LoooSeR Posted December 28, 2018 Report Share Posted December 28, 2018 From Andrey's blog - Pulat/Zaslon/Dozhd' intercepts Kornet. Ramlaen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted January 2, 2019 Report Share Posted January 2, 2019 The US Army Requirements Oversight Council has decided to proceed with IMI Systems’ Iron Fist Light (IFL) active protection system (APS) for its Bradley Fighting Vehicles. General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (GD-OTS), working in cooperation with Elbit Systems and IMI, will now enter into Phase II of the IFL APS programme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted January 8, 2019 Report Share Posted January 8, 2019 Leonardo DRS, Inc. announced today that it has been awarded an undefinitized contract action initially worth $79.6 million to provide the U.S. Army and Marine Corps with additional TROPHY active protection systems. This brings the total funded value of the program to over $200 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 9, 2019 Report Share Posted January 9, 2019 18 hours ago, Ramlaen said: Leonardo DRS, Inc. announced today that it has been awarded an undefinitized contract action initially worth $79.6 million to provide the U.S. Army and Marine Corps with additional TROPHY active protection systems. This brings the total funded value of the program to over $200 million. I don't understand. Wasn't the total $193 mil just a couple months ago? Is $200 mil the new total or is it added for a total of $393 mil? EDIT: Seems it's an added number. So it's almost $400 mil worth of contracts. Below the announcement is additional info that says in total Rafael is under contract to produce 1,500 systems, of which 1,000 are for Israel and presumably 500 for the US. Not a bad number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 The Army is deciding between Rheinmetall's Active Defense System and a lighter version of Rafael's Trophy for integration on the Stryker combat vehicle, Inside Defense has learned. An October report on the larger APS effort prepared for the congressional defense committees stated the service was considering two companies in the current stage of Stryker testing. Leonardo DRS announced Rafael's candidacy in September, but Rheinmetall's involvement was previously unconfirmed. The Army was forced to find an alternative to its original... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 3 hours ago, Ramlaen said: The Army is deciding between Rheinmetall's Active Defense System and a lighter version of Rafael's Trophy for integration on the Stryker combat vehicle, Inside Defense has learned. An October report on the larger APS effort prepared for the congressional defense committees stated the service was considering two companies in the current stage of Stryker testing. Leonardo DRS announced Rafael's candidacy in September, but Rheinmetall's involvement was previously unconfirmed. The Army was forced to find an alternative to its original... I still think they need to reconsider Rafael's proposal as one that should include a turret to replace the MCT-30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted January 11, 2019 Report Share Posted January 11, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_James Posted January 14, 2019 Report Share Posted January 14, 2019 Have there been tests using APS to protect against guided bombs and other aerial munitions, or is it just assumed the APS can handle it if it can defeat top-down ATGMs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 14, 2019 Report Share Posted January 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Lord_James said: Have there been tests using APS to protect against guided bombs and other aerial munitions, or is it just assumed the APS can handle it if it can defeat top-down ATGMs? I don't think that any current APS for AFVs can deal with those things reliably as their primary targets are RPGs and ATGMs, which are smaller and easier to damage projectiles than a bomb. Self-guided EFP bomblets usually detonate at way higher ranges than APS interception zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 14, 2019 Report Share Posted January 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Lord_James said: Have there been tests using APS to protect against guided bombs and other aerial munitions, or is it just assumed the APS can handle it if it can defeat top-down ATGMs? If you're talking about typical iron shells, then I guess it's possible for any APS with elevation. But then there's the aspect of artillery shells landing 20 meters or farther from AFVs, in which case no APS can properly defeat them. For that reason I think companies are very careful about marketing their APS when it comes to artillery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted January 16, 2019 Report Share Posted January 16, 2019 https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-showcases-vehicle-active-protection-system-for-the-us-army Using its Passive Infrared Cueing Sensors system, Northrop Grumman successfully generated threat warning of inbound