Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Sign in to follow this  
asaf

Active Protection System (APS) for tanks

Recommended Posts

They have. Raytheon perhaps think they have a chance at redemption, but only in the very long run. 

For the short term, they can only hope to be selected as the 4th tested APS by beating Rheinmetall's ADS (or RAP), or to develop an anti-KE munition which will allow them to be selected for future interceptor replacement efforts as part of the MAPS project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

- Germany will deploy A7V with the VJTF force. In addition, they will purchase the Active Protection System (APS) "Trophy" for the unit that is part of the force. It is a signal that Germany prioritizes its obligations to NATO, as well as the security for its own troops, Westermoen says.


 

 

Source is the Norwegian rittmester Christoffer Westermoen via the Norwegian defense and security website aldrimer.no. Westermoen is involved with the Norwegian tank upgrade/replacement project, and has let himself be interviewed due to grievances with how the MoD has handled the project.

 

Is the quoted part accurate info @SH_MM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Laser Shark said:

 

Source is the Norwegian rittmester Christoffer Westermoen via the Norwegian defense and security website aldrimer.no. Westermoen is involved with the Norwegian tank upgrade/replacement project, and has let himself be interviewed due to grievances with how the MoD has handled the project.

 

Is the quoted part accurate info @SH_MM?

Oh man, jeez @SH_MM I'm so sorry. :(

Share this post


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

 

I think Damian here is confused, or was confused.

A long while ago, back in 2017, he said there were a total of 6 interceptors, which means 2 in storage and 1 ready per side, which is 3 per side for a total of 6.

Now he's saying it's 4+1 per side? It's definitely plausible but it's quite confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Laser Shark said:

Is the quoted part accurate info @SH_MM?

 

I don't think that it has been decided yet. First of all, Trophy hasn't been tested on the Leopard 2 yet and from what I have heard, they will test multiple types of APS. Maybe their are plans to purchase Trophy independently as urgent material request, which would sideline most of the testing, but it wouldn't mean that the system would automatically be adopted in larger numbers - in the past urgement material requests (mostly for the German ISAF contigent) have also resulted in small numbers of equipment being purchased, that later (after a proper tender and more testing) weren't purchased in larger numbers in favor of a competing system.

Furthermore a widespread adoption of an APS is scheduled/planned for the Leopard 2Ax (project name, probably going to turn into 2A8 when adopted), which also will feature several other enhancements and won't be ready by 2023. There are also three potential APS offers from German manufacturers, which might have some advantages in lobbying (and ADS is being integrated into the Leopard 2 for a costumer since June 2018).

 

it is still questionable wether the Leopard 2A7V will actually be part of the VJTF or an older variant will be used instead. While the current batch of Leopard 2A7V upgrades will be finished by/in 2023, there are still questions about the status of crew training, available spare parts and other relevant factors. Older statements suggested that the 2A6 or 2A6M might be deployed instead.

 

56 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

I think Damian here is confused, or was confused.

A long while ago, back in 2017, he said there were a total of 6 interceptors, which means 2 in storage and 1 ready per side, which is 3 per side for a total of 6. 

Now he's saying it's 4+1 per side? It's definitely plausible but it's quite confusing.

 

According to an older article written by two former soldiers working for the German military acquisition and material agency BWB (nowadays called BaainBW), each autoloader holds three rounds, which is also what Damian said on the Armored Warfare forum. There shouldn't be an option for manually inserting an interceptor into the APS, the ready round should be loaded from the autoloading system's magazine. I don't know why he suddenly talks about 10 interceptors, but he isn't always very consistent. I discussed the Arjun prototype turret back on the DefenceForumIndia quite a few years ago, where he agreed that it - after at first believing that it might be better than the series production version, which he just claimed agian on Twitter - that due to the armor layout it is actually a worse design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

 

I don't think that it has been decided yet. First of all, Trophy hasn't been tested on the Leopard 2 yet and from what I have heard, they will test multiple types of APS. Maybe their are plans to purchase Trophy independently as urgent material request, which would sideline most of the testing, but it wouldn't mean that the system would automatically be adopted in larger numbers - in the past urgement material requests (mostly for the German ISAF contigent) have also resulted in small numbers of equipment being purchased, that later (after a proper tender and more testing) weren't purchased in larger numbers in favor of a competing system.

