Laviduce

I'd expect atleast 350mm RHAe in the center if we're talking 420mm composite + 240mm solid titanium (660mm LOS).
 
The edges of the mantlet area could present as high a value as 400mm RHAe considering the 240-280mm RHA turret armour behind the 420mm mantlet:


 
 
 
PS: Went and sat in a Leopard 2A5DK today and had the opportunity to eyeball the thickness of the add on armour on the upper hull. These blocks of armour looked atleast 5cm thick, probably more. So the upper hull on the newer leopards is very strong. Also had a good 5 min in the gunners position, and I must say the gunners optics are excellent, extremely crisp (no LCD screen for the gunner in the tank I sat in though). Also noted a small joystick to the right of the gunners control handle, not sure what that was for?

Iraqi T-90s
 

Afghanistan
 

各位最近可能在WT论坛上见过这张图片，在一些争论陆上自卫队90式战车的讨论串里：
Some of you may have seen this pic recently on WT forum, in some thread arguing the protection of JGSDF Type 90: 
Discussion on WT forum
 

 
我就直说吧，表格里的中文注解说了，这不过是个“猜想”，GUESSING。
To be straight, the Chinese annotation in the table said it is just a GUESSING.
注解内容可能完全是编造的，但不幸的是，不同语言间的障碍使你们无法看穿这点。
This annotation could be totally nonsense but unfortunately a barrier between languages prevent you guys see throught it. 
 
实际上，这又是一份关于陆上自卫队10式战车的文件，说的并不是90式。
In fact, again, this document itself is about JGSDF Type 10 MBT, not Type 90.
同样的花招，不一样的人，是吧？
Same trick, different people, huh?

↑陆上自卫队的10式战车规格书
JGSDF specification handbook of Type 10 MBT

↑59页，附录B，性能(规定)以及诸元
page 59, Appendix B, performance (regulations) and data
 
下面简要说说这些性能规定如何编写、如何加密。
Let's talk about these regulations and how they were made and encrypted. 
 
大家可能知道日语中有平假名和片假名，和拉丁语中的字母还有大写字母是差不多的。
You may know that Japanese have Hirakana and Katakana, like Latin have letters and capital letters. 
 
正如图中所示，一些最关键的数值和描述用平假名、片假名、罗马字(拉丁字母)隐去了。
As you can see, some of the most crucial numbers and descriptions are covered by a Hirakana or Katakana or Romaji(Latin letters).
 
这些数值和描述被归在一起，编入附属的手册，称为“别册”。
These numbers and descriptions were collected and listed in some append book, called Bessatsu(別冊). 
 
在查阅别册时，就好比在看试卷的答题卡。但如果把别册里面的数值和描述涂黑，你就根本不知道说啥。
When you look up to the append book, just like viewing the answer sheet of an exam paper. But when numbers and descriptions were censored, you'll never know what it said. 
 
比如说，正面防护：
For example, the frontal protection: 
 
“耐弾性 - 正面 - 正面要部は、【あ】に射距離【え】m相当存速において、貫徹されない。”
 
读起来是这样的：
耐弹性 - 正面 - 正面重要部位可抵御【あ】以相当于射击距离【え】米存速的射击，不会贯穿。
It read like this: 
Protection - Frontal - Frontal crucial part should withstand 【あ】 firing at a distance of 【え】meter speed reduce equivalent, and not penetrate. 
 
【あ】代表某种弹药，可能是尾翼稳定穿甲弹，但不知道是量产弹种还是实验弹种。
【あ】stands for certain type of ammunition, probably APFSDS, but don't know whether it is production shot or experimental.
 
【え】代表某个射击距离，可以是1000、1500或2000(米)，但这么远的距离，炮弹会受到风力和重力影响，故无法精确瞄准靶车的防护区域。
【え】stands for certain firing distance, could be 1000 , 1500 or 2000 (meters), but on such a long distance, shot could be effect by wind and gravity, thus cannot aim on the protection area of target vehicle precisely.
 