ATGMs and provided a cue for the soft kill countermeasure system (SKCM). The Northrop Grumman SKCM system, known as the Multifunction Electro-Optical System (MEOS), successfully countered the ATGM and defeated it in real-time. The MEOS identified and countered all types of threats fired at its APS system, making this the fourth consecutive time the system has performed well in field tests to defeat threats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted January 23, 2019 Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 On 10/4/2018 at 1:13 PM, Mighty_Zuk said: I believe it was reported quite a while ago by Rafael officials in 2017's MSPO (September 2017). First report was by Shephard. Quote Rafael to Trial TROPHY APS for LEOPARD 2 Rafael Advanced Defense Systems is expected to trial its TROPHY active protection system (APS) on the LEOPARD 2 main battle tank (MBT) this year, an industry source has confirmed to MONCh. While details are still scarce owing to sensitivities around the testing, it is understood that Rafael is working in conjunction with LEOPARD 2 manufacturer Krauss-Maffei Wegmann for the trials, which are expected to take place this year. The details were disclosed at the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) event in Twickenham, London, held on 22 January. It is not known whether the testing is driven by a particular customer requirement, but it is a sign that Rafael is keen to prove that the increasingly popular APS technology can integrate onto one of the world’s most prolific main battle tanks. TROPHY has already achieved success in both Israel and US. The US Army will soon equip every M1A2 in four armoured brigades with TROPHY after successful trials of the missile-defeating technology. The integration of TROPHY onto the LEOPARD 2 will give operators additional choice of APS technologies for the platform. Rheinmetall Active Protection has already sold its Active Defence System to one undisclosed LEOPARD 2 customer. Both companies are also currently competing to provide an APS solution for the US Army’s STRYLER 8x8 fleet. At this year’s IAV, Rafael also unveiled possible TROPHY configurations for the BOXER 8x8 https://www.monch.com/mpg/news/land/4835-rafael-trophy-aps-for-leopard-2.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 https://defense-update.com/20190124_germany-to-field-trophy-aps-with-leopard-ii-tanks.html How can it look like. That must be Trophy-MV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 Trophy stronk, seems to be a replacement for the turret face wedges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 Wouldn't that reduce the protection from sabot rounds? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 8 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: Wouldn't that reduce the protection from sabot rounds? Along a portion of the sides, yes. But that's an acceptable compromise in return for practically immunity to ATGM. The important bit in that image though, and in the article, is that it's Rafael's demonstration of its key technologies for future combat vehicles, or speficially the Kali'a (or Carmel). You can see a panoramic camera in an armored case that feeds into a set of wide screens. You guys remember that really poorly edited video about the Carmel? Well the Carmel shown there was based on Rafael's proposed technologies, not Elbit's or IAI's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 16 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said: You can see a panoramic camera in an armored case that feeds into a set of wide screens. Could it be APS sensors for passive detection? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 2 hours ago, VPZ said: Could it be APS sensors for passive detection? Nope. The APS detects threats via the radar. The optics are for a 360 degrees vision system, but through image processing technologies are supposed to identify threats, and receive data on threats via BMS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 8 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said: Nope. The APS detects threats via the radar. Iron Fist has passive sensors for "stealth" mode. It will be good if Rafael integrates them too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 17 hours ago, Ramlaen said: Trophy stronk, seems to be a replacement for the turret face wedges. This is a 3D rendering from Rafael showing the Leopard 2A7 with UrbOp (urban operations) armor package, which is being offered by KMW. It replaces the original frontal add-on modules with lighter & thinner to allow adopting add-on armor modules to the side of the hull and turret while still remaining relatively low weight. Germany decided against this solution and instead kept the DuelOp (duel operations) armor package for the Leopard 2A7(V), which is focused on protection against KE longrod penetrators and ATGMs along the frontal arc. To this the add-on armor interface was added, allowing to install the same side armor modules (KMW's proposal didn't seem to include this, because they IIRC wanted to sell both UrbOp and DuelOp to Germany). The same armor configuration (DuelOp + add-on interfaces from UrbOp) was also adopted by Qatar and Denmark. Leopard 2A7+ DuelOp prototype Leopard 2A7+ UrbOp prototype The UrbOp armor package was however install in parts on the Leopard 2A4M CAN. The frontal armor modules are a lot thinner and hollow (AFAIK they are storing 7.62 mm ammunition inside them), though it has been speculated that they could be filled with armor modules if required. The German Leopard 2A6M variant is the most likely to be sent to VJTF 2023, so unless for some reasons the frontal armor is downgraded, Trophy will be installed elsewhere (I'd expect a similar configuration to the M1A2 SEP v2 and Merkava 4M). