Molota_477

APS systems and at which range they can be spotted by radar systems according to the ADS manufacturer...

各位最近可能在WT论坛上见过这张图片，在一些争论陆上自卫队90式战车的讨论串里：
Some of you may have seen this pic recently on WT forum, in some thread arguing the protection of JGSDF Type 90: 
Discussion on WT forum
 

 
我就直说吧，表格里的中文注解说了，这不过是个“猜想”，GUESSING。
To be straight, the Chinese annotation in the table said it is just a GUESSING.
注解内容可能完全是编造的，但不幸的是，不同语言间的障碍使你们无法看穿这点。
This annotation could be totally nonsense but unfortunately a barrier between languages prevent you guys see throught it. 
 
实际上，这又是一份关于陆上自卫队10式战车的文件，说的并不是90式。
In fact, again, this document itself is about JGSDF Type 10 MBT, not Type 90.
同样的花招，不一样的人，是吧？
Same trick, different people, huh?

↑陆上自卫队的10式战车规格书
JGSDF specification handbook of Type 10 MBT

↑59页，附录B，性能(规定)以及诸元
page 59, Appendix B, performance (regulations) and data
 
下面简要说说这些性能规定如何编写、如何加密。
Let's talk about these regulations and how they were made and encrypted. 
 
大家可能知道日语中有平假名和片假名，和拉丁语中的字母还有大写字母是差不多的。
You may know that Japanese have Hirakana and Katakana, like Latin have letters and capital letters. 
 
正如图中所示，一些最关键的数值和描述用平假名、片假名、罗马字(拉丁字母)隐去了。
As you can see, some of the most crucial numbers and descriptions are covered by a Hirakana or Katakana or Romaji(Latin letters).
 
这些数值和描述被归在一起，编入附属的手册，称为“别册”。
These numbers and descriptions were collected and listed in some append book, called Bessatsu(別冊). 
 
在查阅别册时，就好比在看试卷的答题卡。但如果把别册里面的数值和描述涂黑，你就根本不知道说啥。
When you look up to the append book, just like viewing the answer sheet of an exam paper. But when numbers and descriptions were censored, you'll never know what it said. 
 
比如说，正面防护：
For example, the frontal protection: 
 
“耐弾性 - 正面 - 正面要部は、【あ】に射距離【え】m相当存速において、貫徹されない。”
 
读起来是这样的：
耐弹性 - 正面 - 正面重要部位可抵御【あ】以相当于射击距离【え】米存速的射击，不会贯穿。
It read like this: 
Protection - Frontal - Frontal crucial part should withstand 【あ】 firing at a distance of 【え】meter speed reduce equivalent, and not penetrate. 
 
【あ】代表某种弹药，可能是尾翼稳定穿甲弹，但不知道是量产弹种还是实验弹种。
【あ】stands for certain type of ammunition, probably APFSDS, but don't know whether it is production shot or experimental.
 
【え】代表某个射击距离，可以是1000、1500或2000(米)，但这么远的距离，炮弹会受到风力和重力影响，故无法精确瞄准靶车的防护区域。
【え】stands for certain firing distance, could be 1000 , 1500 or 2000 (meters), but on such a long distance, shot could be effect by wind and gravity, thus cannot aim on the protection area of target vehicle precisely.
 
一个常见的解决方式是在更近的距离上开火，比如说200到550米，同时减少推进药量，使得穿甲弹的终点速度符合特定距离的速降。这是一种等效方法。
The usual solution is to fire from a much closer range, from 200 to 550 meters, while reducing the propellant charge so that the end speed of AP shot could match the speed drop on certain distance. This is an equivalant method. 
 
有的人争辩说90式战车可以抵挡另一辆90式战车发射的穿甲弹(JM33)，距离大约250米。这一说法源自一段未知视频片段，具体什么视频他们自己也没看过。较近的射击距离是为了能更好的瞄准，为此可能使用了减装药来模拟远距离终点速度，但也无法证明。
Some people argue that Type 90 MBT can withstand AP shot (JM33) firing from another Type 90 MBT, on a distance about 250 meters. The source of this statement came from an unknown video clip, which they have never seen. Firing on closer range is for better aim, and they could have use reduced charge to simulate a much longer range, but we cannot prove. 
 
 

From the Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2018. The dispersion of five round fired by a Swedish Strv 122 (at just 500 metres distance).
 

 
Interim results... note that Romania is missing (no show?).

