Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Laviduce

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Laviduce

  1. Does anyone have a clue about the K2 front hull profile design ? I am trying to figure out the geometry, but I have not been able to find anything on it. Any feedback would be appreciated!
  2. From the Rumor Mill: - Frontal Hull protection The same Publicly Stated to be. 614MM against KE 1513 Against HEAT - Protection between the two...... Frontal Turret: K2 and Altay have the same Frontal Protection... According to hyundai Rotem the K2 Completely Stopped the A M829A2 (760MM pen at 2 KM) And Dm63 (780MM at 2km) at point blank with a Extra 150 MM untouched. Meaning 910 MM Front
  3. Yes, I still have it. I am looking at the images now. It is difficult to see with certainty. I will keep looking. Maybe you can find a specific image or diagram that will confirm more clearly.
  4. That's ok. Constructive feedback is good. You mean the special armor block in front of the gunner's sight has been thickened on the S2 ?
  5. Thank you for the feedback. I used a variety of sources, including Nexter/GIAT drawings of a Leclerc UAE hybrid and plenty of reference images to generate the models: As well as image references and Dark Labor's work:
  6. Is there more of this that deals with the turret front and hull front ?
  7. Thank you all for your feedback ! I have talked to three other people familiar with armor and they have never heard of it. I will try to get to the bottom of this "mystery" steel (system). I am getting the impression that this might be another case of "AMX-56" !
  8. Not sure if posted already but i think this might supposed to be a BMP variant:
  9. Hello Everyone, I was wondering, does anyone know of this mystery steel system called "triple hardness steel" ? I was trying to find information on it like layout and hardness (BHN or VHN) but i could not find anything concrete on it anywhere. Although it gets mentioned in the AFV community fairly regularly, I can not find it anywhere. If anyone knows, please share it. Thanks in advance !
  10. Not sure if this has been posted before: from: https://thedeaddistrict.blogspot.com/2021/01/about-challenger-1-mbt-weight-breakdown.html
  11. So the Leclerc wont the South African competition ? How did it win it ? I never heard of that competition until now. Is there any more information floating around out there ?
  12. Here are also seems to be another view of an Abrams turret shell CAD model in the lower right corner of the image: It seems that certain Abrams tank test rigs such as the M1 Thumper used the original M1 turret as a base instead of creating a new turret from scratch.
  13. Thanks for the feedback and additional information. I am trying to figure out what prototype could have been used in 1987. The earliest prototypes besides the 1986 Mulet Systeme Complete (MSC) was the Leclerc Ares prototype. The second prototype, Leclerc Bayard came into being in 1988. Frankly, the Ares prototype is the only Leclerc prototype I have never ever seen an image of in any publication or any other media. I have no idea how that thing looks like. Having said that, in 1987 the only vehicles available for an evaluation would have probably been the MSC (and maybe Ares). As
  14. Here is another diagram to illustrate the idea of the 2 man flat turret design concept being able to use "denser" special armor arrays: Although the modules on both turrets have the same constructive depth, the flat turret design can get away with adding another 3 NERA plates in its special armor array without a volume (really mass) penalty. In this case the flat turret design is even slightly "lighter" (0,176 m3) than the full turret design ( 0,192 m3) while still theoretically improving the protection by 50%.
  15. I was explaining the idea of a 2 man flat turret according to GIAT/Nexter. The illustrations show that heavier(denser) modules can be allocated towards the front of a turret without much or any additional weight penalty. In case of the 3 man turret i might only be able to insert 6 special armor plates where as in case of the 2 man flat turret i can insert another 2,4 for the same mass. I rather go with the 8.4 special armor plate design than with the 6 special armor plate design. These British snippets are indeed problematic because they contradict what has been reported
  16. Thank you for your reply. Here is my rebuttal: Lets focus on KE protection. The Leclerc Series 1 turret frontal arc protection is rated around 550 mm RHAe against KE projectiles. Where as the Leopard 2A4 equipped with C-Technology armor is rated at around 420 mm RHAe against KE projectiles. The Leopard 2A4 (C) front hull is rated around 400-450 mm RHAe against KE projectiles, where as the Leclerc's seems to be around 500 mm RHAe for the same threat. Sources: Lindström Presentation (Leclerc protection and Leo 2 protection) and declassified British Documents (Leo 2 protection).
  17. The 60 degree frontal arc protection is not as consistent but directly from the front it has its advantages. Having a 2-crew autoloader flat turret design has the advantage that armor can be concentrated and protection improved by up to 74% compared to a 3 crew conventional turret of the same mass. That is what the South Koreans seem to have done. The French did it with the Leclerc to a slightly lesser extent. That also explains why the Leclerc has a similar mass to the Leopard 2A4 yet superior protection in terms of KE and CE resistance. This would also explain to some extent how a 55 ton veh
  18. Interesting! Where was this taken ?
×
×
  • Create New...