alanch90

19 minutes ago, 2805662 said:

DOT&E on the AMP round:

 

 

On M1A2 SEP v3 & APS:

 

On AMPV:

 

Links are broken

On 1/13/2024 at 6:20 PM, LoooSeR said:

 

  Hide contents

 

So this is the first serial batch?

On 1/9/2024 at 8:19 AM, jojoisgood said:

https://iiil.io/h9pB

Chinese DTC 10

If I understood correctly, the insinuation here is that DTC-10 (125) penetrator is about 590mm long?

Just now, Serge said:

So, it’s appeared as an up-armoured Kurganets. 

Yes, also the shape of the UFP is changed. Previously it was a flat surfice and now it has an extra angle. Also of note is that the older Epokha module is mounted and no APS is component visible.

21 minutes ago, Serge said:

Interesting post. 

 

Kurganets was always amphibious, even without extra equipment. This is add on armor which is also buyoancy positive.

So this showed up on a recent patent proposing a kinda modified AZ type autoloader capable of fitting enlarged rounds. Seems to me highly likely its the almost mythical Vacuum round.

3 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 

Some news on T-14 development after use in Ukraine.

Could you share the links to the sources please?

1 hour ago, BaronTibere said:

I wouldn't be surprised if GDLS wants to develop the AbramsX demonstrator turret into something for this.

From this:  

“We can no longer grow its capabilities without adding weight, and we need to reduce its logistical footprint,” Maj. Gen. Glenn Dean, the Army’s program executive officer for ground combat systems, said in the statement. “The war in Ukraine has highlighted a critical need for integrated protections for soldiers, built from within instead of adding on.”

It sounds like AbramsX is the path forward. 

2 hours ago, Clan_Ghost_Bear said:

Sounds like the clean-sheet design effort has been cancelled, disappointing. 

Disapointing but sound decision. There is no merit in reinventing the wheel just for the sake of it.

16 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

BTR-82A Improved is name. Improved in Russian is Uluchsheniy, like in T-80U. So i call it BTR-82AU. Note that this is company given name, Army didn't bought it to give it any official designation.

 

There is some speculation that they are calling it a "BTR-82" to bypass bureaucratic steps regarding testing and so on, in order to start production as soon as possible. 

On 8/25/2023 at 6:53 PM, LoooSeR said:

BTR-82AU 

Is that the actual name? I´ve seen other names for the same vehicle on official materials, such as "BTR-22" or "BTR-82 Advanced". BTR-22 is the best name in my opinion.

On 8/6/2023 at 7:10 AM, LoooSeR said:

PAT-S prject looks like got reanimated.

Waste of time when they could just revive the Vena (or just put the Lotos turret on a BMP-3 hull).

33 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

Patent confirms use of submunitions with orientation in horizontal plane in flight, but not in vertical.

However that alone should suffice for covering the likely approach angles of top attack ammunition.  Also noteworthy is the claim that the system can protect against artillery shells. 

23 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Kurganets is an IFV chassis, it is its own thing, this programm shouldn't affect it. 

In terms of components, yes. For example, lets say that Bumerang orders get significantly cut down or cancelled altogether (of course i know it isn´t cancelled at the moment), then the case for mounting the YAMZ engine on the Kurganets (for commonality) instead of the 2V-6-3 gets a lot less compelling. And if the Kurganets doesn´t need to be able to be compatible with both engines, then the general layout to accomodate an L style engine powerpack arrangement losses a lot of sense as well. Perhaps Kurganets will get a redesign more reminiscing of the initial concepts, with an internal layout more similar to the Manul (which is more efficient in terms of volume available to the crew and squad). We could say the same for the Epokha turret.

On 6/11/2023 at 7:04 PM, LoooSeR said:

Boomer light, heh. Patent for new APC using some parts of BTR-80 and 82.

Seems to be more like a BTR-87 modified to include elements from Boomerang, which isn´t a bad idea at all. Might have rammifications for Boomerang proper as well as Kurganets. 

2 hours ago, mr.T said:

Looks like Europe will end up on M1 as most of Euro tanks will end up being scraped in Ukraine . No one is going to be buying Leclerc or Leopard after Ukraine and honestly manufacturing in Europe is getting killed by green new deal being showed down every ones throats.