A small gallery of Leopard 2A6FIN sideskirt photos, taken on the FDF 100-years day 4.6.2018 by me: https://imgur.com/a/83RepaQ

NERA & ERA from South-Africa
 

 

Ingwe ATGM being tested against armor

Modified MBT-2000（many details very closed to the VT-4 mod.2012,but with 6TD-2 engine） and BK1871（the initial prototype of Type-90 II/MBT-2000）appear in a last year documentary video.【央视纪录片】军工记忆-链接世界 CCTV9

Modified MBT-2000↑
 

The BK 1871 on the left, note its very sloping UFP , and side by side is the MBT-2000 FP-1, FP means "Formal  Prototype", which was designed a new hull nose structure.
More pics about BK1871:



 
 
 
There are also another interesting details of MBT-2000 )

Modified MBT-2000（many details very closed to the VT-4 mod.2012,but with 6TD-2 engine） and BK1871（the initial prototype of Type-90 II/MBT-2000）appear in a last year documentary video.【央视纪录片】军工记忆-链接世界 CCTV9

Modified MBT-2000↑
 

The BK 1871 on the left, note its very sloping UFP , and side by side is the MBT-2000 FP-1, FP means "Formal  Prototype", which was designed a new hull nose structure.
More pics about BK1871:



 
 
 
There are also another interesting details of MBT-2000 )

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

Main infos given during the interview:
 
-Engine and transmissions are placed side by side for compacity
-Both forward and rear wheels are directional
-The vehicle can be driven as a 6x6 off-road or in propulsion mode when on road (the forward wheels are then decoupled from the transmission)
-800km range on internal fuel
-Stabilized commander optical sight was asked both for backup and for a better topography perception
-LRF  on the commander TV-Thermal sight (linked to the RCWS)
-7 episcopes on the commander hatch
-The gunner TV sight is exactly the same than the one of the commander (LRF, TV-Thermal) + an optical backup
-2 forward facing episcopes on the gunner hatch
-2 Antares systems for optical surveillance (see my previous post above) doubling as LWR, one on the far right front and one on the rear left of the turret
-3 forward facing episcopes for the driver, the one in the center can display the thermal and light intensification images from the cameras on the left of the driver hatch.
 
 
-2 proxy camera on each side of the vehicle to survey dead angles from 0 to 50m + one reverse camera
 
 
-Any TV image from all the listed optics can be seen by any crew member on their display
-The RCWS can be decoupled from the commander sight (to observe without being menacing in peace keeping operations)
-2 missiles in the pod and 2 others at the rear of the vehicles, apparently they need to be reloaded from the outside.
-IED scrambling system is not displayed on this particular vehicle but will be installed
 
 
-An hard kill APS under development by TDA (Thales) is also on the contract
- Pilar V acoustic shot detection system
-All detected threats and alerts will be shared to other vehicles equipped with the Scorpion BMS (SICS) which are the Leclerc XLR, VBMR light and heavy, EBRC Jaguar (the VBCI won't be equipped with it for now).
 
Also on passive protection, he say that he not at liberty to say but give the following info:
 
-Crew capsule (already known)
-Both the Jaguar and the Gryffon comply with the new (?) STANAG on IEDs (they don't say at which level)

Sounds like a good idea.
 
Now about the CAESAR:
 
Nexter is working on a guided artillery shell for the CAESAR and they have apparently started some testing (TRL 5 passed)
The new shell will be called Menhir and will be a precision shell (canard wings, GPS and inertial guidance) with a circular error of 10m.
The range will be of 30km when fired from an L52 (shorter than the standard range which is 42 to 50km)
 

 
They are also working on a Menhir MkII which would reduce the circular error down to 2m when using a laser designator (the detector for the shell is already available from a cooperation with Thales a few years back).
They also hope to increase the range of the shell to 60km by working on a reduced drag and by adding small wings turning the shell into a glider.
Other options are being studied like in-flight retargeting and hardening the shell against GPS jamming.
 
As far as lethality enhancement goes they are proposing to use 3D printing to create alumide charges custom made to optimize fragmentation depending on the target.
 

 
All in all the goals seem to be pretty similar to the LRPF program in the US (bar the 70km range).

