Just realized I posted to the wrong board.
       
    • By SH_MM
      Well, if you include TUSK as armor kit for the Abrams, then you also have to include the different Theatre Entry Standards (TES) armor kits (three versions at least) of the Challenger 2. The base armor however was most likely not upgraded.
       
      The Leclerc is not geometrically more efficient. It could have been, if it's armor layout wasn't designed so badly. The Leclerc trades a smaller frontal profile for a larger number of weakspots. It uses a bulge-type turret (no idea about the proper English term), because otherwise a low-profile turret would mean reduced gun depression (breech block hits the roof when firing). There is bulge/box on the Leclerc turret roof, which is about one feet tall and located in the centerline of the turret. It is connected to the interior of the tank, as it serves as space for the breech block to travel when the gun is depressed. With this bulge the diffence between the Leopard 2's and Leclerc's roof height is about 20 milimetres.
       

       
      The problem with this bulge is, that it is essentially un-armored (maybe 40-50 mm steel armor); otherwise the Leclerc wouldn't save any weight. While the bulge is hidden from direct head-on attacks, it is exposed when the tank is attacked from an angle. Given that modern APFSDS usually do not riccochet at impact angles larger than 10-15° and most RPGs are able to fuze at such an angle, the Leclerc has a very weakly armored section that can be hit from half to two-thirds of the frontal arc and will always be penetrated.
       

       
      The next issue is the result of the gunner's sight layout. While it is somewhat reminiscent of the Leopard 2's original gunner's sight placement for some people, it is actually designed differently. The Leopard 2's original sight layout has armor in front and behind the gunner's sight, the sight also doesn't extend to the bottom of the turret. On the Leclerc things are very different, the sight is placed in front of the armor and this reduces overall thickness. This problem has been reduced by installing another armor block in front of the guner's sight, but it doesn't cover the entire crew.
       

       
      The biggest issue of the Leclerc is however the gun shield. It's tiny, only 30 mm thick! Compared to that the Leopard 2 had a 420 mm gun shield already in 1979. The French engineers went with having pretty much the largest gun mantlet of all contemporary tanks, but decided to add the thinnest gun shield for protection. They decided to instead go for a thicker armor (steel) block at the gun trunnions.
       

       
      Still the protection of the gun mantlet seems to be sub-par compared to the Leopard 2 (420 mm armor block + 200-250 mm steel for the gun trunion mount on the original tank) and even upgraded Leopard 2 tanks. The Abrams has a comparable weak protected gun mantlet, but it has a much smaller surface. The Challenger 2 seems to have thicker armor at the gun, comparable to the Leopard 2.
       
      Also, the Leclerc has longer (not thicker) turret side armor compared to the Leopard 2 and Challenger 2, because the armor needs to protect the autoloader. On the other tanks, the thick armor at the end of the crew compartment and only thinner, spaced armor/storage boxes protect the rest of the turret. So I'd say:
      Challenger 2: a few weakspots, but no armor upgrades to the main armor Leclerc: a lot of weakspots, but lower weight and a smaller profile when approached directly from the turret front M1 Abrams: upgraded armor with less weakspots, but less efficient design (large turret profile and armor covers whole turret sides) So if you look for a tank that is well protected, has upgraded armor and uses the armor efficiently, the current Leopard 2 should be called best protected tank.
×