Furthermore a widespread adoption of an APS is scheduled/planned for the Leopard 2Ax (project name, probably going to turn into 2A8 when adopted), which also will feature several other enhancements and won't be ready by 2023. There are also three potential APS offers from German manufacturers, which might have some advantages in lobbying (and ADS is being integrated into the Leopard 2 for a costumer since June 2018).

 

it is still questionable wether the Leopard 2A7V will actually be part of the VJTF or an older variant will be used instead. While the current batch of Leopard 2A7V upgrades will be finished by/in 2023, there are still questions about the status of crew training, available spare parts and other relevant factors. Older statements suggested that the 2A6 or 2A6M might be deployed instead.

 

 

According to an older article written by two former soldiers working for the German military acquisition and material agency BWB (nowadays called BaainBW), each autoloader holds three rounds, which is also what Damian said on the Armored Warfare forum. There shouldn't be an option for manually inserting an interceptor into the APS, the ready round should be loaded from the autoloading system's magazine. I don't know why he suddenly talks about 10 interceptors, but he isn't always very consistent. I discussed the Arjun prototype turret back on the DefenceForumIndia quite a few years ago, where he agreed that it - after at first believing that it might be better than the series production version, which he just claimed agian on Twitter - that due to the armor layout it is actually a worse design.

There are a multitude of reasons why Damian isn't a poster here anymore. Him getting called out for that particular foible is one of them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israeli defense writer for news site "IsraelDefense", Ami Rojkes Dombe, brings up a good point in a so-far-hebrew-only speculative article, that the Israeli MoD's project for a joint APS developed by all major gov't owned companies - IAI (radar), IMI (interceptor), and Rafael (electronic and overall architecture), is probably even more dead right now than it was in 2014. 

 

The history goes a bit like this:

 

2006 - Rafael and IMI demonstrate their APS in state trials.

2007 - Trophy is selected to enter service.

2008 - Trophy enters production.

2009 - First battalion is fully equipped.

2014 - IMOD initiates program to develop joint APS by Rafael, IMI, and IAI, with Rafael being the prime contractor.

2016 - 2 brigades are fully equipped, and preparations made for production for Namers and Merkava 3 tanks.

2017 - Total of 1,000 new systems are on order until 2027, with an average production rate of 100 vehicles per year.

==============================================================================================================================

 

Now for the future:

 

2019 - Carmel project ends (cockpit design) and is superseded by Kaliya/Bullet, thus increasing the urgency for next gen APS.

2021 - Merkava 4 Barack tanks enter service with new APS capable of defeating KEPs.

2027 - Vehicles developed in the Kaliya/Bullet program enter service with a next generation APS.

 

So by 2021, which is relatively speaking right around the corner, The IMOD should have an anti-KEP APS already in service.

 

This puts quite a dent in that goal, but MANTAK can't really be blamed for falling behind schedule. It's very atypical for them. In the worst case, the MoD presents a schedule that is unnecessarily stretched, but MANTAK are known to always deliver.

==============================================================================================================================

 

Back to the speculation part:

 

The deal was that IMI, IAI, and Rafael will supply a joint APS. It was actually tried before, and failed. The companies did not agree to work together for a whole lot of reasons, mostly related to pride, even though they were government owned companies.

It was revived, and although nothing new of it came up throughout the years, other than that the Barack will get an anti-KEP APS which is without a shred of doubt a reference at the joint APS, it seems that the MAPS program of the US Armed Forces, along with the financial difficulties of IMI, have made a completion of this project somewhat unlikely.