Modified MBT-2000（many details very closed to the VT-4 mod.2012,but with 6TD-2 engine） and BK1871（the initial prototype of Type-90 II/MBT-2000）appear in a last year documentary video.【央视纪录片】军工记忆-链接世界 CCTV9

Modified MBT-2000↑
 

The BK 1871 on the left, note its very sloping UFP , and side by side is the MBT-2000 FP-1, FP means "Formal  Prototype", which was designed a new hull nose structure.
More pics about BK1871:



 
 
 
There are also another interesting details of MBT-2000 )

Modified MBT-2000（many details very closed to the VT-4 mod.2012,but with 6TD-2 engine） and BK1871（the initial prototype of Type-90 II/MBT-2000）appear in a last year documentary video.【央视纪录片】军工记忆-链接世界 CCTV9

Modified MBT-2000↑
 

The BK 1871 on the left, note its very sloping UFP , and side by side is the MBT-2000 FP-1, FP means "Formal  Prototype", which was designed a new hull nose structure.
More pics about BK1871:



 
 
 
There are also another interesting details of MBT-2000 )

Pictures of Royal Thai Army’s VT-4 MBT during its demonstration earlier this year. I have some close up pictures of the Oplot-T and VT-4 from the Children’s Day this year working as a service member of the Thai Army so tell me if you want to see them.
 

 

 

 

 

 

I posted about this on another forum quite a while ago, so you may already know this: The company FWH manufactures cast armor parts for German AFVs. It offers three quality classes. Quality class "P" with a hardness of 350 to 380 on the Brinell scale was used for the Leopard 2 to 2A3 (I suppose the early batches of 2A4 tanks also received casts parts of the same quality class). Quality class "Q" with a hardness of 380 to 420 HB was used on the Leopard 2A4, 2A5 and the 2A6 models for Greece and Spain. The quality class "R" with a hardness of 480 to 520 HB is used for the Puma and Boxer. Most German combat vehicles make use of welded armor, so this info is rather meager. However the Boxer uses 45 cast armor parts made by FWH with a size of up tp 1,600 mm.
 
On the Leopard 2 cast armor elements might be used for the gun mount, the mounting system for the suspension elements and maybe parts of the hatches. But this information gives a general idea about what steel was used for this tank and how protection was improved from the earlier models to the later Leopard 2A4 batches and the following models.
 
Welding is done austenitic for steel elements of quality class "P" and ferritic for the quality classes "Q" and "R".
 

 
There is a document suggesting that the welded steel plates for the Leopard 2's basic construction were delivered by the Stahlwerk Geisweld. The steel is branded "HFX 130" and has a thickness ranging between 5 and 45 mm depending on location. Unfortunately there is no HFX 130 steel being advertised anymore. An interessting fact is that the Stahlwerk Geisweld is nowadays owned by Schmolz und Birkenbach, which also owns the Swiss company SteelTec. While Stahlwerk Geisweld seems to be focused on manufacturing stainless steel for industry applications, SteelTec offers a product called "HSX 130". Given that the "HF" stands for "hochfest" (German for "high strength") and "HS" also stands for "high strength", both of these steel alloys might be the same.
 
HSX 130 steel is offered with a maximum thickness of 45 mm (like shown in the German document mentioning HFX 130) and has a hardness of 395 HB on average (tensile strength ranges from 1,250 to 1,400 N/mm². This might be used on the Leopard 2, given that flyers from Krauss-Maffei talked about the high quality steel used for the tank.
 


___
 
German Leopard 2A6MA2 being handed over to the Netherlands:

 
 
 

Here some scans from the Satory VI (1977) catalog :
https://imgur.com/a/zfjSNwm

Might as well repost this from the AW forum.
(Thanks @Laviduce for taking the time to incorporate the label in English directly)
The translations I did back then were quite literal since I'm not really a mechanics guy, so it may sound awkward.
Scans comes mainly from 2 books I have.
 
 
V8X Hyperbar and the ESM500 gearbox:
 
 
Principle scheme of the engine:
 
1) Autoadaptation valve of the turbine
2) Discharge valve
3) Turbine
4) Compressor
5) Air intake regulation valve (secondary combustion chamber)
6) Secondary combustion chamber
7) Cooling unit of air intake
8 Ignition
 
 
Kinematic chain:
Didn't tried to translate that one since I'm not too good are reading this kind of diagram.
Ask if you need me translate something in particular.
 

About T-80UE-1 and UA
   Basically same upgrade, but if T-80BV is getting new FCS and some other changes it get T-80UE-1 designation, if T-80U - then T-80UA. But T-80UE-1s can have differences between them...
   Some T-80UE-1, according to photos posted on Otvaga, have "Plissa" thermal imager, but part of T-80UE-1s have PL-1 IR lamp.