1 hour ago, SH_MM said:

 

KMW is getting more orders for Leopard 2 tanks (and negotiating with further potential customers) than before the Russian attempt to invade Ukraine. So it is quite the opposite.

If more European countries other than Poland end up choosing platforms other than Leo 2 it will depend mostly on urgency of costumers to get new things and the production rate that KMW can achieve. IIRC the production rate for Leo 2 was extremely low.

On 5/16/2023 at 11:25 AM, SnakeKqcke said:

This could allow them to get something mutch faster and could make use of Leopard 2A7+, 2S8 and AX production because if i remember it right all have the same hull

There are many factors working against MGCS right now and that stem from the slow pace of development, estimating an IOC by 2040. 2040 is a very long time, not only France and Germany might not want to wait that much (and hence suffer a capability gap) but the world weapons market (more urgently, the European) might not want to wait either. If any other "next generation" tank becomes available during that time gap, then it will swallow up a potentially huge share of the market that MGCS was projecting to get. This is why the South Koreans and Rheinmetall are moving faster with things such as KF-51 (it is marketed as a "next generation tank") or the "K3", they are smelling blood on the water.

So, what options does France have? After all, Leclerc got a few customers. I think the best option (for KNDS interests) is to further develop the EMBT, incorporating as many MGCS technologies and requirements as possible while avoiding the "blanck sheet design curse", and offer it as an upgrade kit for existing Leopard 2 and Leclerc hulls. That way they can engage the existing market and offer something faster than the competition. This is also the same strategy that Rheinmetall is using with the Panther, but they are in a more vulnerable position because at present they lack the manufacturing facilities to work on Panther orders (they want to set up a factory in Ukraine but that will depend on what will happen with that country in the near future). 

9 minutes ago, Renegade334 said:

The KF51 only has 20 or 22 rounds of 130mm ammo, though I suppose this could be increased if they got rid of those loitering suicide drone launchers atop the turret to increase bustle size.

KF51 bustle consist of 2 intercheangeable modules, each capable of holding 10 rounds or the drones. In addition theres a 10 round rack in the hull.

Nevertheless, both the Rh130 and the Ascalon made improvements to round volume in comparison to the old 140mm and at the same time keeping comparable performance. So the question is how many rounds they need to carry (and 30 sounds good enough to me) vs target tank weight and design the tank around that.

If they want to keep weight down, they should go with lighter guns that are still bigger than 120mm. I´m surprised they didn´t even mention the french 140mm, its not like there are many alternatives for bigger calibers out there anyway.

So the "APFSDS" round for 155mm turned out to be a gun launched saboted kamikaze drone...not entirely sold on the concept but it is interesting nonetheless

https://twitter.com/i/status/1645387021379158018

This was bound to happen. French politicians started talking about replacing the Leclerc not with the MGCS but by something developed on the basis of EMBT. And yes, it makes a lot of sense.

https://www.opex360.com/2023/04/02/un-depute-suggere-de-remplacer-le-char-leclerc-par-lebmt-de-nexter-et-de-krauss-maffei-wegmann/

10 T-14 of serial production plus 1 T-16 ARV on train somewhere. Notice the tarps and other things not usually used for parades.
 

So this went under the radar but 11 days ago UVZ released a video about the delivery of T-90M, showing more of those at the production line. But on the production line there were also 1 or 2 serial T-14.
 

So, if these 2 are real T-14, then until now we can confirm the completion of 5-6 serial T-14.

1 hour ago, Wiedzmin said:

Apart from a frontal visual of the mantlet without the armor modules, what are we looking at?

1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:

That tank is more like T-72B1 that was bitten by Budget Cuts 3 obr 2016 addon ERA kit. Sight is subpar and while solution/system is significantly inferior to the Sosna-U or/and Kalina. 

 

Although rumors says UVZ now fully modernise 2-3 tanks per shift, which maybe a reason for rather poor upgrade to FCS.

But that specific tank was modernized at UVZ? Several months ago Putin had decreed the opening of 2 new big facilities dedicated for repairing tanks, perhaps also capable of doing some modernization/overhaul.