TokyoMorose

Spoilering it because it's huge, but here's a good image showing how the armor was added on the M1A2C.

Spoilering it because it's huge, but here's a good image showing how the armor was added on the M1A2C.

Generally speaking, with the crude electronics of the time hydraulics were smoother, more powerful, and more reliable.
 
The Sherman is an interesting vehicle from this perspective, as it was initially produced with either a hydraulic or electric drive depending on the vehicle. But the Oil Gear designed hydraulic drive was so superior in performance and reliability that it became standard for all. And of course by the 50s, basically everyone had moved to hydraulic for these reasons despite the issues of a hydraulic drive. Reliability was the biggest issue, and would not be fully solved for electrical systems until the development of solid-state electronics. And once those came about, you start seeing the trend back towards electric drives that continues to this day.

Generally speaking, with the crude electronics of the time hydraulics were smoother, more powerful, and more reliable.
 
The Sherman is an interesting vehicle from this perspective, as it was initially produced with either a hydraulic or electric drive depending on the vehicle. But the Oil Gear designed hydraulic drive was so superior in performance and reliability that it became standard for all. And of course by the 50s, basically everyone had moved to hydraulic for these reasons despite the issues of a hydraulic drive. Reliability was the biggest issue, and would not be fully solved for electrical systems until the development of solid-state electronics. And once those came about, you start seeing the trend back towards electric drives that continues to this day.

Cleaning once per day is within spec for multicyclone, which was certified to meet its filtration quality for 20 hours without cleaning. Air purity was kept at 100% (within margin of testing error) to densities of 3 grams per cubic centimeter - with is reasonably dusty.
It should be mentioned cleaning multicylcone (or cyclone) is actually quite simple. Like any cyclone-filtering vacuum cleaner all you do is disconnect the dust bin, dump it out, and reconnect it.
 
The CIA report is based on an NK tank that was battered to hell and back and not properly maintained for its years with the DPRK. It is unsurprising elements of it were damaged.  And on the other hand, we have combat experience corroborated by German and Japanese reports of really quite vast and long-ranging movements in Bagration and Manchuria by Soviet armor.
 
Oh, and dust cleaning with filters is not some magic process either - if a filter lasts longer between cleaning it is purely because the filter has more dust capacity, and will take proportionally longer to clean. You spend about the same amount of time overall cleaning any dust filter of a given configuration for a given volume of dust, irregardless of the fine details that differ it. (Note how cleaning a vacuum cleaner of a standard size is basically the same work irrespective of brand and design features)

Cleaning once per day is within spec for multicyclone, which was certified to meet its filtration quality for 20 hours without cleaning. Air purity was kept at 100% (within margin of testing error) to densities of 3 grams per cubic centimeter - with is reasonably dusty.
It should be mentioned cleaning multicylcone (or cyclone) is actually quite simple. Like any cyclone-filtering vacuum cleaner all you do is disconnect the dust bin, dump it out, and reconnect it.
 
The CIA report is based on an NK tank that was battered to hell and back and not properly maintained for its years with the DPRK. It is unsurprising elements of it were damaged.  And on the other hand, we have combat experience corroborated by German and Japanese reports of really quite vast and long-ranging movements in Bagration and Manchuria by Soviet armor.
 
Oh, and dust cleaning with filters is not some magic process either - if a filter lasts longer between cleaning it is purely because the filter has more dust capacity, and will take proportionally longer to clean. You spend about the same amount of time overall cleaning any dust filter of a given configuration for a given volume of dust, irregardless of the fine details that differ it. (Note how cleaning a vacuum cleaner of a standard size is basically the same work irrespective of brand and design features)

Although John did not disclose which company produced the delivered prototypes, a GDLS spokesperson confirmed that the company delivered its 12th and final prototype to the army at the end of December 2020. GDLS’s delivery completion means BAE Systems has delivered only two ballistic hulls to the service.

That report is (in)famous, but every Jagdpanther ever seen has had the same final drives as other Panthers. That, along with the supposedly reinforced transmission on Jagdpanthers appears to be nothing more than a myth.
 