 
 

 
GurKhan explains:
   So T-80UE-1 Sp1 is variant with PL-1 IR laser projector, Sp2 - with Plissa thermal imager. T-80UA also have similar 2 variants (with PL-1 and second one with Plissa), although no designations that i know.
 
   Also:
 
   And if tank have RCWS - it may be either UD or UE-1, if not - them U or UA. Cyprus got special variant T-80, similar to UA but without Ainet and with older mechanical loader. And one more moment - PL-1 is not a give away of model of T-80, as IR lamps on normal T-80Us could have been swaped for PL-1 during repairs (without any modernisations or changes inside).
 
   One notorious thing in UE-1 - some ammunition is located in the turret. I guess fuck everybody inside was MoD moto.

 
   To summarize:
   T-80UE-1 is T-80BV with T-80UD turret, new FCS and sights, with 1250HP gas turbine installed and Kontakt-5 build in ERA package on both hull and turret. T-80UE-1 Sp1 have PL-1 IR laser projector, while T-80UE-1 Sp2 received Plissa thermal imager. And both Sp1 and Sp2 have ammunition fucking stuffed everywhere in turret.

Generaly speaking, I never answer to such a question because it’s the start of unrealistic discussions of technology fanboys unknowing real. But, I can say :
- never forget AMX-10RC is a very 80’s light tank. So, any improvement must be cheap provide. 
- the world famous Serge AFV belief is : an AFV chassis push, carry and tow. 
- having a good AFV is good, but without its environment, it’s useless. 
 
FCS, sights, weapons were good.
 
So, I would have :
- modified the seats to have something more confortable and armored. Maybe an harness to sleep ;
- introduced a new TC hatch with an umbrella opening (my priority) ;
- rearrange external storage to increase them ;
- suppress river crossing (both useless and dangerous) to have more storage ;
- add spall liner and mine proof plates under pilot seat and turret floor. 
 
Considering chassis, I would have add :
- 2 rear fuel drop barrels like the Leclerc ones. Fuel drums are compulsory ;
- front tools connector to push mine rollers...
 
Considering it’s environment, I would have :
- add a fourth 10RC per troop (In France, reccon tanks troops are 3 tanks troops. Leclerc : 4 MBT troops) ;
- adopted AMX-10RTT as command post and ARVs instead of VAB and ARV based on trucks.

 
With diminution of 10RC number, I would have transformed some of them in general purpose vehicles able to carry dedicated teams for special tasks such as EW....
When dimounting the barrel and ammo racks, you have plenty of room. 
 

If I have time, I will post modular part of the hull tomorrow.
At the front, you only have 4 modular blocks. The LFP can’t be modified. 

Yes, it is a useful course book and very easy to be found in Chinese Internet, however its hardcover is very rare now.
Link：https://pan.baidu.com/s/18QXkATK6JEAH6Sy4RT27SA

Code：yde9

Boxer with CT40 turret and ATGM launcher.
 
The UK wants a total of ~800 Boxers (but supposedly currently plans with only ~500, because money is limited), which could make it the largest single Boxer contract yet. Saudia-Arabia was close to order a total of 928 Boxers including some very exotic variants, but the contract was never signed due to politics. It was apparently very close to be signed - Rheinmetall even requested an export licence for an initial 200 vehicles, but it was denied. The Saudi deal would have included 119 anti-tank Boxers with 105 mm main gun in a turret, 100 Boxers with dozer blades to break through barricades and 60 Boxers to transport up to four VIPs each (probably to evacuate the Saudi-Arabian royal family in case of a revolt/war) incorporating sinks, fridges and safes. The German government didn't want to approve such a deal and an attempt to circumvent this (by selling the licence for the Boxer to some Spanish company and making the vehicles there) failed. This is why Saudi-Arabia ordered the LAV 700.
 
The UK wants 10 variants for the MIV:
armored personnel carrier command and control vehicle armored recovery vehicle mortar carrier ambulance armored engineering vehicle joint fire control vehicle infantry fighting/reconnaissance vehicle 155 mm self-propelled gun carrier short-range air-defence vehicle Apparently this makes the Boxer the best option, because all variants are either (to be) ordered or fielded already. Germany is interesting in a SHORAD system based on the Boxer (NNbS;  Nah- und Nächstbereichsschutz), an artillery variant with RCH 155 turret, a Boxer for the JFST and a fire-support variant with 30 mm gun. Slovenia wants to buy IFV/recce vehicles and mortar carriers, Lithunia ordered IFVs and scout vehicles with the Samson Mk II RWS, Australia buys turreted CRVs and apparently some ARVs. The 155 mm artillery variant seems to currently be an unique selling point of the Boxer, because other 8x8 wheeled vehicles have not been demonstrated in such a variant.
 
