Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Alzoc

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    769
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

Everything posted by Alzoc

  1. Pretty much, the significant event was that Kim Jong-un talked directly with the US president. It could be the start of the process, but as you said, it will take time and given that both sides have shown a tendency to throw their engagement out of the window on their whims I don't know if anything concrete will be achieved in the meantime. I hope that something will come out of this, but I'm not holding my breath on it. In the short time, the level of tensions decreased which is always good to take.
  2. Final scores on the SETC 2018: For now it's a bit all over the places (and no source to be seen anywhere) Wikipedia gives this: Opex 360 and 4Chan gives this: Edit: Apparently those numbers pops up on (or were taken from) the site of @Andrei_bt
  3. What's amusing with the EMBT is that the exact same concept had already been proposed during the design phase of the Leclerc. Take a Leo 2 hull, slap a P48 2 man turret on it and call it a day. Cooperation failed this time, because (according to the French version of the story) the German wanted to build the hull (their Leo 2 normal), use a Rhm gun and build half of the turret leaving only the electronics for the French. Needless to say French officials were not too happy about the proposal^^ Germany did tried to sweeten the deal by proposing to name the tank Napoléon. Appealing to French pride is always a good plan (Damn they know us too well^^)
  4. Thanks. But that's quite a far cry from the 25 (I think that's the number) of the LVTP-7. So if it's aimed at replacing it (at least in some country) it will probably have to be significantly cheaper to compete (unless the AAV was originally too large for the needs of the client).
  5. The real question is how many dismounts can it carry (I don't think he mentioned it in his speech)?
  6. I know. But members outside France don't necessarily know that. AFAIK we are pretty much the only country to use such a low level of protection that the document doesn't even count as classified^^ French love for paperwork and administrative rules at its best xD
  7. Technically yes you are right. I have no way of knowing if they changed the actual armor under it. DR is pretty much a joke anyway. I used to work with some DR documents and there isn't really much important stuff in it. It's basically just here to tell you that it should only be shared on a need to know basis. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexteArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000022685385&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000022683846&dateTexte=20111202
  8. On the left side of the turret, the frontal armor block normally has a small cut in it gun side (AFAIK it's for the driver head). Since with the adaptator, the turret is raised I guess they didn't need that anymore and replaced it by a full composite block But that's a pretty minor modification.
  9. So it have (almost) nothing to do with MGCS. Just a project to start working together on an MBT and to do some PR. Possibly they could market it as an upgrade for the Leopard 2 (smaller turret mean that you could potentially cram more armor on it than on a 3 man turret) but I'm not sure that it would be worth the cost of ditching the existing turrets instead of upgrading them. Perhaps around 2040 when the French army will start to retire it's Leclerc and that second hand turret would become available for cheap.
  10. The MMP is marketed as having a 4km range but during trials aimed at testing the system beyond it's nominal conditions of utilization they managed to hit a target at 5km twice (out of how many launch?). http://www.opex360.com/2018/06/10/missile-moyenne-portee-de-larmee-de-terre-atteindre-cibles-a-5-000-metres-de-distance/
  11. Well they reworked the armor packages a bit and so far it's really nothing more than a Leclerc turret on a Leopard 2 hull. The turret sitting so high on the hull looks funny^^ I guess it's only a test bed but I really hope that they'll be a bit more inventive on a clean sheet design. However it may indicate that they have chosen how they'll split the job: A French turret with a German gun (I see no reason not to use the new 130mm) on a German hull. Plus if they base the design on a modified/redesigned Leo 2 hull it's possible that a new turret might be offered as an upgrade for country operating Leopard 2, which would be a big marketing argument. Not saying that they shouldn't design a new hull, but if it's close enough to the Leo 2's to offer retro-compatibility it could be a plus. Edit: But keeping an architecture similar to a classis Leo 2 hull would probably forbid installing a proper crew capsule and a proper unmanned turret.
  12. Came across this thread when looking for pictures of the AMX-30 FORAD (OPFOR). http://engins-blindes.leforum.eu/t1286-AMX-30-B2-FORAD.htm Quite a lot of pictures of the interior as well for those interested.
  13. Congratulations to the winners (and to all the participating teams in general)
  14. With such a small entry hole the pressure inside the building must be nuts.
  15. I guess that even if the new SPG enter service sooner, the M109 won't be phased out entirely immediately. I wouldn't find it strange if they kept it for the reservist, at least in the beginning.
  16. The logic move would be to brand it KNDS. The question however is who would manufacture it if an order come in? I don't know if Nexter and KMW have an agreement on the industrial model. Will each site manufacture specific parts which will be assembled in a final site (like the civilian part of Airbus) or repeat the mess of the Eurofighter where each country had its own assembly line? The first solution is more efficient but also involve a lot more politics than the second, especially for non-NATO or EU orders which will have to be validated by both country. Side-question: Is there actually a market for amphibious landing vehicles atm? I mean the US marines are pretty much the only ones to use that kind of vehicle in any meaningful numbers, and the replacement program of the AAV have been canceled afaik.
  17. Well it's their first time in the competition, so they are probably simply unfamiliar with how the scoring system works (Although the same apply for the Swedes). I've read that last year the pistol shooting range was quite unexpected for our tankers for example. Also comparing the scores of that edition to the previous one it is possible that scoring became harder this year:
  18. Too bad I guess. I would have liked to see one of their modified and modernized T-55
×
×
  • Create New...