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

Serge

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    976
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by Serge

  1. The French RTD company changes its name. Call it Arquus now. https://www.lopinion.fr/blog/secret-defense/industrie-rtd-devient-arquus-149544
  2. http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/news/2015/november/Russia_to_develop_a_new_wheeled_version_of_Koalitsiya-SV_152mm_self-propelled_howitzer_640_002.jpg
  3. Swedish CV90 begins 120mm mortar fire trials https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/swedish-cv90-begins-120mm-mortar-firing-trials/
  4. At at the front of the 40CTA, you have a lubricant past to protect the bore when firing. The main problem was a sealing default. It’s now solved.
  5. http://www.janes.com/article/79642/export-lav-700-enters-production http://www.gdlscanada.com/products/LAV/LAV-700.pdf
  6. Milrem to support Estonia’s CV-9035 : https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/landwarfareintl/bae-systems-milrem-support-estonias-cv9035/
  7. Having one or two gunners is very different. Two men can concentrate on two directions. One man can only have one of them under control. With an improved AG travers, it can become very interesting because it’s possible to cross both arc of fire. If you transfert one bow gunner task to the tank commander, you will burden its job. Never forget that, into a troop, one of the tank commander is a troop commander too (even a patrol commander too). Having a 5 men crew is a big advantage.
  8. Fully agree. If the BMPT’s task is to support T90 squadrons, it’s not a problem. It would have been a problem if it was suppose to support a more mobile tank. The limited travers of AG17 is a point to improve. But the current design offers the best protection and is very affordable. Russian companies are always producing missiles with different warheads. So, it can already provide what you call for. Manpads are specific. If you want to improve the AD capability, you must transfert your BMPT to the AD artillery C2. An other option could be to adopte ISTAR kit to be mounted in place of the Attaka launchers with dedicated operators in place of both bow gunners. Mixted with classical BMPTs, units can provide both close in fire support and close in EW support. Yes.
  9. This catalog shows the gap between companies proposals and the real Army purchase policy. For instance, we have been suffering from decades a deep lack of armored maintenance and repair vehicles in spite of there availability. Don’t know if it was already shown, the Leclerc T40 NEXTER proposal. It was made as a first entry capable ISTAR platform.
  10. I think scrapped. They will be very old. The upgrade capability is poor and the barrel is not NATO compatible. It fires a light 105mm shell.
  11. SEPAR kit is so heavy, 10RCR is beyond its limits. It was designed during Afghanistan but it’s no more used.
  12. And you have to take into account the terminal effect of calibres. If it takes you a 3 12,7mm rounds burst to knock out a vehicle, how many 7,62mm will you use ? And once you have the number, you have the volume consumed.
  13. I propose a new topic to regroup information about French AFVs. Days after days, information is overwhelmed under the inflow of photos about anything and everything. It can be interesting to try to have dedicated topics to ease the quality of exchanges. So, if you have already posted interesting photos, documentations and view about French AFVs, you can quote them here.
  14. Yes. 12,7 HMG integration is not so cumbersome
  15. Both commander and gunner’s seats are identical. The only difference is the commander adjustment’s got a rear stopper to reduce the setting by 3 cm. Why ? To avoid to pierce fuel tanks. Without the stopper, the seat can protrude from the turret basket. My goal is to protect the crew from shrapnel. So, I would have manufactured seats with ballistic materials. We have to remain that in France, people above 185cm were not permitted to become tankist, but tank commanders. So my knees suffered a little bit against the gunner’s seat. Look at any tank at war. You never have enough place. The only external storage you have (on the RC standard, not the RCR), is a basket designed to carry 4 of the old butyl waterproof tank crew pack. During the Gulf war, crewmen stored MREs between the hull and the add-on armor. In the French troop, you have a truck per troop to carry burden. But, in the real life you must be as autonomous as possible. My solution would have been a mixt between the TML-105 storage for the front and the sides and a Merkava like rear basket. SEPAR is too much heavy. I’m just thinking about internal layer on some dedicated places. AMX-10RC can’t be burdened. It’s very dangerous considering its steering system. In 2002, Australian SAS LRPV received 4cm thick anti-mine composite floor plates. This kind of solution would have been acceptable.
×
×
  • Create New...