The armament of the APC variant is supposed to be a a Kongsberg Protector with Javeling ATGM. This is why the Dutch variants (already fitted with the Protector RWS) are meant to be the basis for the British variants. According to Nicholas Drummond on Twitter, the ambulance variant of the Boxer was well-received (although he doesn't specify which ambulance variant - Germany and the Netherlands use different ones).
 
 
 
 

Yes, it is a useful course book and very easy to be found in Chinese Internet, however its hardcover is very rare now.
Link：https://pan.baidu.com/s/18QXkATK6JEAH6Sy4RT27SA

Code：yde9

Sure, you can download it from here https://drive.google.com/file/d/19zgh1r1ULfYJLfwNlOEpBywqXh4igTLu/view?usp=sharing 
 

Something interesting about Merkava III's armor protection(in Chinese):
Some of these images are come from Chinese course book《装甲防护技术基础》（The basic technology of armor protection）, and others are come from this issue： http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-BQZS200108004.htm
The main author of these two sources is one of the chief tank designers in China. Mr.Zhang has presided over a design of front-engine tank scheme under the frame of Chinese 3rd gen MBT, but there was little info refer to these history)

Photo of Mr.Zhang and General Tal.

The cast turret base and weld frame.

Special armor covered, those colored parts most likely are heavy NERA or Built-in-ERA structure modules, while others are lighter module I guess.

T-3/4 module before shooting by a HEAT warhead of HOT missile. According to previous picture, it should be the side armor of the turret. So we can assume that the front arc of Merkava III's turret, looks likely ±30°，which can withstand more than 700mm even 800mm penetration from CE threat.

Still the T-3/4 module,before hitting by a RPG warhead. 
I am confused this number as T-9/4 at my first look, but it is more likely a distorted "3". There are some reasons: (1) Its thickness doesn't seem to fit on top of the turret. (2) In this pic the threat is RPG warhead, moreover, its incidence normal angle is smaller than the previous HOT warhead, which can be used as a useful basis for judging.

Built-in ERA structure, the left side is Israeli scheme, and Russian scheme at right side.




The armor layout of tank Merkava Mk III. The solid line is base steel armor's equivalent thickness, including spaced armor array inside the hull( The table above shows the thickness and inclination of the base steel armor,  unfortunately many  notes are missing in the PDF) and the dotted line is the special armor's protection capability against KE ammunition, up to 450mm RHA on turret front and 350-400mm on the UFP.
 
 
Hope you guys will enjoy this post

Something interesting about Merkava III's armor protection(in Chinese):
Some of these images are come from Chinese course book《装甲防护技术基础》（The basic technology of armor protection）, and others are come from this issue： http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-BQZS200108004.htm
The main author of these two sources is one of the chief tank designers in China. Mr.Zhang has presided over a design of front-engine tank scheme under the frame of Chinese 3rd gen MBT, but there was little info refer to these history)

Photo of Mr.Zhang and General Tal.

The cast turret base and weld frame.

Special armor covered, those colored parts most likely are heavy NERA or Built-in-ERA structure modules, while others are lighter module I guess.

T-3/4 module before shooting by a HEAT warhead of HOT missile. According to previous picture, it should be the side armor of the turret. So we can assume that the front arc of Merkava III's turret, looks likely ±30°，which can withstand more than 700mm even 800mm penetration from CE threat.

Still the T-3/4 module,before hitting by a RPG warhead. 
I am confused this number as T-9/4 at my first look, but it is more likely a distorted "3". There are some reasons: (1) Its thickness doesn't seem to fit on top of the turret. (2) In this pic the threat is RPG warhead, moreover, its incidence normal angle is smaller than the previous HOT warhead, which can be used as a useful basis for judging.

Built-in ERA structure, the left side is Israeli scheme, and Russian scheme at right side.




The armor layout of tank Merkava Mk III. The solid line is base steel armor's equivalent thickness, including spaced armor array inside the hull( The table above shows the thickness and inclination of the base steel armor,  unfortunately many  notes are missing in the PDF) and the dotted line is the special armor's protection capability against KE ammunition, up to 450mm RHA on turret front and 350-400mm on the UFP.
 
 
Hope you guys will enjoy this post