Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Laviduce

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Laviduce

  1. I am not sure if this applies to the new or old smoke grenade launcher boxes:
  2. Thank you for feedback! I tired to keep it simple and not get into details, since i had limited information and limited time for the model before i had to move on to the vulnerability study.
  3. Ahh, thats ok. I am grateful for your contributations. Does this seem like a reasonable approximation for the gun-mantlet assembly ?
  4. Also; the gun mantlet area as well as the gun elevation mechanism. Thank you ! :3
  5. My model against 700 mm KE threat at -20 degrees from the front: Original FMV model against 700 mm KE threat at -20 degrees from the front:
  6. Thank you for your response. The top diagrams seem to show the protection of the entire vehicle, not only the turret. As you pointed out, the magenta colored plot seems to correspond to the left diagram and the yellow plot corresponds to the diagram on the right. Here is my DM33 estimate on the Leclerc S1:
  7. No , this tank is not an M1A2C. The turret face is a little to thin (by 1-2 inches) and the hull towing connectors are of the old type. It seems to be an M1A2B.
  8. Could someone explain this center plot to me again? I assumed that the different colors represented the KE protection coverage offered on the Leopard 2 using 5 different armor (wedge? / insert?) types (B, C, D1, D2, D3). Looking at the T-80U front protection coverage: Overlaying the D1 frontal (0 degrees) plot with the T-80U plot, Leclerc plot of the Swedes and the Leclerc plot of my model i get the following results: These results confuse me. I used to the plot below to generate the plot for my model above. The T80U offers better ar
  9. Cross-section of the Leopard 2(A0-A4) with uncensored hull front geometry:
  10. Test Line-Of-Sight Thickness Diagram overlay at +10 degrees of the Leclerc S1 model: The overlay diagram is just a test. Considerable more fine tweaking has to go into it before i can release the rest. The MATLAB program measures the LOS thickness in 10 mm intervals over any part of the crew compartment using pixelated slices of the vehicles in a .png picture format. I have tested it several times with smaller inputs and it seems to work, although it has to process for 30+ minutes for each aspect. Note that this is not the vulnerability diagram. As one can see the le
  11. MVEE Cross Section of the Challenger 1 tank:
  12. The joint military excercise would be there to deter US aggression, foster international interoperability and promote peace and regional stability.
  13. The 19 tons are metric tons. When i present data I always use SI/metric units.
  14. Rolf Hilmes gives a turret mass of around 19000 kg for the original M1 tank.
  15. I do not have the full report. I have contacted a person that might have more "direct" information (turret data) on it. If he responds I will post it here. Also, i have no idea what the product improvement program (PIP) is about concerning this document.
  16. duh , my mistake , had glanced over it too quickly.
  17. Not sure if these has been seen before but can anyone verify this:
  18. So the EMES 15 itself weighs 1789 kg, almost 2 metric tons !???
  19. As far as i know the Leclerc mantlet assembly is at least partially "multilayered". According to Froggy the block around the COAX is composite. The mantlet itself might also be composite/multilayered.
  20. Thank you, that sucks a bit! Also, would you know where the Leclerc protection info (350-430 mm KE for turret) is coming from and if they are legit or not ?
×
×
  • Create New...