Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

alanch90

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    372

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Everything posted by alanch90

  1. alanch90
    At this point it really amuses me this "free-enterprise creed". Because not only state owned monopolies have demonstrated that they can be superior both in development and mass production of military equipment to whatever the "free enterprise" western countries had (USSR, anyone?). But also this "free enterprise" in reality is a mirage, private military manufacturers are critically reliant on state support, to get public funds for R&D or to get critical intel, etc. There are truly no "free enterprises" in the military industry, only openly state-owned or "covertly" state-funded.
  2. alanch90
    Has this been posted yet? A lot of info on the 50mm gun for the OMFV
  3. alanch90
    I guess that the plan is for the K-3 to replace the K-1 in service and in parallel to upgrade the K-2 with the 130mm gun.
  4. alanch90
    New generation? K-2 isn´t enough?
  5. alanch90
    Any word on GDLS OMFV proposal being at AUSA?
  6. alanch90
    Well that was fast. How long it lasted in the competition? Oh and "The disqualification of the team means that General Dynamics Land Systems’ offering is the only vehicle remaining in the competition. " I understand everything now
  7. alanch90
    So in the end they are not proposing the Griffin the´ve been showing in the last years?
  8. alanch90
    The only reason these projects are not outright cancelled its because they got too big to fail. No one, the government or the industrial complex, can afford to pay the price either economical or political and now they are just trying to save face. What we should be asking ourselves is why to launch such a pharaonic project which is proving to be unachievable. My opinion is that ten years ago the government was much more optimistic (or delusional?) about the economic development of Russia, but then Ukraine and Syria happened, and sanctions on top of a worsening world economic situation. Could have they have forseen the worsening of the economic situation? Well, they should have but facing that reality meant recognizing they´re own failings.
  9. alanch90
    Now that i think about it, the narrative about the program failing to meet its goals because of a failure on the part of the industrial-military complex is preferable, from the POV of the Government interests, instead of admitting that the whole economic policy is failing which leads to a lack of funding and resources.
  10. alanch90
    I wonder, what it actually means "simplified"... Another engine, sighting systems, absent APS?
  11. alanch90
    Yeah i recognized the hull but what got me curious was the gun, i can´t identify it.
  12. alanch90
    Hello, i need help: what is this thing?
  13. alanch90
    The front plates on the turret front and sides seem thin and bolted on. Whats the reason for that?
  14. alanch90
    Interesting indeed the side picture shows just how much volume is available for side armor (not counting externally mounted ERA), perhaps they are aiming for total protection (except for the back) against ATGMs with tandem warheads? On the other hand, in this model the crew sits just below the turret, being able to access it to solve malfunctions. Seeing the side skirts and the wheels i imagine that the vehicle is not well suited for off-road maneuvers. Also this might be the worst thought place to store drones:
  15. alanch90
    For some reason i cant post a better quality version, which is published in Rafael´s official youtube channel.
  16. alanch90
    Video on Elibit´s prototype showing the internal module, quite different from Rafael´s proposal.
  17. alanch90
    However "Malachit" works, it doesnt need the same kind of "stand-off space" as relikt does, at least not in the less angled (in comparison to T-90) UFP as in T-15 and possibly T-14.
  18. alanch90
    https://defense-update.com/20190804_carmel.html " Israel MOD Evaluates Future Concepts for Armored Warfare By Tamir Eshel - Aug 4, 2019 550 The Carmel variant presented by Rafael. Photo: IMOD 0 FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailMore56 Israel’s Ministry of Defense Defense Research and Development Directorate (DR&DD) provided today a glimpse into the Carmel technology demonstration program, evaluating future combat vehicle technologies for the late 2020 and beyond. DR&DD invited three industry groups to provide technology demonstrators for the program – Rafael, Elbit Systems and IAI. The demonstrators were all based on an M-113 used as a platform surrogate for the combat vehicle. The future platform will utilize a new chassis powered by a diesel generator powering a rechargeable battery bank to provide the electricity for propulsion and all systems. During the first phase of the Carmel Program, a significant challenge was presented to the three major defense industries in Israel: to prove the feasibility of an AFV that is operated by only two combat soldiers, with closed hatches. The two persons employ different sensors onboard and off-board, including radars, thermal imaging sensors, video cameras, acoustic and lasers and drones, all inputs are fused and displayed to the crew for situational assessment and response. The Carmel variant presented by Elbit Systems. Photo: IMOD Subscribe to read the full coverage. The Carmel variant presented by IAI. Photo: IMOD Each group took a different approach to meet the objectives – a light (35 ton) combat vehicle armed with medium caliber auto-cannon and missiles, and operated by a crew of two, with an additional position for a third person operating specialist systems. Designed for manned operation, Carmel is equipped with sensors, artificial intelligence, and advanced automation and system autonomy thus reducing operator workload. This approach enables human operators to take decisions and actions in a timely and optimal manner.The Carmel Program also includes the development of other capabilities not presented in the demo day, such as the platform with hybrid-electric propulsion and energy storage with high capacity to support the electronic systems on board, signature reduction, including active camouflage, multi-task radar providing both self defense (active protection) from anti-tank threats as well as detection and tracking of drones, vehicles and humans, blue force tracking and various types of weapon systems, including direct and indirect fires, self-protection and high-energy lasers. Another aspect to be pursued in a later stage is teamwork – the synergy between several Carmel vehicles, sharing information and tasks using broadband connectivity. ‘Manned-Unmanned Teaming’, will evaluate the advantages of augmenting the small crew with the capabilities of associated robotic team members. The lessons learned from the recent evaluation will be assessed and presented to the DR&DD for further action. DR&DD is expected to recommend a technology mix for further development and integration in a future platform or select a single provider or a team to act as a prime contractor. Among the technologies already selected for integration in future platforms is the Iron Vision helmet display from Elbit Systems, that will be integrated in the next phase of the Merkava Main Battle Tank – the Merkava Mk4 Barak. Other systems could be included in the future in the Eitan APC and Namer heavy armored infantry combat "
  19. alanch90
    Yes its a good possibility. Although i feel like in order to figure out where the armor "starts" we miss an estimation of the dimensions of the crew compartment.
  20. alanch90
    You mean this one, @Karamazov ?
  21. alanch90
    US defense budget and penny pinching is an oxymoron.
  22. alanch90
    Wrongly worded i admit it. But i think that my point can be understood nonetheless.
  23. alanch90
    And tell me, apart from all of these tanks featuring autoloaders, what do they all have in common?
  24. alanch90
    So, let me get this straight: the same people who refused for over half a century to even mount an autoloader in a tank because "too many moving parts can fail" now want to replace the Abrams with a completely unmanned tank?
  25. alanch90
    Third time is the charm. I made yet another thickness estimation but this time i used a picture with much higher resolution, which should yield much more precise results. Also took advantage and calculated several parts of the upper front hull of T-14. So, the hull armor keeps getting thinner and thinner at every estimation i make. Anyways, this estimation (~780mm) is very close to the maximum physical thickness of T-72B turret (from the front), but the question about the possibility of "reflective plates" being re-used yet again on T-14 remains unclear.
×
×
  • Create New...