MRose
-
Posts
113 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by MRose
-
-
So when are they just going to buy Namers off the hot line in Ohio?
-
-
On 1/4/2020 at 4:41 PM, DIADES said:
I saw performance data for the Diehl APS in 2015. Could deal with KE 30mm and above. 25mm too small to reliably detect. The 120mm gets bent or knocked off axis. Still a mighty bang on impact but no penetration. But - Diehl did a diehl
with IMI and Iron Fist is the outcome. The performance of that is very much less.
Iron Fist is a result of earlier cooperation, don't think they had anything to do with each other by 2015.
-
2 hours ago, Serge said:
FCS is still sci-fi by 2020.
18t platform can’t perform as a 60t one.
It isn't trying to perform exactly the same, if it was that would be stupid.
4 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:In general, no - but a lot of the detailed ideas still remain extremely wonky, such as purposefully forgoing armor in total reliance for active protection. Even if you build an all-conquering APS, it'll still quickly deplete its loaded bank of shots. There's also a *lot* of as-yet unworkable electronics demanded, and they even considered stuff like exoskeletons. There was also a planning undercurrent behind all of the FCS designs that high-intensity peer conflict was a thing of the past. The general concepts they were working on are indeed workable now, but without your all-conquering APS and literally magic electronics & sensors they aren't nearly as viable - FCS was only viable on paper *because* of the all-conquering APS & absolute omnipresent networking & data fusion along with nearly omnipotent sensor systems. Even the latest sensors and networks are far below what FCS was aiming for.
(As an aside, FCS *was* laughably pie-in-the-sky technologically in the context of when it was approved! It'd be like trying to put the current top-line smartphones with everything they have into service in the mid 2000s, sure it's not seen as a big deal now but the Army were really "optimistic" with approving that program...)
There's some tested systems I seem to remember seeing that do alright against KE (I forget the names), although none fielded that I know of. The Quick Kill system proposed for FCS was extremely wonky, never fully worked right (although has some real impressive looking test footage!), and to this day still isn't fieldable. And then you get to the issue that the QC VLS cells were in packs of 4-8, and I've only ever seen one or two packs on the FCS vehicle renders. I've also never seen anything resembling a quick reload method for the QC, and so if worst case scenario you have only 4 of them loaded and the enemy takes 5 shots at you with an old T-12 Rapira... then what? Honestly not being able to rapidly reload is a total killer for an APS outside of Low Intensity patrols, and Quick Kill's design doesn't appear to be fast to load and certainly cannot be reloaded under armor.
The network and sensors are a lot closer to reality than they were before. In some cases, they are almost commercially available, but. Presumably, now it would be able to plug directly into the ABMS.
The APS would be a backup for when the superior sensors didn't identify and kill the target before it got into engagement range. Quick Kill is unworkable and completely fucked. The Trophy/Iron Fist combo APS that is supposedly in the pipeline would probably suffice. Although, it seems like that one is going to be missing for a while because Rafael and IMI had too much infighting and the Israelis didn't really have a requirement for beyond Trophy. If you have to reload the APS, presumably you would have already been mission killed at the very least.
What really killed the FCS was IEDs, which is completely near sighted.
-
On 12/30/2019 at 8:28 PM, TokyoMorose said:
So with FCS being too sci-fi, the army is repeating the mistake of the 84-ton GCV monster now in going maximum conventional. Do they not have a setting between 'pie in the sky tech dream' and '50 year old tech'?
Reminds me of the fact we have both the B-2 & B-52 in service...
FCS isn't too sci-fi today. The problem today is funding and time.
-
7 hours ago, LoooSeR said:
Probably yes, missile flies to a zone where target is located using inertial and sat navigation system, activates thermal imager seaker on terminal phase of flight to detect targets and attack them. Laser beam riding channel is likely to engage thermally non-contrast targets like buildings, fortifications and similar.
