Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

On 9/28/2019 at 1:01 PM, David Moyes said:

 

I would expect more artillery and more anti-aircraft assets. Are there really only five counter-battery radars or does it mean that only self-propelled ones are listed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LXREyOU.jpg
5QxcArd.jpg
G25pssc.jpg

Spoiler

63UwmK7.jpg


VB4ECo1.jpg

 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

2 hours ago, Beer said:

I would expect more artillery and more anti-aircraft assets. Are there really only five counter-battery radars or does it mean that only self-propelled ones are listed? 


The Royal Artillery has been severely neglected since the Cold War ended. Most of the upgrade/procurement programmes were cancelled and in a counter-insurgency world has tried to stay relevant by focusing on UAVs.

There are only 5 MAMBA, it was used along with another system called COBRA but they're replacement (latest ARTHUR) never materialised.
COOBRA went out-of-service and MAMBA only has a few years left.

Share this post


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

Image speaks for itself.

 

5I87s6R.png

An attempt to obscure the obsolescence of the platform and the almost-incompetence of the upgrade program by applying a nostalgia-inducing camouflage scheme from the Cold War?
 

Tank cosplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 2805662 said:

An attempt to obscure the obsolescence of the platform and the almost-incompetence of the upgrade program by applying a nostalgia-inducing camouflage scheme from the Cold War?
 

Tank cosplay.

 

Look at the roof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£2.8bn armoured vehicle contract secured for British Army

TsXaOnf.jpg
 

Quote

The Defence Secretary has announced that the army will receive more than 500 Boxer 8x8 high mobility, network-enabled armoured vehicles to transport troops onto the frontline.
 

Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace, said:

"Our men and women of the Armed Forces deserve to have the best equipment to do their job."
"The Boxer vehicle is a leader in its field and I look forward to it arriving in units from 2023."

 

The vehicles will form part of the Army’s Strike brigades, new units set up to deploy rapidly over long distances across varied terrains.

Boxer is modular by design to meet these requirements - the same vehicle base can be rapidly reconfigured to fill different roles on the battlefield, from carrying troops across deserts to treating severely injured service personnel on the journey to hospital.

Initially the Army will buy a mixture of the troop-carrying variant, ambulances, command vehicles, and specialist designs to carry military equipment.


Sir Simon Bollom, Chief Executive of Defence, Equipment and Support (DE&S), said:

"This is excellent news for the Army and I’m delighted that we can now move forward with a contract for the Mechanised Infantry Vehicle."

"We are looking forward to continuing to work closely with the Army and our partners across industry to deliver the best equipment and support for our troops."
 

The UK announced in 2018 that it would re-join the Boxer programme within the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (OCCAR) and explore options to modernise its vehicle fleet and meet the Army’s Mechanised Infantry Vehicle requirement.

The UK played a central role in the original design, development and testing of the Boxer. In re-joining the programme last year, the UK reassumed the rights it had as a project partner.


Major General Simon Hamilton, Mechanised Infantry Vehicle Programme lead for the British Army, said:

"I am delighted that we have committed to delivering the Mechanised Infantry capability through the purchase of around 500 battle-winning Boxer vehicles for the British Army. Boxer completes the suite of platforms to equip our new state-of-the-art STRIKE brigade where, alongside Ajax, Boxer’s low logistic need, extended reach, high-mobility, and advanced digitisation will ensure STRIKE is ready for any global scenario."
 

This contract was signed ahead of the pre-election period due to the strong value-for-money agreement reached with industry and other OCCAR nations, which expires on December 31st 2019, and announced today due to expected market implications. It would be possible for a new Government to take a different position.
 

The MOD Permanent Secretary, as the Accounting Officer, considered the value for money implications and, on this basis, determined the most appropriate course of action is to proceed with the contract award ahead of the election.


----------------------------

About £5.5m per vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK JOINS THE BOXER FAMILY
 

Quote

After the UK decided to re-join the BOXER programme in 2018 and the receipt of the proposal in early 2019, it took only 8 month to evaluate, negotiate and finalise the 11th amendment of the series production contract for the BOXER vehicles.
 

Personnel from the OCCAR-EA BOXER Programme Division and specialists from the UK MoD Defence Equipment & Support worked hard to accomplish the negotiation of the contract with best value for money in such a short timeframe.
 

The contract includes the delivery of 5 prototypes in four specific Build Configurations (Infantry Carrier, Specialist Carrier, Command Post and Ambulance) and 523 series vehicles,  initial In-Service Support Packages and Special to Role Kits. The vehicles will be equipped with a remote controlled weapon system with a 12.7mm L1A2 Heavy Machine Gun or a 7.62mm L7A2 General Purpose Machine Gun, depending on the mission. They will also have missile blast as well as Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPG) protection.
 

The UK vehicles have the ability to change within the variants (Build Configurations) by changing the interior,  introducing different kits and assemblies depending on the mission.
 

The production of the UK fleet will be shared between Germany and the UK. As a first step, the prototypes will be manufactured in Germany by the main-subcontractors of ARTEC, the companies Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall.
The first phase of  series production will be conducted on the German production lines of both companies. Workers from the UK will be trained on how to assemble the vehicles and after the necessary knowledge transfer, the production will be transferred to new facilities in the UK. The plan says to have the first trials in June 2022 and the delivery of the first series vehicle to the British customer by November 2022.


http://www.occar.int/uk-joins-boxer-family
 


Confirmation that UK Boxers will have the uprated powerpack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DyQcubB.png

https://www.army.mod.uk/media/7504/adr008741_in_front_issue_4_final.pdf#BeTheBest

  • BAE/GD 'Black Night' bid dead?
  • Rheinmetall/BAE bids merged
  • Enhancements to powerpack
  • Gun WILL be replaced with smoothbore
  • Armour will be "upgraded" to "provide higher levels of protection"
  • Allow APS to be fitted
  • Sights, fire/gun control upgrades

Share this post


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


This article is a bit strange.
The Warrior was made by GKN, not Alvis. Although Alvis would later purchase GKN defence. Eventually killing the promising Warrior 2000 to promote the mature CV90.
As far as I can tell the flanking armour plates are not new and have been used for some time as the mounting for the WRAP 2 armour system:

oPmy19x.jpg
UcCitWl.jpg
vEAh8lT.jpg
NXxe3q6.jpg
5Ip4AmF.jpg

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 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.
×
×
  • Create New...