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted February 2, 2019 Report Share Posted February 2, 2019 Reposting this here. http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2018/pdf/army/2018aps.pdf Quote Iron Curtain APS • Phase I live fire testing demonstrated an improved ability of the Iron Curtain system to intercept incoming threats compared to prior DOT&E tests (held in 2011) and ground combat vehicle tests (held in 2014). However, damaging effects to the Stryker vehicle base armor occurred regularly even with successful intercepts. An upgrade to the baseline armor will be necessary if this APS is to be employed on a Stryker vehicle. The Army has also observed other limitations regarding performance in low light and simulated rainy conditions. Consequently, the Army is pursuing other systems for Stryker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted February 2, 2019 Report Share Posted February 2, 2019 5 hours ago, Ramlaen said: Reposting this here. http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2018/pdf/army/2018aps.pdf It seem that all APS similar to Iron Curtain have such problem. Trophy-LV requires additional armor too, at list on such vehicles as Humvee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adraste Posted February 4, 2019 Report Share Posted February 4, 2019 Quote Iron Fist APS • Phase I Iron Fist live fire and user testing was completed in 2018. Preliminary assessment by the Army was that the system demonstrated an inconsistent capability to intercept threats. Counter-munition dudding and power failures to the launcher were leading contributors to the low intercept rate. The Program Offi ce has been working with the vendor on design improvements to address the system performance shortcomings. Some prospective solutions have been implemented and will be tested in Phase II. http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2018/pdf/army/2018aps.pdf Now we have a better idea as to why the IDF was reluctant to select IMI Iron Fist and paid for more R&D and improvements themself . Trophy was and still is more mature and efficient. The good news is that the US army kept her faith in the Iron Fist and asked IMI to improve several shortcomings thus benefiting all the other futur operators of this APS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted February 4, 2019 Report Share Posted February 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Adraste said: Now we have a better idea as to why the IDF was reluctant to select IMI Iron Fist and paid for more R&D and improvements themself . Trophy was and still is more mature and efficient. The good news is that the US army kept her faith in the Iron Fist and asked IMI to improve several shortcomings thus benefiting all the other futur operators of this APS The IDF was not reluctant about the Iron Fist's selection. Trophy met the needs in the given time, and Iron Fist didn't. The competition was thus very short. Any future attempt at acquisition did not take into account Iron Fist's maturity because the IDF (probably) were sure of IMI's capability to bring their product to sufficient maturity if given the funding and assurance that the army will buy their product, and support them all the way. In fact, despite the revelation of issues about the interceptor unit specifically, the IDF requested that the pairing of the Trophy and Iron Fist be done by pairing the computer, sensors package, and data fusion technologies of the Trophy, with the interceptor unit of the Iron Fist. Additionally, the IDF is now testing the Iron Fist in its IF-LC version for light vehicles. Keep in mind this report talks specifically about the system which was presented to the US Army - the IF-LC, which is not identical to the original Iron Fist, which is now dubbed IF-MBT. The real focus of the changes was the power supply to the entire system, and smaller interceptors. So the described issues may be relevant to the IF-LC alone, not necessarily the entire family. IMI, now Elbit, had to put the IF-LC on the market very quickly in order to compete with the Trophy. Any further delay and Rafael would snatch the entire western APS market. Better have a somewhat faulty system that the world can see and consider, than have a mature and perfected one when everyone has already made their mind. From a marketing point of view at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.