Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

VT-4 and Oplot of Thailand army. Oplot at least have pretty serious ERA coverage of sides, VT-4 hull looks naked compared to Oplot-BM.

739078_original.jpg

Spoiler

739482_original.jpg

 

740015_original.jpg

 

Share this post


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

In my opinion NORINCO should offer the VT-5's side armor package as upgrade option.

 

They do offer armor upgrades actually. (As well as some other newer options that didn't exist at the time the VT4 just came out.)

 

Edit: not sure if it's the exact package as used on the VT5, but extra passive and ERA for the sides and other areas is now offered for the VT4 design to clairify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SH_MM

For which kind of Weapon? 

And is that the Puma on the left board above the Stryker?

 

It seems it can Penetrate the Stryker and the Bradley from the Front so maybe some sort of ATGM? But then aiming for the upper plate of the Abrams?

If you shoot it from the front without elevation it wouldnt probably fuze, right?

 

And i think i can see a Marder behind the guy.

Share this post


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

@SH_MM

For which kind of Weapon? 

And is that the Puma on the left board above the Stryker?

 

It seems it can Penetrate the Stryker and the Bradley from the Front so maybe some sort of ATGM? But then aiming for the upper plate of the Abrams?

If you shoot it from the front without elevation it wouldnt probably fuze, right?

 

And i think i can see a Marder behind the guy.

 

 

If we put aside the strong propaganda vibe this site gives, the info is really pretty basic.

 

On the Abrams, it says to hit its sights and external gear with sniper rifles, its upper front plate with either RPGs or ATGMs(recommended from elevation) or APFSDS at any point between the turret bottom and UFP.

 

Hit with RPGs (even the simplest ones) the sides of the tank at the rear, or with 30mm autocannon munitions.

 

Doesnt specify as far as I can see, with what to shoot at the turret sides at the rear. Also doesnt specify on the Bradley and Stryker, though they could probably be disabled by RPGs practically everywhere, including basic PG-7 warheads. The BRAT and SRAT kits (ERA for Bradley and Stryker) could increase that threshold to tandem warheads e.g PG-7V.

 

The Stryker's wheels are vulnerable to small arms fire, and it is vulnerable to all sorts of autocannon fire.

 

Bradley may be protected against 30mm munitions at the front through passive armor, but I think it only relates to newer variants so I'm not sure.

 

 

And yes that is a Puma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21.01.2018 at 2:16 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

If we put aside the strong propaganda vibe this site gives, the info is really pretty basic.

....

Andrey's blog you mean? 

Share this post


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

Andrey's blog you mean? 

Yes. Starting any article with how country X's propaganda is this and that, is unprofessional and in itself sends a message that the author itself wants to insert his own agenda in a disturbing way.

 

Now, Andrey is a knowledgeable man. So perhaps a rewording is due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21.01.2018 at 1:16 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

 

 

If we put aside the strong propaganda vibe this site gives, the info is really pretty basic.

 

 

 

Your understanding of this is "pretty basic" as it was a parody to US and WW2 posters which someone take too seriously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still not sure what to think about the Ajax platform. But I guess they now officially confirmed (for the second time), that the "side armor" modules are in fact storage boxes; otherwise there wouldn't be a need to adopt the net-based Tarian's RPG armour at the sides.

 

ajax-fig.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like a bit of a stretch to claim an RPG net is official confirmation that the side boxes are all storage. They barely weigh anything, why not throw one on the sides.

Share this post


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

I'm still not sure what to think about the Ajax platform. But I guess they now officially confirmed (for the second time), that the "side armor" modules are in fact storage boxes; otherwise there wouldn't be a need to adopt the net-based Tarian's RPG armour at the sides.

 

ajax-fig.jpg

 

 

We could have misinterpreted previous infographics as stating these are storage boxes. They could be, but logically they wouldn't be nearly as big and extend all the way down, and all the way across the vehicle. It just makes no damn sense.

