Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

Quote

Automatic Target Acquisition by Real-Time Imaging could be integrated into the SCORPION program

http://www.opex360.com/2019/07/05/lacquisition-automatique-de-cibles-par-imagerie-en-temps-reel-pourrait-etre-integree-au-programme-scorpion/

 

2aci-20190705-1.jpg

   Basically a system that runs AI (probably neural network-based) to recognize/identify targets in real time.

 

Quote

/.../

   This 2ACI project consisted in developing a function of detection, recognition and identification of targets in real time thanks to artificial intelligence [algorithmic chains and database of learning] as well as "massively parallel processing" of the data.

"The 2ACI function allows real-time detection, recognition and identification of terrestrial targets, fixed or mobile, via a real-time image processing performed on video streams from weapons system viewers", explains MBDA, via a press release.

/.../

 

   Also, was linked on otvaga - MBDA press-release

Quote

   MBDA, along with its industry and French Government partners, have been awarded the prestigious Ingénieur général Chanson prize for their work combining artificial intelligence (AI) and massively parallel processing to develop new real-time target Detection, Recognition and Identification (DRI) technology.

/.../

 

Share this post


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

https://www.janes.com/article/90049/france-to-seek-new-engineer-vehicle

 

I have seen Leclerc ARVs but no AEVs so far. Is the idea of the request to put that dozer on Leclerc chassis?

 

Possible

The current AEV in service are based on the AMX-30B2:

 

http://auto.img.v4.skyrock.net/0413/18930413/pics/535607575_small.jpg

 

(there's even a remote controlled version for path opening)

 

Spoiler

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/World_of_French_tanks_-_Engin_Blind%C3%A9_du_G%C3%A9nie_-_front.jpg/800px-World_of_French_tanks_-_Engin_Blind%C3%A9_du_G%C3%A9nie_-_front.jpg

 

There's still plenty of AMX-30B2 laying around in various military base, so the chassis is more or less expendable and cheap.

 

An AEV version of the Leclerc does exist but it remained at the prototype stage.

https://www.chars-francais.net/2015/images/stories/photos/epg_03.jpghttps://www.chars-francais.net/2015/images/stories/photos/epg_01.jpghttps://www.chars-francais.net/2015/images/stories/photos/epg_02.jpg

Spoiler

 

It is based on the ARV variant.

 

So given that the Leclerc XLR will probably be the last upgrade and that not all tanks will be converted to that standard, it's possible that they will convert some Leclerc hulls to  AEVs, but on the other hand I think that the army would like to keep those tanks in reserve until the first MGCS start entering service.

It's also worth noting that part of the Scorpion program 18 Leclerc DCL(ARV) will be renovated as well.

 

For now my guess is that both options are on the table (converting Leclerc hull, or a new vehicle entirely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Leclerc chassis won’t be used. 

 

The French problem is the stupid faith in the « wheels only platform doctrine » starting in 1987. 

So today, we don’t have tracked platform. 

 

I don’t know the future but the best AEV considered by French engineers is the Terrier MSV. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that wheeled AEV with a functions like Mine Breaching will work. The Plow requires much more traction on the ground than a wheel vehicle can generate.

Dozer in heavy terrain (mud, clay/rocks mix, ice/rocks mix etc.) has the same issue.

UAE uses Leclerc MBT+ARV but Wisent 2 AEV due to the mentioned reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rico said:

Dozer in heavy terrain (mud, clay/rocks mix, ice/rocks mix etc.) has the same issue.

 

Dozers have FAR more traction than any military vehicle on any terrain. No tank would be able to push the blade, or pull the ripper of a D10 or D375 (both 70 tons) for example, but I may go even so far  that the same would be true for any tank vs the smaller 50 ton D9/D275. 

In this video it is clearly seen that the ABV is struggling with pushing only a few m3 of soil, this is absolutely nothing for a D9/D275, which have the blade capacity of around 16-17m3.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO5ehu1lLjk

 

Military tracked vehicles are massively inferior to dozers in many ways. First their track provides much less traction. Second, the presence of the suspension system makes it significantly harder to maintain grade. And third, their transmission system is optimized for speed, rather than power. 

On the other hand, dozers have a huge disadvantage, their sluggishness which is not a good thing in warfare...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, heretic88 said:

First their track provides much less traction. Second, the presence of the suspension system makes it significantly harder to maintain grade. And third, their transmission system is optimized for speed, rather than power. 

For those keeping track at home, the D9 for example has a lot of rollers (good MMP), deep grousers for excellent traction in soft soil, and oil coolers for the torque converter. Unlike armored vehicles in which the torque converter is intended to lock up quickly and therefore not get very hot, the torque converter in the D9 is designed to work in slippage at all times. This results in a lot of power being turned into heat in the oil, which then needs to be cooled to prevent the seals from dying. You could run a tank in 1st gear and 100% slip on the torque converter and get pretty good tractive effort, but not for any length of time. The D9 is a very well designed tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, heretic88 said:

 

In this video it is clearly seen that the ABV is struggling with pushing only a few m3 of soil, this is absolutely nothing for a D9/D275, which have the blade capacity of around 16-17m3.