一个常见的解决方式是在更近的距离上开火，比如说200到550米，同时减少推进药量，使得穿甲弹的终点速度符合特定距离的速降。这是一种等效方法。
The usual solution is to fire from a much closer range, from 200 to 550 meters, while reducing the propellant charge so that the end speed of AP shot could match the speed drop on certain distance. This is an equivalant method. 
 
有的人争辩说90式战车可以抵挡另一辆90式战车发射的穿甲弹(JM33)，距离大约250米。这一说法源自一段未知视频片段，具体什么视频他们自己也没看过。较近的射击距离是为了能更好的瞄准，为此可能使用了减装药来模拟远距离终点速度，但也无法证明。
Some people argue that Type 90 MBT can withstand AP shot (JM33) firing from another Type 90 MBT, on a distance about 250 meters. The source of this statement came from an unknown video clip, which they have never seen. Firing on closer range is for better aim, and they could have use reduced charge to simulate a much longer range, but we cannot prove. 
 
 

Collapse Of 250 Ton Goliath Crane At GRSE To Impact India’s Most Advanced Warships Program

Dat T-84 shorty

KMW and Nexter apparently developed a new amphibious vehicle. No idea if this will be KMW or Nexter branded...
 


 
 

We need mooar Leopard 2 xD
tis never enough.
 
Representing the French army last year was the 501e RCC
 

 
This year it will be the 1er Régiment de chasseurs
 

 
I'll follow their facebook page to see what they'll update
Don't know from which units are the other participants though.
 

Soon.

A small gallery of Leopard 2A6FIN sideskirt photos, taken on the FDF 100-years day 4.6.2018 by me: https://imgur.com/a/83RepaQ

And so it begins:
 
 

Does anyone know where the gun elevation mechanism of the Leclerc is located  and how it looks like?
 
Using DarkLabors older CAD model i am getting the impression that the marked object is part of the gun elevation mechanism:
 

 

 

 
The real thing:
 

 

Modified MBT-2000（many details very closed to the VT-4 mod.2012,but with 6TD-2 engine） and BK1871（the initial prototype of Type-90 II/MBT-2000）appear in a last year documentary video.【央视纪录片】军工记忆-链接世界 CCTV9

Modified MBT-2000↑
 

The BK 1871 on the left, note its very sloping UFP , and side by side is the MBT-2000 FP-1, FP means "Formal  Prototype", which was designed a new hull nose structure.
More pics about BK1871:



 
 
 
There are also another interesting details of MBT-2000 )

With the introduction of the new K9 Thunder SPG and BONUS anti armour munition, the Norwegian Army finally has the tools it needs to defeat the Wehrmacht:
 

 
Norwegian article with more K9 footage: https://forsvaret.no/aktuelt/her-er-k9-thunder

As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse:
  Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one.  
There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles.  
The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side.            We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary                  design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
 

Turret down position.

Chelyabinsk, spring 1947:

Dragoons are the result of an urgent operational needs statement (ONS) for the 2nd Cavalry Regiment which is stationed in Germany. A “we need bigger teeth, what can we get quickly”, and the Kongsberg MCT-30 turret + XM813 gun was such a thing.
 
The Army has decided the Stryker fleet as a whole needs bigger teeth (Stryker Lethality ECP), and since there isn’t the ONS rush they are looking at their options.
 
If you remember about a year ago the Army put out an RFI that they were looking for a turret with additional capability than what is currently on the Dragoon. And just recently announced an industry day for vendors to make presentations.
 
As for the CMI turret, it didn’t originate from the Stryker Lethality ECP (see video) but it fits what the Army is looking for. Its selection isn’t a done deal but I think it has a lot of weight behind it, especially if the Army wants to put it on other vehicles as well.
 
 

I think this shape would be simple and effective:

Belly is composed of two sloped plates, spaced apart with air between to work as a cushion. Preferably the plates would slope upwards until they are vertical, where they would be welded to the side armor. Either a cast or bent plate could be used.  The underside of the sponsons are curved upwards and outwards to direct the blast away from the hull. Double hull could be used here, but I am not sure if it is worth it.

Moscow, May 9, 2018. Airborne combat vehicle BMD-4M returns from the Red Square after the Victory Day Parade, top view.