Met749

SSO/Russians and Ural Trucknical with ZSU-23-2

 

 

 
Also, SAA/Tiger forces Trucknicals

Here's an odd one.....I recall a discussion from the Missing Lynx modelling forum about a Sherman subtype with suspension fitted with spacers to allow the use of tracks with double-duckbills, like this:
 

 
The site where I found the image attributes this as a M4A1 Flamethrower:  http://www.odfever.com/folly/Galleries/M4A1/M4A1.htm
 
 
Here's another picture of a different vehicle with the same spaced suspension & double-duckbills, but with a chevron track:
 

 
This one is described as an M4A1E6 on this page:  http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/m4a3e4/m4a3e4.html  But the description doesn't mention the changes to the suspension.
 
Hoping you might know the designation for this type (pretty sure it was a M4A1 variant, E4 or E6 does ring some bells), maybe you have a section on it, I'd quite like to build one as a curiosity.

Polish simple NERA armour= better cut-viev:
 

 
the same descibe here:
 
 

 

 

T-62Ms with sandbags

I have a new 4K monitor, which means...
 
...I can get better screen caps from our MoD photo database!
 

 
("Right mouse button -> Open image in new tab" for bigger photo)

When you lost your turret, ISIS BMP.

One of 3 types of upgraded BRDMs, used by some sort of PMC. 2 others were posted much earlier in this thread - one with open turret and second one with ZU-23-2s in RCWS.

 

Cenaturo with Spanish ERA:

PT-91M2 is almoust exatcly ctrl+c/ctrl+v this what I suggest here:
https://we.tl/zj6Yrq288z
(my article from 9/2015 for downloade for free - beta version so comenst under images are BS)
 
PT-91M2 is this what is needed by PolishArmy:
 
1) New gun from Konstrukta (2A46MS)
2) New sabilisation (EPS-97 Albatross or Ukrianian 2E42M  -teh same as in Bulat's)
3) New or refresh FCS (new SAVAN or polish Drawa-TGA)
4) APU
5) Soft-kill Obra-3
6) SOD (system obserwacji dookrężnej) - double thermal/day cameras whit 360 degree around turret
7) slat/bar armour
8) maybe ERAWA-3 (so polonisated Knive/Duplet)
 
About prices - valuse form Malaysian contract from 2002-2004:
EPS stabilisation -  130k EURO
SKO SAVAN-15 + Vigy 821k EURO // or Drawa TGA - 1,2 mln PLN
125mm 2A46MS  - 110k USD
turret  non-retractile bearing - 60k Euro
ERAWA complet  (142k PLN)
Obra-3 23,75k USD
etc

ISIS VBIED from Raqqa province

 
a single-barrel 23 mm autocannon (or maybe second one is missing or it was damaged before being mounted on the car?)

2S41 82mm mortar on a light MRAP for VDV (Typhoon-VDV). 40 rounds, 6 km max range, ROF is up to 12.

 

BMP-2 there in the back has got it too.

I've found it :

More:

 
 

Close up of soft case 4S24 ERA series variant on T-72B3 Obr.2016.

IFVs offered for the Czech Army.
 
CV90 turret armament options:


 
Main armament options:
120 mm tank gun 35 mm Bushmaster III (capable of using 50 mm Supershot, but it's a smaller catridge than the Rheinmetall one) 30 mm Bushmaster II (capable of using 40 mm Super40 ammo) Left sponson options:
Storage box 7.62 mm MG 12.7 mm HMG 40 mm AGL HEW (future option, IMO rather unlikely due to the high power consumption of lasers) Right sponson options:
Storage box Spike ATGMs AT-4 RPGs Also APS, RWS and panoramic commander's sight are optional.
 
Overview over older CV90s:

 
Original CV90 has extremely poor protection, second, third and fourth generation CV90s are only qualified with STANAG 4569 level 5 ballistic protection (though it is estimated to be exceeded by BAE Systems) - it's commonly quoted at 30 mm AP(FS)DS protection, but back then there was no official standardized testing against 30 mm AP/APDS/APFSDS ammo. I am really confused about the low level of mine protection, only STANAG 4569 level 3 and that only on the CV90 Mk III - there was no mine protection at all in the previous models! That's the same level of mine protection as found on the Marder 1A5, which is a much older design were the designers never put any thought into mine-protection at all. Seems to be quite a big oversight, specifically given that Sweden and Norway both bought MEXAS mine protection kits for KFOR and SFOR.
 
Mobility stayed the same according to BAE Systems, so essentially they decided to keep it on an early 1990s level? Not sure if this is good, though the initial CV90 had great mobility at its day.
 