 

Well the ABV is not really an optimized engineer vehicle. 

But you are right D9 looks very nice if it comes to earth moving. Sadly I haven't found any data regarding the earth moving capacity of the D9. I think a large blade gives a good hint but volume /weight per hour would be nice to compare it.

 

Terrier CEV has 300t/h

https://www.themanufacturer.com/articles/the-bae-systems-terrier-tank-is-the-swiss-army-knife-of-combat-vehicles/

 

Wisent 2 AEV has 600t/h (~1m3  = 1,5t)

http://www.military-today.com/engineering/wisent_2.htm

 

Nevertheless, the D9 has less speed, protection and no mine plow or excavator. So it has lots of missing engineer functions if you want to use it in combination with other military vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2019 at 1:21 PM, Rico said:

Wisent 2 AEV has 600t/h (~1m3  = 1,5t)

Honestly, that seems very little. I didnt find any data regarding dozers, but Im 100% sure that their performance is lightyears ahead of these military vehicles. Why do I think so? Simply because you can feed an 1000 ton/hour crusher or screening plant with a 25 ton class wheel loader(5m3 bucket). At my workplace I operate a little 5 ton loader, with 1m3 bucket, and if I can do it without stop, I can move 100 ton/hour of material without problem.

All in all, AEVs are extremely poor "construction vehicles". Their suspension and transmission systems are highly unsuitable for any earthmoving job. One example, the 40 ton, 700hp BAT-2 performs worse than a 10 ton, 110hp T-100 tractor. Same with western equipment. A Wisent 2 is no match for a Cat D9, not even a D8.

But on the other hand, civilian construction vehicles are highly unsuitable for military operations because of their slowness, and of course, lack of protection.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because military platform are balanced. They’re not devoted to dozing. They must be able to do others tasks too. 

One reason of the efficiency of lighter tractors can come from the difference of bucket. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Serge said:

Because military platform are balanced. They’re not devoted to dozing. They must be able to do others tasks too. 

Well, there is a russian saying: "Универсальная машина может делать все, но все одинаково плохо"

Which means "Universal machine can do everything, but it does everything equally badly" (russian speaking members will correct me if I translated it badly)

Although it must be said, for military needs, their performance is more than enough. No need to fine grade, no need to dig holes quickly and precisely, no need to do slot dozing, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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.


  • Similar Content

    • By Xoon
      Colonization Of The Solar System

       
      This thread is for discussing the colonization of the solar system, mainly focusing on Mars and the Moon since they are the most relevant. 
      Main topics include transportation, industry, agriculture, economics, civil engineering,  energy production and distribution, habitation, ethics and politics. 
       
       
       
       
      First order of business, our glories tech messiah Elon Musk has set his eyes on Mars:
      Reason stated? Because being a interplanetary species beats being a single planetary species. 
       
      How does he plan to do this?
      By sending two cargo ships by 2022 to Mars for surveying and building  basic infrastructure, then two years later in 2024 sending 4 ships, two cargo ships and two crewed ships to start the colonization. First thing would be to build fuel refineries and expanding infrastructure to support more ships, then starting to mine and build industry. 
       
      This could mark a new era in human history, a second colonization era, this time without the genocides. The economic potentials are incredible, a single asteroid could easily support the entire earths gold, silver and platinum production for a decade. The moon holds a lot of valuable Helium 3, which right now is worth 12 000 dollars per kilogram! Helium is a excellent material for nuclear reactors. 
       
       
       

       
       
      Speaking about the moon, several companies have set their eyes on the moon, and for good reason.
      In my opinion,  the moon has the possibility of becoming a mayor trade hub for the solar system.  Why is this? Simply put, the earth has a few pesky things called gravity, atmosphere and environmentalists. This makes launching rockets off the moon much cheaper. The moon could even have a space elevator with current technology!  If we consider Elon Musk's plan to travel to Mars, then the Moon should be able to supply cheaper fuel and spaceship parts to space, to then be sent to Mars. The Moon is also rich in minerals that have not sunk to the core yet, and also has a huge amount of rare earth metals, which demands are rapidly increasing. Simply put, the Moon would end up as a large exporter to both the earth and potentially Mars. Importing from earth would almost always be more expensive compared to a industrialized Moon. 
       
