Mighty_Zuk

For the non educated; what does the writing say?

Dusting off the Namer

From 1996:

On 12/12/2017 at 7:59 AM, Laser Shark said:

 

 

Norwegian Army CV9030N MkIII outfitted with SAAB Barracuda Mobile Camouflage System, November 2017.

Are those 3 sets of optics coaxed to the main gun? Interesting.

Seems to be Elbit's ELAWS laser warning system. But the picture resolution doesnt let me see it well enough.

26 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

That's quite a large hole in the upper front plate. Must have been a large calibre ATGM.

That's probably not a hole. When the transmission hatch is open, there is a small gap in front of it, between it and the UFP. The fire comes out from that gap, and it's been estimated to be a fuel fire.

Someone claims to be personally familiar with the incident - says it occurred in 2006 after an ATGM hit the powerpack section. Fire was put out quickly enough, engine replaced and it returned to service very shortly after.

I don't know what kind of data and statistics MANTAK have, and I know they make overall very practical decisions, but I think it's about time the LFP gets some armor. The hull is too tall to neglect that area and focus all the frontal armor on the UFP.

And a few photos:

And from a reservist brigade; a few photos of the interior:

7 hours ago, Belesarius said:

Pentagon reversing itself on cluster weapons.

 

http://www.janes.com/article/76101/pentagon-reverses-cluster-munition-ban

I just wanna add one thing:

It came up fairly recently that one of the reasons cited by the Israeli MoD for KMW's loss to Elbit in the artillery tender, was that Germany might ban the use of cluster munitions as these are illegal in Germany.

This, coupled with newly developed cluster-munition rockets for the M270 MLRS by IMI, shows that cluster munitions are now returning after they were withdrawn even by those parties who didnt sign a convention for their ban.

Modern cluster munitions have 5 fail-safe mechanisms, as opposed to 3 in the past. This gives them a theoretical dud rate of 0.01%, about 100 times less than the stated maximum.

So basically modern cluster munitions arent affected by the ban.

Why on earth would anyone ever use a tank for riot control?

K9 artillery in Israel.

They were brought to Israel to test ammunition, as South Korea intends to purchase (or already purchases?) munitions from IMI. 

Hanwha Techwin used the opportunity to also show it to the Israelis in the artillery bid, which was later won by Elbit. 

(August 2016)

(September 2017)

Credit to: https://david-2.livejournal.com/479757.html

Below the drum we see a schematics of the hull ammo rack, along with different colors and markings to tell which shells are where. 

The controller shows the number '6', which may indicate how many shells are left in the drum.

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs.

Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. 

https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html

It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it):

1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new)

Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. 

However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad.

2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old)

Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). 

The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas.

3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new)

Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents.

4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new)

Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 

5)Hybrid powerplant. (new)

Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief.

6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old)

Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 

7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new)

Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program.

8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new)

Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3.

9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old)

Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade.

Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:

At what circumstances did this happen?

1 hour ago, Ramlaen said:

Is focus.de a reputable source? It’s claiming less than 100 of Germany’s Leopard 2s are combat ready.

I'm more worried about the fact they only have slightly more MBTs in service than the UK.

With the right amount of money and effort, you can repair and prepare tanks and AFVs much more quickly than making new ones and staffing them, along with the infrastructure they require.

5 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Pretty sure tank commanders will still unbutton.....Systems like this provide an enhanced 2d view of a 3d environment, which is nice as an option, but little more IMHO.

A set of cameras gives a 2d view but eyes give a 3d view? I'm confused.

I personally can't see the difference between a panoramic camera view with selectable angles and plain eyesight.

Tell me I'm not sick.

No automated tracking up until now? I'm surprised to be honest.

Either way, it's good they're going for an HMD solution in parallel to APS.

Is there a schedule for when a follow-up variant is set to be developed, either officially or through a pattern?

After Trophy, the next key technology in the Abrams will be an IronVision-like HMD, displaying a full real-time picture on a simplified HUD. 

Army’s next-gen tank will be see-through with advanced sensors

9 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

Norway might be looking to upgrade or replace its Leopard 2A4s by 2025.

 

 

They say their current upgrade program for the Leopard 2A4 is insufficient. 

So now the modular solutions for the 2A4 are out, and the Leopard 2A7 is too heavy (according to @SH_MM). But I can't see them acquiring a new tank. And to keep an old and soon outdated fleet of Leopard 2A4 until at least 2025 is too much of a risk. And I thought they were the reasonable ones when they decided to dump the Javelin and go for an anti-APS oriented solution. 

2 hours ago, Andrei_bt said:

Patents are official and open, no " leaked patent" , just some rtds from one highly patriotic forum decided that 38 NII patent on hypotetical APS concept is Afghanit.

And how exactly do I find these patents?

10 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

According to pieces of patent that was leaked. AFAIK there was 2 EFP warheads aimed sideways in each rocket/interceptor. And what is MEFP? 

 

30° degrees is far from being top attack. It is like within angles at which HEAT shells can land at the vehicle because of distance and elevation differences between shooter and target. 

Do you still have a link to the leaked patent pieces?

I believe @Andrei_bt got it right, but I'm still curious about the patent.

1 minute ago, LoooSeR said:

Afganit is belived to use EFPs warheads in it's interceptors, not a fragmentation to hit incoming projectiles. Also, Afganit's hard kill system can't do shit against top attack munitions, thats why there is an extensive soft-kill system in development/developed for Armata/Kurganets/Boomerang.

According to whom? You don't need tube launchers for MEFP, and you certainly cannot defeat APFSDS with MEFP.

And when I said top attack I meant shallow angles of approach. I believe the Drozd was able to defeat ATGMs with 30° elevation relative to the tank.

46 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

So they are getting the 100mm gun now? 

Nope. They write APC instead of APS.

You can understand this when they say "Afghanit APC".

The 100mm ammunition is for the Afghanit APS of course.

But the interesting part is that they list 2 separate designations for the Afghanit's ammo, meaning there are probably 2 variants - 1 for the Armata family (T-14 and T-15) and 1 for the lighter Kurganets.

If I were to guess, the Kurganets uses fragment-free munitions as it will face a lower threat of top attack munitions (fragments help the Afghanit's horizontal launchers reach fairly high) and needs more focus on dismount protection.