Only the new fifth gen CV90 (though still officially known as a CV90 Mark III) does have STANAG 4569 level 6 ballistic and level 4 mine protection, but given that the quoted weight is equal to the quoted max combat weight, they seem to have sacrificed growth potential for this.


CV90 Mk III payload is 16 tonnes, which is less than that of ASCOD 2 (19 tonnes).

Also, I didn't knew that BAE Systems never manufactures the turret for the CV90, but always uses a subcontractor for it.
 

The Armored Combat Vehicle Puma started as a privat-venture betwen Krauss-Maffei and Diehl in 1983. The two first prototypes were ready first in spring 1986 with a Kuka 20mm two men turret and second in autumn with a Diehl 120mm mortar turret. 
ACV-Puma was intented as an export armored vehicle of the 16-28 t class. 
 

 
By 1983 original concept, it was offered with two engine options (400/600hp) to cope with the level of armor protection asked.
The running gear was a mixt of both Leopard-1 and 2 components :
- Leo-1 : road wheels, track support rollers, torsion bars and even the driver's seat ;
- Leo-2 : track adjuster, cooling system components and sproket hub.
It was possible to run the engine outside of its compartment. 
 
In 1988, the concept was improved further :
- the class range reached 38t ;
- the engines offer was 440 or 750hp strong ;
- the chassis was now available in two length (5/6 road wheels) and  hight/low profil hull (20cm).

The ACV-Puma was a contender at the Norwegian IFV programme from 1991 and the Turkish 1987 relaunched TIFV programme.
Norway chose CV-90 and Turkey, the AIFV.
(If anyone have information about how it was a serious contender, I'm interested)
It was also evaluated by the Swiss army in 1991. I don't know if it took part to the Char de grenadiers 2000 programme. 
 

In 1983´s concept, the difference betwen the low profil hull and the 20cm higher hight profil hull was obtained by a "box shape vertical raised" rear compartment. With the 1988's design, the front slop is now different to achieve a better ballistic protection. 
 
When considering documentations of this period, it's important to note the mine/IED protection was not a priority like today. 
 
I'll post soon a scan showing general layout of the troop compartment. It's a Marder/BMP old fashion one with soldiers facing outside. 
 
Even if it was not a success at exportation, I think ACV-Puma must be known because of both :
- the outdated combat beliefs of the 80's (still vigourous today) ;
- and advanced proposal  such as the differential hull length from the drawing board. 
 
I have a question :
Does anyone known if a 6 road wheels chassis was ever built ?

Scratch my original 6pdr Portee/AEC Deacon waffle.....Realised this was supposed to be a US made vehicle, I'd assumed it was British.
 
T-44 GMC perhaps:

It is based on infomation present in the summary "Perforation - Protection: State of the Art" by P.Y. Chanteret and G. Weihrauch of the French-German Research Institute of Saint Louis (ISL), published as part of the European Forum on Ballistics 2001.
Okay, a small correction: The article mentions that first anti-KE ERA was tested in/before 1973 by the ISL, summarized in the document "Untersuchung zur Mindering der Durchschlagleistung von Wuchtgeschossen" from 1973 by G. Weihrauch, H. Müller and B. Wellige. The specific ERA package for the frontal arc of the Leopard 1, providing protection against 105 mm APFSDS, was tested somewhere in the mid-1970s, the final report "Deutsch-Französische Kommission für Angriff und Schutz, Leo-I Beschuss mit reaktivem Frontschutz mit Pfeilgeschossen Kal. 105 mm" from the ISL is dated at 1977. ERA was first used in combat in 1982, with the first fielded anti-KE ERA being Kontakt-5 in 1985... so 1977 is still quite a bit ahead of schedule.
 

 
The ISL research program by Germany (not sure if France was involved, no French names and the cited documents all have German names) lasted more than 10 years and lead to multiple "very effective sandwiches" by optimizing various different aspects of reactive armor. The English-language document "Recent Research Work conducted at ISL in the Field of Reactive (Active) Armour" by G. Weihrauch from 1984 supposeldy contains a summary of them. Unfortunately I couldn't find any of the research papers online aside of the general article form the European Forum on Ballistics (it's on NDIA, can't find link ATM).

Sprut and BMD-4s

I moved these posts to this thread from the active protection systems thread because they are more relevant here.  But this is very interesting.
 
@SH_MM, do you happen to recall the name of the West German anti-apfsds ERA developed for the Leopard 1?  This is very interesting, and the first I've heard of such a thing.

APFSDS round used by the Type-10, google translate didn´t get me far but it seems it is similar to the DM33 or DM53.
(from here: http://eaglet.skr.jp/MILITARY/TK-X.htm )
 

 
 

Much Security!