      Now how would we go about colonizing the moon? Honestly, in concept it is quite simple.When considering locations, the South pole seems like the best candidate. This is because of it's constant sun spots, which could give 24 hour solar power to the colony and give constant sunlight to plants without huge power usage. The south pole also contain dark spots which contains large amount of frozen water, which would be used to sustain the agriculture and to make rocket fuel. It is true that the equator has the largest amounts of Helium 3 and the best location for rocket launches. However, with the lack of constant sunlight and frequent solar winds and meteor impacts, makes to unsuited for initial colonization. If the SpaceX's BFR successes, then it would be the main means of transporting materials to the moon until infrastructure is properly developed. Later a heavy lifter would replace it when transporting goods to and from the lunar surface, and specialized cargo ship for trans portion between the Moon, Earth and Mars. A space elevator would reduce prices further in the future.  Most likely, a trade station would be set up in CIS lunar space and Earth orbit which would house large fuel tanks and be able to hold the cargo from  cargo ships and heavy lifters. Sun ports would be designated depending on their amount of sunlight. Year around sunlight spots would be dedicated to solar panels and agriculture. Varying sun spots would be used for storage, landing pads and in general everything. Dark spots would be designated to mining to extract its valuable water. Power production would be inistially almost purely solar, with some back up and smoothing out generators. Later nuclear reactors would take over, but serve as a secondary backup energy source. 
       
       
      The plan:
      If we can assume the BFR is a success, then we have roughly 150 ton of payload to work with per spaceship. The first spaceship would contain a satellite to survey colonization spot. Everything would be robotic at first. Several robots capable of building a LZ for future ships,  mining of the lunar surface for making solar panels for energy production, then mining and refinement for fuel for future expeditions. The lunar colony would be based underground, room and pillar mining would be used to cheaply create room that is also shielded from radiation and surface hazards. Copying the mighty tech priest, a second ship would come with people and more equipment. With this more large scale mining and ore refinement would be started. Eventually beginning to manufacturing their own goods. Routinely BFRs would supply the colony with special equipment like electronics, special minerals and advanced equipment and food until the agricultural sector can support the colony.  The colony would start to export Helium 3 and rocket fuel, as well as spacecraft parts and scientific materials. Eventually becoming self sustaining, it would stop importing food and equipment, manufacturing it all themselves to save costs. 
       
      I am not the best in agriculture, so if some knowledge people could teach us here about closed loop farming, or some way of cultivating the lunar soil. Feel free to do so.
       
       
      Mining:
      I found a article here about the composition of the lunar soil and the use for it's main components:

      In short, the moon has large amounts of oxygen, silicon, aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium and titanium in it's soil.
      How do we refine them? By doing this.
       
      Aluminum could be used for most kinds of wiring to requiring high conductivity to density ratio. Meaning power lines, building cables and such. Aluminum is not very suited for building structures on the surface because of the varying temperatures causing it to expand and contract. Iron or steel is better suited here. Aluminum could however be used in underground structures where temperatures are more stable.  Aluminum would also most likely end up as the main lunar rocket fuel. Yes, aluminum as rocket fuel. Just look at things like ALICE, or Aluminum-oxygen. Aluminum-oxygen would probably win out since ALICE uses water, which would be prioritized for the BFRs, since I am pretty sure they are not multi-fuel. 
       More on aluminum rocket fuel here:
      https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/88130-aluminum-as-rocket-fuel/&
      http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns2.php#umlunar
      https://blogs.nasa.gov/Rocketology/2016/04/15/weve-got-rocket-chemistry-part-1/
      https://blogs.nasa.gov/Rocketology/2016/04/21/weve-got-rocket-chemistry-part-2/
       
      Believe it or not, but calcium is actually a excellent conductor, about 12% better than copper. So why do we not use it on earth? Because it has a tendency to spontaneously combust in the atmosphere. In a vacuum however, this does not pose a problem. I does however need to be coated in a material so it does not deteriorate. This makes it suited for "outdoor" products and compact electrical systems like electric motors. Yes, a calcium electric motor.  
       
       
      Lastly, a few articles about colonizing the moon:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_the_Moon
      https://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-scientists-say-we-could-colonise-the-moon-by-2022-for-just-10-billion
      https://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/topnav/materials/listbytype/HEP_Lunar.html
       
      NASA article about production of solar panels on the moon:
      https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20050110155.pdf
       
      Map over the south pole:
      http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/images/gigapan
       
       
      Feel free to spam the thread with news regarding colonization. 
       
       
    • By LostCosmonaut
      For those of you who are not familiar with him, Robert Zubrin is an American aerospace engineer and author of some note. He is probably best known for his advocacy of the 'Mars Direct' proposal, although he's also done quite a bit of work in the nuclear spacecraft propulsion field (he's the guy that came up with the NSWR). His wiki page says he's also written on other vaguely political topics, but I'm not familiar with them.
       
       
      Personally, I find his work on spacecraft propulsion highly interesting, and it's good that we've got somebody putting forth cogent ideas for space exploration. However, I feel that some of his ideas are a bit too optimistic, especially in regards to his Mars Direct approach. I feel that it would be more optimal to gain more experience with long term off-planet living in a location such as the moon before proceeding to Mars, while also using that time to mature techniques such as nuclear rockets to actually get to Mars. On a related note, I showed his NSWR paper to a guy I know who has some not insignificant knowledge of nuclear physics, and he was a bit skeptical. Still, in my opinion, it's infinitely better to have somebody be a bit overoptimistic about how well their ideas will work, and keeps push them forward, then a bunch of limp wristed pessimists who are afraid to send anyone beyond LEO because it might cost a few million dollars.
×
×
  • Create New...