Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Alzoc last won the day on May 11

Alzoc had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Nuclear engineering
    Military technology

Recent Profile Visitors

2,584 profile views

Alzoc's Achievements

Contributing Member

Contributing Member (2/3)



  1. The base looks like a Ferret armored car No idea for the turret though. Given that it has been exported practically everywhere, it likely is some local attempt at modernization.
  2. Well that might explain the involvement of London If the subs intended for Australia are based on the Astute class, the design being from the early 2000s many advancements have probably been made since then. So the Australian contract will probably used to pay for the development of some technology blocks for the Astute's successor. That mean however that the Australian are the one who will have to deal with the kinks of the program. Even a first delivery by the 2040s looks optimistic now.
  3. According to this guy it doesn't in itself constitute a violation of the NPT : The loophole was left voluntarily, but exploiting it is another matter. Regardless, discussions have started with the IAEA regarding on how they will proceed : If that's the case that mean HEU fuel (which could have been expected given that both the UK and the US use it exclusively), meaning there is a major risk of proliferation. Even if the IAEA authorize it still create a precedent opening a gaping hole in the NPT. The other problem pointed out by some people on various news articles is that the both the US and the UK are using legacy American HEU and the stockpiles are limited to a few decades already. Adding a third country will only aggravate the situation. Unless the US restart it's research to switch to LEU, they will have to start enrich uranium at high level again in the upcoming years (which once more won't go over well internationally). There is a reason why when Brazil wanted to develop SSNs with the help of France, we provided help only with the hull and in the integration department. All the nuclear technology used was of Brazilian origin and there was no transfer of technology regarding nuclear propulsion (and even then it was a bit dicey). It makes sense from a logical point of view, but the UK is taking a huge political risk and I'm not quite sure the money they will get out of the contract will outweigh the costs. While the US can afford to flaunt international treaties from time to time, the same cannot be said for the UK. Civilian use of nuclear energy is not prohibited by the NPT and is even encouraged as long as you can prove to the IAEA that you don't enrich fissile materials at high levels.
  4. The real question is how will Australia will acquire the whole nuclear infrastructure and skilled personal necessary to support SSNs. Building a nuclear program from the ground up takes literally decades, even with assistance. Australia does have some experience (2 research reactors and mining operations) but not much. I suppose that the US could directly sell them SSNs ready to be used, and do the most complicated maintenance operations on the west coast (at least until infrastructures are ready in Australia). Problem is that it would be a massive violation of the treaty of non proliferation, creating a precedent for China and Russia to hand over military nuclear technology to whoever they want. An argument could be made that Russia already used a loophole by "leasing" several SSNs to India, but technically India did not sign the TNP unlike both the US and Australia. I am certainly not an expert on international law but if thing go this way, it will likely open a stinky can of worms from both a legal and geopolitical point of view (even if they manage to do some weird flex to justify it legally). That being said if the Australian navy manage to have operational SSNs within the next few decades, it will definitively help against China.
  5. Regarding the cold startup time of the Leclerc : It seem that the turbine takes roughly 25s to reach it's nominal state (judging only by the sound) and the driver doesn't start to move before the 1min mark (but that could simply be because he waited for people to move away)
  6. If the structure of the vehicle can handle the detonation without deforming too much it could protect the vehicle against legacy shaped charges. I guess there is a reason ERA isn't usually mounted on such light vehicle but even if the vehicle is wrecked by the detonation, as long as it increase the chances of the crew getting out alive (and not lower it), it would have done it's job.
  7. I guess that since TUSK (and maybe Trophy) can be removed for transport so it may not be relevant. It is also possible that the Abrams with TUSK mounted may exceed the maximum width on European railways.
  8. The second Indian carrier (INS Vikrant) has started it's sea trials : Of STOBAR configuration and design based on the experienced acquired by the Indian navy on the ex Admiral Gorchkov (Kiev class). Displacement of about 40 000 t with a top speed of 28 knots (18 cruise) propelled by 4 General Electric LM2500+ gas turbines. Capable of holding about 30 aircraft (among those 26 MiG-29K), it may also carry Ka-31 helicopter MH-60R. In the future it may also carry navalized Tejas as well as either Rafale-M or F/A-18 Super Hornet (depending on how their Multi Role Carrier Borne Fighters program goes). https://indiannavy.nic.in/content/commencement-sea-trials-indigenous-aircraft-carrier-iacp71-‘vikrant’ http://www.opex360.com/2021/08/05/le-nouveau-porte-avions-indien-ins-vikrant-a-commence-ses-essais-en-mer/
  9. Because at it's core it is the ADS. Used to be called Shark (Système hard kill) and it's not exactly new It is basically the ADS but with Thales built sensor and detonator. Apart from adapting the system to the new Scorpion vehicles, I'm not sure if there is any difference with the old system (which was already presented on a VAB back in 2008) https://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/actualite-dga/2008/l-initiation-opto-pyrotechnique-une-rupture-technologique-dans-la-protection-active-des-vehicules-blindes https://defense-update.com/20080701_eurosatory08_aps.html
  10. Some consider the K2, Type 90 and Type 10 as "western" If not geographically rather in design philosophy. (That and various prototype that never entered service, or some early cold war vehicles)
  11. It's unlikely that Poland have any kind of ban on DU. I don't know how polish citizens view nuclear power but their government and science community have always been pro-nuclear. Right now Poland rely largely on coal to produce it's electricity. Nuclear energy was viewed has a viable alternative to supply the growing needs of the country and there was quite a lot of cooperation with France on the industrial, scientifical and institutional fronts (cooperation which has considerably soured since the PiS got the majority in 2015). DU being a by-product of nuclear industry if they are for the later, they won't have a problem with the former. I don't know what is the opinion of the current polish government on nuclear energy, but it is unlikely that it has changed.
  12. Arquus presented an hybrid powerpack for the Griffon 150 kW electric coupled with a 400 hp (~300 kW)thermal engine. Based on civilian components, they think they can have an operational hybrid Griffon by 2025. They also presented solar panels to be affixed on various vehicles. Those panels are not meant to be one of the power source in combat condition but rather to optimize battery life for vehicle in long time storage or during long idle time in missions. A more realistic use of solar panels than using them in combat conditions, but if it's for storage or for long idle time, might as well use dedicated infrastructure/modules than just fixing the panels on the vehicles. http://www.opex360.com/2021/07/11/arquus-a-presente-un-groupe-motopropulseur-hybride-pour-le-vehicule-blinde-griffon/
  13. That's the Arquus' Scarabée : One of the two major candidate to replace the VBL (VBAE program) in the French army (the other being the Thales' Hawkey). For now the Scarabée is the favorite thanks to it's hybrid drive allowing it go silent for a short time (which will most likely be a requirement for the future VBAE). The trailer on the picture could be additional batteries to extend it's time in silent running.
  14. I passed on Battlefield 1 and V but the new one look interesting (kind of an up to date version of Battlefield 4).
  15. For now yes, and even then it's not even exactly the same than the British one. As I understood it, while France took the system that was developed as a whole, the UK choose to swap out a few subsystems to better suit their requirements (notably the feeding system) which caused a lot of integration problems.
  • Create New...