 

What we know:

  • IMI is now being absorbed into Elbit, with the move perhaps being finalized before the end of 2018 (stock merger in November). Elbit, being a private company, can be far more aggressive in marketing than even Rafael and IMI were known to be, and they are showing that they can definitely swallow entire markets within Israel's defense industries.
  • Rafael and IMI are fiercely fighting against each other in the US, Australia, and all over Europe, instead of working together on offering a joint system that shouldn't be more developmental than the new developmental iterations of the Trophy and Iron Fist.

However there is one mitigating factor that should be taken into account:

  • The IDF is reportedly testing the IF-LC on the Eitan and D9 bulldozers, which should signal to Rafael that they may want a cooperation after all, to mitigate the threat presented by Elbit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 7:33 AM, SH_MM said:

I discussed the Arjun prototype turret back on the DefenceForumIndia quite a few years ago, where he agreed that it - after at first believing that it might be better than the series production version, which he just claimed agian on Twitter - that due to the armor layout it is actually a worse design.

 

You're telling me the Arjun could have been a worse design?! :huh: I struggle to comprehend that. 

Share this post


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

Given the Trophy was purchased directly after successfuls tests on the Abrams, does this mean that Iron Fist isn't market ready by US Army definition (TRL too low)?

 

I'm certainly getting the impression that the US Army is leaning towards Trophy for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SH_MM said:

Given the Trophy was purchased directly after successfuls tests on the Abrams, does this mean that Iron Fist isn't market ready by US Army definition (TRL too low)?

 

We have an answer.

 

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/12/army-bradley-brigade-will-get-israeli-anti-missile-system-iron-fist/

 

The US Army is going for Iron Fist and the market survey was worded specifically for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Army moves closer to equipping an active protection system on Bradley Fighting Vehicles

By: Jeff Martin 50 minutes ago
 
FLFQ3T44VJD7LKAXH3LS75RZPE.jpg

The Army is looking to replace aging combat vehicles like the Bradley Fighting Vehicle with a Next-Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) but it will need reprogrammed dollars in FY18 to move forward at a rapid clip. (Photo by Winifred Brown/Fort Bliss Public Affairs)

 

The Army has chosen to move forward with the Iron Fist Light Active Protection System (APS) for its Bradley Fighting Vehicle, after evaluating its ability to be installed on the vehicle.

The Army will now install the system onto a number of Bradley vehicles for a second phase of more extensive testing and evaluation, according to a release from the industry team providing the system.

That team, made up of General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (GD-OTS) and Israeli companies IMI Systems and Elbit Systems, are working to integrate and test the system, designed to protect the Bradley from threats like anti-tank missiles, rocket propelled grenades and other weapons. It uses a variety of sensors and countermeasures to stop those threats before they reach the vehicle. They include a electro-optical “soft kill” jammer and a physical “hard kill” interceptor to stop threats from getting closer to the vehicles.

“We are excited to move into Phase II and bring the vast capabilities of our Active Protection System to the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. We look forward to continuing to partner with the Army on advancing this important technology as well as enhancing integration capabilities across multiple Army platforms” said Steve Elgin, vice president and general manager of armament and platform systems for GD-OTS in a statement.

While the release announcing the progress in testing did not say what the next phase would look like, it will likely mirror the same process the Army has used to qualify and evaluate Rafael’s Trophy for the Abrams tank. More advanced tests will likely be against multiple types of threats in a simulated urban environment.

The decision is a vote of confidence in the system and could mean further fielding on a larger number of vehicles down the road.

The move to install an APS system on a Bradley is a critical part of the service’s work to put protection systems on it, the Abrams tank and the Stryker combat vehicle. While its uncertain what system will be installed on the Stryker, the Army selected Rafael’s Trophy system for the Abrams in 2017.

 

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/12/20/army-moves-closer-to-equipping-an-active-protection-system-on-bradley-fighting-vehicles/

 

So the Iron Fist purchase is still not final?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...