Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts


   Widespread in Japanese network resources, photos of a prototype of a promising tracked platform (armored personnel carrier) developed by the Japanese corporation Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Allegedly, the tracked vehicle is partly unified with the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries' wheeled (8x8) MAV armored platform, which is now bidding on a new wheeled armored personnel carrier under the Next Armored Wheeled Vehicle program for the Japanese Self-Defense Forces ground forces, while the chassis and the layout is based on the design of the Japanese Type 89 BMP. Based on both wheeled and tracked platforms, it is proposed to create a wide range of armored vehicles for various purposes.

   According to information on a promising tracked platform reported by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries at the DSEI Japan defense show held in Tokyo in November 2019, the approximate combat weight of the vehicles on this platform is 24 tons, length is more than 7 m, width 3.2 m, height 2.4 m. Maximum speed of more than 70 km/h.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

FFG has delivered the first of 30 PASI XA-203N MRSP (multirole medical platform) to the Norwegian Army, which will replace the existing SISU XA-185 ambulances, as well as plugging some of the gap that has been left by the decision to transfer all of the Bell 412SP/HP to the Norwegian Special Operations Command (a couple of them will still be on medevac duty in Northern Norway, but that’s it). The PASI XA-203N have previously been used as armoured personnel carriers, but there hasn’t been much use for them after the Norwegian Army abandoned the idea of having light armoured/motorized infantry battalions in 2013. Now the plan is to keep them trucking for another 20 years as armoured ambulances.


The vehicle was displayed at Army Summit 2019:




(NASAMS High Mobility Launcher in the foreground.)




The old armoured ambulance, SISU XA-185, offers inferior protection compared to the much heavier PASI XA-203N, but it also has a better power-to-weight ratio, and it maintains an amphibious capacity unlike the newer vehicle:




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Beer said:

Any info when was it taken? 

No info regarding the photo.  However, we can assume it's between 1987 and 2007, given the service entry date of the K1 and the exit of the M47.  I want to say it's probably on the earlier side of that date range.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Arlan MRAP and Barys APC with new combat modules going through tests at the military training ground "Mailan", which is located in the Akmola region of Kazakhstan.



   Vehicles were developed by Kazakhstan Paramount Engineering (KPE, joint project of investors of Kazakhstan and South Africa). Arlan is already used by troops, while Barys APC is in prototype stage (2 vehicles were made so far - 8x8 and 6x6 versions).

   KPE showed new combat modules for both vehicles. Sunkar for Arlan MRAP and Ansar for Barys APC. Both modules were designed by Weapon System Engineering (KPE subsidiary).

   Ansar is equipped with 2A72 30 mm autocannon, thermal imager, TV sight, laser rangefinder, atmospheric conditions sensor, radar that measure muzzle velocity of shells, and FCS. FCS can track up to 5 targets in the same time, turret can rotate with speed of more than 110 degr. per second and engage air threats. Ammunition in Ansar can be reloaded from inside of APC.


















   Sunkar combat module for Arla MRAP have NSVT 12.7mm HMG and PKT 7.62 GPMG. It can elevate to 88 degrees, rotation speed ~110 degr/sec, automatic target tracking.









Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Libya, Haftar troops armored vehicles:


MSPV Panthera T6 4x4, INKAS Titan-DS 4x4, INKAS Titan-S 6x6, JMSS Al-Mared 8x8, Paramount Group Mbombe 6x6













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.

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 Monochromelody
      Disappeared for a long period, Mai_Waffentrager reappeared four months ago. 
      This time, he took out another photoshoped artifact. 

      He claimed that the Japanese prototype 105GSR (105 mm Gun Soft Recoil) used an autoloader similar to Swedish UDES 19 project. Then he showed this pic and said it came from a Japanese patent file. 
      Well, things turn out that it cames from Bofors AG's own patent, with all markings and numbers wiped out. 

      original file→https://patents.google.com/patent/GB1565069A/en?q=top+mounted+gun&assignee=bofors&oq=top+mounted+gun+bofors
      He has not changed since his Type 90 armor scam busted. Guys, stay sharp and be cautious. 
    • By LostCosmonaut
      Originally posted by Rossmum on SA;

      Looks pretty good for the time.
    • By Collimatrix
      Shortly after Jeeps_Guns_Tanks started his substantial foray into documenting the development and variants of the M4, I joked on teamspeak with Wargaming's The_Warhawk that the next thing he ought to do was a similar post on the T-72.
      Haha.  I joke.  I am funny man.
      The production history of the T-72 is enormously complicated.  Tens of thousands were produced; it is probably the fourth most produced tank ever after the T-54/55, T-34 and M4 sherman.
      For being such an ubiquitous vehicle, it's frustrating to find information in English-language sources on the T-72.  Part of this is residual bad information from the Cold War era when all NATO had to go on were blurry photos from May Day parades:

      As with Soviet aircraft, NATO could only assign designations to obviously externally different versions of the vehicle.  However, they were not necessarily aware of internal changes, nor were they aware which changes were post-production modifications and which ones were new factory variants of the vehicle.  The NATO designations do not, therefore, necessarily line up with the Soviet designations.  Between different models of T-72 there are large differences in armor protection and fire control systems.  This is why anyone arguing T-72 vs. X has completely missed the point; you need to specify which variant of T-72.  There are large differences between them!
      Another issue, and one which remains contentious to this day, is the relation between the T-64, T-72 and T-80 in the Soviet Army lineup.  This article helps explain the political wrangling which led to the logistically bizarre situation of three very similar tanks being in frontline service simultaneously, but the article is extremely biased as it comes from a high-ranking member of the Ural plant that designed and built the T-72.  Soviet tank experts still disagree on this; read this if you have some popcorn handy.  Talking points from the Kharkov side seem to be that T-64 was a more refined, advanced design and that T-72 was cheap filler, while Ural fans tend to hold that T-64 was an unreliable mechanical prima donna and T-72 a mechanically sound, mass-producible design.
      So, if anyone would like to help make sense of this vehicle, feel free to post away.  I am particularly interested in:
      -What armor arrays the different T-72 variants use.  Diagrams, dates of introduction, and whether the array is factory-produced or a field upgrade of existing armor are pertinent questions.
      -Details of the fire control system.  One of the Kharkov talking points is that for most of the time in service, T-64 had a more advanced fire control system than contemporary T-72 variants.  Is this true?  What were the various fire control systems in the T-64 and T-72, and what were there dates of introduction?  I am particularly curious when Soviet tanks got gun-follows-sight FCS.
      -Export variants and variants produced outside the Soviet Union.  How do they stack up?  Exactly what variant(s) of T-72 were the Iraqis using in 1991?

      -WTF is up with the T-72's transmission?  How does it steer and why is its reverse speed so pathetically low?
    • 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 
  • Create New...