Wiedzmin Posted May 27, 2020 Report Share Posted May 27, 2020 11 minutes ago, SH_MM said: It is the side plate of the gun mount (i.e. the plates between the gun trunion). i understand what it is i talking about this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTibere Posted May 27, 2020 Report Share Posted May 27, 2020 His intention in measuring that was that it was representative of the base turret thickness. Obviously there isn't really a way to verify that. edit: not sure what exactly that highlighted piece is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted June 2, 2020 Report Share Posted June 2, 2020 Quote 1. An admission that there had been mixed drivers on Ajax as a delivery programme.2. These had been an issue on Ajax. 3. Delays on Ajax had had a morale impact on units due to see it as their core equipment. 4. There had likely been attempts to push it into service, regardless. 5. It turned out to be unrealistic to deliver to units a piece of equipment that still had issues. 6. AM Knighton seems to be saying, when he says, "when we better understand", that this is a relatively on-going issue (hearing was scant days ago).7. If PS has to "write a letter" to the PAC about this, this is not a mundane issue. 8. AM says that any such letter will be, "a revised assessment of the programme - meaning that current assessment is no longer valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted June 5, 2020 Report Share Posted June 5, 2020 UK to reassess Ajax programme Quote UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) procurement chiefs are reassessing the GBP5.3 billion (USD6.7 billion) Ajax programme after the first batch of production standard armoured fighting vehicles (AFVs) was found not to be ready for delivery. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/29cf9003-fcc5-4c72-af61-e7a41a7aa603 The rumour is that the Spanish built vehicles have shocking quality control (including hull welds) resulting in the Welsh facility having to disassemble, fix, reassemble and then re-validate each unit. Santa Bárbara recently had problems with the Piranha V-based Dragon 8x8 and a Spanish defence magazine says the VCZAP Castor (ASCOD-Pizarro engineering variant) prototype is overweight and delayed. Despite this Desider Magazine reports that the first 2 rebuilt Ares have been accepted for service:Success as AJAX completes acceptance testing Quote Progress with AJAX testing has continued despite the challenging circumstances brought by COVID-19. The first two Ares platforms that will provide reconnaissance support have recently passed general acceptance testing and will shortly be delivered to the Household Cavalry Regiment. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/889347/June-desider-online.pdf Ramlaen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted June 10, 2020 Report Share Posted June 10, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FORMATOSE Posted June 20, 2020 Report Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) Vickers MBT Mk. 7 loader's station : Edited June 28, 2020 by Sovngard added a GIF Laviduce 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slakrrrrrr Posted July 5, 2020 Report Share Posted July 5, 2020 Ed Francis has recently started a fantastic Youtube channel going over British vehicle design and development called Armoured Archives. He has plenty of unseen gems in his videos, including this bad boy: I'll let his work speak for itself: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCIgjPAYn253oyWLsYgiHDw David Moyes, Beer, Priory_of_Sion and 4 others 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valryon Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 BaronTibere, David Moyes and Laviduce 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 Quote It is because there was this realisation that the programme was not ambitious enough. It needed a smoothbore gun. It needed the ability to put a missile down that barrel to overmatch Armata, as you rightly describe. It needed its protection levels to be significantly enhanced. https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/652/pdf/ Army apparently wants CR2 to fire gun-launched ATGM and have significantly enhanced protection. Laviduce, Ramlaen and BaronTibere 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 I thought that GLATGM started to go out of fashion with the rise of APS systems and advance with the ballistic computers and ammo. Sure they still bring a capability which is useful (not sure if against T-14 though) but is that worth of the investment and the development effort? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 Quote There is a lot of missile technology that is around now. People have developed cyber and so on and so forth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTibere Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 That committee meeting is spicy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 3 hours ago, David Moyes said: https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/652/pdf/ Army apparently want CR2 to fire barrel-missiles and have significantly enhanced protection. 120mm ATGM to overmatch a modern MBT huh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTibere Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 Ignoring the problem of APS the LAHAT is designed for top attack is it not? Theoretically an Armata can be hull down with no exposed crew meaning some form of top attack would be required to hit the crew compartment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 38 minutes ago, BaronTibere said: Ignoring the problem of APS the LAHAT is designed for top attack is it not? Theoretically an Armata can be hull down with no exposed crew meaning some form of top attack would be required to hit the crew compartment. But top attack missile would hit most likely the unmanned turret instead of the crew compartment (even if we completely ignore the countermeasures T-14 posses). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 3 hours ago, BaronTibere said: Ignoring the problem of APS the LAHAT is designed for top attack is it not? Theoretically an Armata can be hull down with no exposed crew meaning some form of top attack would be required to hit the crew compartment. afaik LAHAT is just a bog standard 105mm ATGM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 3 hours ago, BaronTibere said: LAHAT is designed for top attack is it not? Yes, but only about 40 degrees angle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 LAHAT is also a laser-homing missile, so it is not really suited for use against modern tanks with laser warning systems. Aside of that, the system isn't being used on tanks anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanch90 Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 I don´t understand how they believe that Lahat is gonna give them overmatch vs the T-14. Lahat may have a very good maximum range (8km) and top attack but its not fire and forget and the missile is fairly slow, meaning that the tank has to be exposed to enemy fire during a long time. If the gunner loses visual on the target, the missile is useless. How its going to go in a theoretical scenario? Cr2 spots an advancing T-14 at about 5km and fires Lahat. T-14 APS detects the missile and the point of origin, Cr2 turret is then spotted by the gunner. T-14 loads Sokol, locks the target and fires. T-14 deploys smoke and countermeasures and reverses to cover while Sokol flies on his own and hits the Cr2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 Lahat can be detected only when target is illuminated by laser (at the end of the flight). And effectiveness of Armata's APS is questionable. It looks like old Soviet Drozd APS, and we don't know if it can be effective against top attack missiles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 I've seen it mentioned that "missile" could simply mean a tank round projectile. In English a missile is "an object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a mechanical weapon". However the CR2 Streetfighter concept with Brimstone launcher shows the Army is interested in under-heavy-armour ATGM ability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanch90 Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 32 minutes ago, VPZ said: Lahat can be detected only when target is illuminated by laser (at the end of the flight). And effectiveness of Armata's APS is questionable. It looks like old Soviet Drozd APS, and we don't know if it can be effective against top attack missiles. I didn't mean a hardkill interception. Just by popping smoke the missile is useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 14 minutes ago, alanch90 said: I didn't mean a hardkill interception. Just by popping smoke the missile is useless. Any tank with radar can do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanch90 Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 Just now, VPZ said: Any tank with radar can do it Indeed. Thing is that there are not many tanks out there with radars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Posted July 10, 2020 Report Share Posted July 10, 2020 Moreover you have to try really hard to find a spot where you have a 5 km line of sight in Europe. That's possible basically only in deserts or if the enemy is completely stupid. 1 hour ago, VPZ said: And effectiveness of Armata's APS is questionable. It looks like old Soviet Drozd APS, and we don't know if it can be effective against top attack missiles. The Drozd-like APS rockets are not meant for top attack missile defence. On the turret there are 24 smaller vertical launcher tubes likely intended for that (aside of another 24 rotating smoke grenade launchers). What they atually launch is another question. 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.