Serge

Boxer HEL/"Jupiter" that is being tested jointly developed and by the Netherlands (energy storage and cooling systems) and Germany (effector). The laser is based on the system that has been tested on the Sachsen-class frigates, but operates at a lower power (10 kW) to reduce energy consumption.
 
https://defence-network.com/jupiter-gtk-boxer-mit-laserwaffe/
 
Rheinmetall had already presented a first HEL effector on Boxer (with just 5 kW output) back in 2013.

The recent Naval focused YIDEX 2024 has a ground vehicle display this year as well. While mainly comprising of ROKMC vehicles you can see the N-WAV with an extendible periscope for view over the splash guard along with an electric KLTV on display.
 

 

Kimichi cope cages , look like they were roofs lifted straight from a kiosk
 
 
https://streamable.com/a4ycp0
 

Some K1A1 with an ammo carrying turret bustle concepts for a presentation by GDLS on the "K1 Compartmentation Of All 120mm Ammo". Document is undated.
 

10x10s are back on the menu boys. They made one up with the RCH-155.
 

Another video detailing ROK armored vehicles, this time the K9.
 
The video itself is pretty neat, detailing what looks to be an XK9.
But there are two larger points of interest, being the footage of the XK9 prototypes firing at the beginning of the video, and the XK9 developmental model. 
 
 

A video detailing the recently revealed N-WAV that Hyundai Rotem showcased at ADEX 2023.
 
https://youtu.be/Knv5_frfkZA (Sadly the video won't embed but it should still be watchable) 

Looks fine. 
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Ffnss-pars-alpha-with-30mm-teber-turret-and-2x-omtas-atgms-v0-ukv3fiy7xcgc1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D640%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D50a86972e26927e0f1c227bae86b1f023573d9e5
 

Looks fine. 
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Ffnss-pars-alpha-with-30mm-teber-turret-and-2x-omtas-atgms-v0-ukv3fiy7xcgc1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D640%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D50a86972e26927e0f1c227bae86b1f023573d9e5
 

109 CAESAR Mk2 ordered by the French army. 
https://www.knds.fr/actualites/nos-dernieres-actualites/la-direction-generale-de-larmement-commande-109-caesar-mkii
They will first supersede the AUF1.
Good news for French artillery. 
 
- better armoured cab ;
- better inertial station ;
- better engine ;
- faster spades.

Im not yet fully convinced that the lines are just simple weld lines. Thats why I initially brought this up.
In the center the blocks are directly welded with a smooth finish.

On the outside they are cut into the steel and then filled - non of the lines have any visible typical weld patterns (though could be covered by thick layer of paint). Butt joints like these also usually bulge out of the plate - instead being embedded. Why is the pattern irregular (but also identical on all tanks)?

If they are strongly welded together, why would there be two additional bolts to strap all the four blocks together?
That's why I wondered if these might be crumple zones to allow for some minimal shift of the blocks to feed more material against a penetrator. I wonder if that could work for thicker blocks like these, maybe someone could simulate it.

Anyway lets leave it at this, discussing it further would be unnecessary.

The blocks are around 360-370mm thick based on my current estimate. Each section including the joint lines is 100mm, with the last block being a bit thinner, around ~60-70mm.

Gunner side is 542kg - Loaders side is 389kg (@ TWMSR)

 
 What makes you think that the gunshield is some aluminum alloy? Its definitely some sort of tempered metal.

Here a short animation displaying the parts

The model is based on a mix of 3D photogrammetry scans of the entire turret and schematics, but still needs some fine tuning.
 

The first time I see this KNDS proposal of MRLS

I don’t know the state of the concept. 

Early K2 models from two early 00s issues of the Korean magazine Military Review
 

 

The new Pars 8x8. 
https://istanbulticaretgazetesi.com/tr/turkiyenin-yeni-zirhli-araci-pars-x-ortaya-cikti

The Indian way : producing outdated concepts.
the worst ARV design ever. 

M48A3Ks with subcaliber training devices of both a K2 and M16A1 flavor.
 

A model for a concept of a drone launcher system mounted on the sides of a vehicle, with a K2 model being used here. This was at the Poongsan booth.
 



 

RCV-H Mock-up 
 

Bigger pic of the StrykerQB.
 

That's the way I always understood it.
 
 
I think so. It is a rudimentary way of having an hunter-killer capability which needs a commander input (preferably from a stabilized sight) that can override the gunner commands and put the gun directly on target without the commander having to hand-over the target to the gunner manually (which takes precious time).
 
The exact definition of an hunter-killer capability depends on who you ask but generally the goal is to shorten the time between target acquisition (commander) and firing on it (gunner or in an emergency directly the commander). More modern system allow the commander to queue targets in the FCS and the gunner can just switch from one to the next with acquisition done (mostly) automatically.
 
It is a capability that most 1st and 2nd (and even some 3rd) gen MBT lacked (The Abrams only acquired it with the A2 version in the 90s for example).
 
The system on the AMX-32/40 allow for shorter firing sequences (less than 10s as stated in the video) and "some kind" of gun stabilization when the tank is moving (by continuously slaving the gun to the commander sight).
 
True it wasn't a full stabilization system since the tank still had to stop for the gunner to fire at longer ranges. But at "combat range" (<1000~1500 m) the commander could just fire on the move without any kind of elevation or (much) lead corrections since at that range an APFSD trajectory is mostly flat and will reach the target in less than 1s (minimal lead corrections required). It allowed the tank to react much faster in case of a close range encounter (assuming that it was the commander who spotted the target).
 
 
Well remember that no tank had a full "fire on the move" capability until the 90s anyway. Mostly gun stabilization was a way to allow for a quicker firing sequence after coming to a full stop or was mostly limited to firing only in the frontal arc at a much reduced speed (see below at around 0:50) :
 
 

https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/international/verteidigung-deutschland-startet-neuen-anlauf-fuer-kampfpanzer-allianz/29374860.html
 
Paywalled article:
 
 

ATAC System Demonstrator also know as Thumper, to receive the 140mm gun tube and a functional rearm port, 1992.

Warren Jones, right, project officer for the U.S. Army, instructs Oak Ridge National Laboratory staff on how an M1 Abrams tank operates in September 1992. From left are Dong-Soo Kwon, Carol Scott, Sam Meacham, Jim Hannah, and Katie Vandergriff.
Katie Vandergriff and Jim Hannah helped develop the ATAC System Demonstrator's rearm port, they also developed the Future Armor Rearm System (FARS). 
 


 
Compared to it's first appearance (1988), Thumper received weight simulators in the turret, they also changed the mudguards? Or the turret was assembled on another M1A1 chassis. The XM291 gun got removed from the turret to change the gun tube, from the 120mm L/56 (6.75m) gun tube, to the 140mm L/48 (6.75m) gun tube to test the FARS with the new two-piece ATAC 140-mm ammunition.
 
The ATAC System Demonstrator and the FARS are sitting together at Sierra Army Depot.
Location: 40.2051086922686, -120.13611546011911


ATAC System Demonstrator with the 140mm gun tube and the FARS.