I'm sure the JgPanther crews wish they had those reinforced drives and/or transmission.

That report is (in)famous, but every Jagdpanther ever seen has had the same final drives as other Panthers. That, along with the supposedly reinforced transmission on Jagdpanthers appears to be nothing more than a myth.
 
I'm sure the JgPanther crews wish they had those reinforced drives and/or transmission.

Everybody knows that Abrahamanus is the worst tank in the world, but Challenged 2 is best because it have rifled gun and fire HESH! Very Strong! 

So, here's some pictures of the CR2E in training kit with a strange camo.
 

The second one in particular reminds me extremely heavily of the Type 89 and Desert Warrior.

The second one in particular reminds me extremely heavily of the Type 89 and Desert Warrior.

Is it me or does every time this thing shows up it manages to look worse? They ditched the low-profile hull, they ditched the 120mm and went back to ye olde 105... when GDLS first showed off the Griffon II I thought it was a much better design than the warmed-over XM8 - but now what's the selling point for it? XM8 is already somewhat familiar to the Army and has parts commonality with other Army vehicles... this is just an ASCOD 2 with a armor-less M1 turret slapped on.

That was blue-on-blue but rather with NM 222 (Mk 264) MP-T than with NM 225 (Mk 258) APFSDS-T.

I was tempted to mount ye old M135 demolition cannon as a secondary mount to meet the HE requirement while being under armor. I am quite certain the 165mm HEP round would satisfy even the most ardent of rangers.
 

I was tempted to mount ye old M135 demolition cannon as a secondary mount to meet the HE requirement while being under armor. I am quite certain the 165mm HEP round would satisfy even the most ardent of rangers.
 

I was tempted to mount ye old M135 demolition cannon as a secondary mount to meet the HE requirement while being under armor. I am quite certain the 165mm HEP round would satisfy even the most ardent of rangers.
 

I was tempted to mount ye old M135 demolition cannon as a secondary mount to meet the HE requirement while being under armor. I am quite certain the 165mm HEP round would satisfy even the most ardent of rangers.
 

Seriously? Modular Jihayotas?

Unless my memory serves me wrong, doesn't the Army designed 50mm turret have independent sights? That would mean a three man crew is essentially mandatory, as the 50mm is effectively mandatory (all 30mm entries *have* to demonstrate a path to the 50mm, and the Army is going to want its turret used). You do save on three dismounts, but you're only going to save so much weight there (I.e. comparing to GCV you would need to knock more than 10 tons off, or >20% of total vehicle weight just by removing three dismounts - I remain doubtful that the dismount reduction allows that level of savings). I use the GCV for comparison because it is the closest requirement that matches the OMFV reqs, and because it was designed with essentially the exact same technology/industry base. As to the Puma, as much as I genuinely believe that would have been the most satisfactory solution, the Army disputed CBO's reckoning about the Puma's survivability (they are likely using different matrixes for calculating scores) and it needed more equipment added on to meet specs anyhow (particularly now with the 50mm).
 
Griffin III was never bid, and simply does not have the protection to meet the requirements or GD would have bid it. Honestly, Griffin III is just a tarted up system almost as old as the Bradley (good ole ASCOD).
 
 
Transformational change is how they got LCS, Zumwalt, and EFV or did they memory hole that?

My turn.  That's kind of my point the bid failed.  So when did they last win new platform work?

That's kind of my point, Raytheon-Rheinmetall decided not to bid and the shipping issue was merely a side effect of a conscious decision to not bid. They decided not to bid because they knew they couldn't meet the impossible requirements, and Lynx can already grow to the ~50t number that NLM posits for the GD bid. Hence my supposition of the actual amount of weight needed to meet the requirement being much larger.
 
 
Supposedly, their tender was all-new. And considering their heaviest existing chassis cannot get anywhere *near* the required protection given its relatively low weight cap (42t) I am tempted to believe that.

Hey, I guessed right - the absolutely stupid 360 degree protection requirement was what doomed the GCV as well (remember the baseline config was 60 something tons and the system max was 84?). The Puma is as good as you can get protection wise and fitting two on a C-17.