Still, regardless of what they are, net armor is not a confirmation of anything. It's just another layer of defense. Good for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By 2805662
      The following is derived from various wanderings, discussions, & tyre kicking, and covers an opinion on the forthcoming Land 400 Phase 3 Request for Tender, and is as per June 2018.
       
      General: Phase 2 will significantly shape participation in Phase 3. Costs for the two bidders that weren’t short listed for the Risk Mitigation Activity (GDLS & Elbit Systems) ran into the tens of millions of dollars. Costs for the losing BAE bid could rightly be assessed as double that. Combined with Rheinmetall’s Phase 2-driven “perceived incumbency”, nobody wants to waste money to be a stalking horse on the Commonwealth’s behalf. There is a plausible risk that only Rheinmetall will bid. 
       
      Reorganisation of infantry sections: When Land 400 was conceived, Australian infantry sections consisted of two fire teams of four. This drove the initial “eight dismounts” requirement that has subsequently been relaxed. Now comprising three fire teams of three, one of those teams will be the vehicle crew, the other two will dismount, for a total of six dismounts. Recent operational experience has highlighted the need for temporary attachment of specialist personnel, so a platform that has some spare seating could still count for it. 
       
      GFE Turrets: One possible tactic that the Commonwealth may seek to use is that of mandating that the Lance Turret, as used on the Phase 2 Boxer CRV, be used as Government Furnished Equipment (that is, purchased from Rheinmetall and provided to suitably configured hulls by competitors). This would simplify the turret training and offer spares commonality across both phases. Perceived savings for “buying in bulk” were (apparently) unable to be realised as Rheinmetall was reluctant to discount its turret. 
      Costs aside, if an offerer has a GFE turret, who owns the systems integration risk? Who does the customer turn to solve potential issues between the turret and hull when they, the customer, has mandated that particular turret? Commercially, this is a high risk proposition. 
       
      Unmanned turrets: Only GDLS offered an unmanned/remote turret for Phase 2, the Kongsberg MCT-30, as has been adopted in small numbers (81) by the US Army to meet an immediate operational need. A bias against unmanned turrets is unlikely to manifest itself in Phase 3 due to the likely presence of the PSM Puma IFV. Of course, that’ll likely to open the door to GDLS bidding the ASCOD fitted with Elbit’s optionally manned/unmanned MT-30 turret....should they decide to bid at all. 
       
      Likely bidders: This brings us to the inevitable list of potential bidders and their platforms. 
       
      BAE: Unlikely to bid. If they win SEA 5000, that may get them off the bench, as would a requirements set that looks a lot like CV90. In the event that they do bid, the CV90 Mk4 is the most likely platform. 
       
      GDLS: More likely to bid than BAE, but still waiting to see what the RFT looks like. (Tellingly?) Their ASCODs at Eurosatory were painted for upcoming European opportunities, not in the distinctive Australia disruptive pattern. 
       
      Rheinmetall: likely to offer the Lynx and maybe also the Puma. With the reorganisation of Australian infantry sections (see above) the eight dismounts of the KF41 version of the Lynx are less relevant. Still, the modularity of the KF41 demonstrated at Eurosatory 18 definitely left an impression. 
       
      PSM: As a JV between KMW & Rheinmetall, Puma may be offered separately (unlikely if the Boxer =\= ARTEC in Australia model is followed). In the event that is is offered separately, it’s high unit cost, without the associated modularity of Boxer, may be a disadvantage. Also, PSM has no experience with industrial partnerships in Australia: a significant disadvantage. 
       
      Hanwha Defense Systems: Korea has been a bit “off” Australian defence opportunities, largely due to the cack-handed way in which the cancellation of the K-9/AS-9 was handled in 2012. The AS-9 was viewed as a loss leader, primarily as Australia has a reputation of being a discerning (aka difficult) customer. If Hanwha bids their K21, it’ll be interesting to watch. 
       
      Whilst by no means exhaustive, the above outlines some less-obvious factors currently at play for the 450-vehicle opportunity that is Land 400 Phase 3.  
       
    • By Sovngard
      Meanwhile at Eurosatory 2018 :
       
      The Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT), a private venture project intended for the export market.
       


    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
×