Will be interesting to know if Sokol-V is in any measure related to LMUR (or their seakers).
What's the speculative range to make this a worthwhile endeavor?
-
On 11/17/2019 at 12:25 PM, LoooSeR said:
News about Sokol-V GL-ATGM, info found by otvaga members in state orders.
https://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/1513247.html
This ATGM is strange. It have laser beam control channel, probably for direct control by a gunner, but also a thermal imager seaker, inertial and sat. nav. systems on top of that. I bet those missiles will be very rare as they are going to be quite expensive.
Documents related for missile testing with list of things needed.
So NLOS?
-
5 hours ago, LoooSeR said:
Was already posted, such things probably better to link in that thread.
I honestly found the passive armor information offerings to be a lot more interesting. Especially, the part where they have a wheeled IFV (Eitan) going to level 6.
-
Marketing video from Rafael on their passive and reactive armors.
-
5 hours ago, VPZ said:5 hours ago, heretic88 said:
Yes, one very simple reason: Israel back then didnt have access to technology/no capability to manufacture composite arrays. They needed a solution for good anti-HEAT protection, and the only option was put the engine at the front as armor. As Damian said back then, the design is very inefficient, huge size and mass with comparatively low protection. But since Israel had no other choice, we cant blame the designers. They did everything they could, and the Merkava eventually became a good tank.
They put the engine at the front not for protection.
It's almost as in they put a door in the back.
-
Wonder what the IMI-Elbit entry will be. Unfortunately, it has to be tracked.
https://www.defence24.com/polish-army-to-purchase-tank-destroyers-13-potential-contractors
-
4 hours ago, LoooSeR said:5 hours ago, MRose said:
All I'm saying is that Hezbollah is the by far more competent regime troops and the Russians aren't exactly bringing plentiful manpower. I'd imagine Hezbollah has learned how to make better use of combined arms operations. Remember the drone that had to be shot down with a patriot missile. Didn't a lot of the guys in Syria, also serve in Ukraine?
1) Al-Mukowama are not regime troops
2) They already had Iranian army and SAA to draw from on that subject. Russia couldn't bring them much more, as there was no serious combined arms warfare conducted by Russian Army in Syria.
3) No. 50 000 Army personal participated in operation, many of which never had combat experience or never participated in Ukrainian war (Air forces for example).
1) Meant regime-allied.
2) The Afghanis got chewed through.
3) Some very notable Russians who fought in Ukraine died in Syria, who presumably would've been liasoning with Hezbollah.
-
1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:3 hours ago, MRose said:
There's been some stuff published on the subject. I'd imagine Hezbollah would be very interested in the conflict in Ukraine, although Russia used a lot of techniques derived from the Israelis.
That article is garbage. There are far more instanses of Russian military cooperating with Liwa Al-Quds during past few months than with Lebanon Islamic Resistance in 4 years. Liwa Al-Quds didn't suddenly became much better than they were. Hell, PMC training probably did more positive for their training than Russian Army "support" ever did. 5th assault corps was made out of garbage left from Soviet times like T-62Ms and similar crap like tin-can BMPs in ATGM-filled enviroment of Syrian war.
In short Russian Army showed very little commitment to train or equip troops that we were supporting in Syria.
On top of that Islamic Resistance had very few operations where both Russian and their side even participated in the same time with 2 of them comming to my mind now - Battle for Aleppo and push to Deir EzZor.
On top of that i don't know what we can give to Islamic Resistance training wise, as Russian Army ground troops are not exactly super-well trained or more experienced.
Also, our side showed more will to help to Israeli side in Syria than Iran or Islamic Resistance (airstrikes, story about Russian SFs searching body of dead Israeli, etc).
All I'm saying is that Hezbollah is the by far more competent regime troops and the Russians aren't exactly bringing plentiful manpower. I'd imagine Hezbollah has learned how to make better use of combined arms operations. Remember the drone that had to be shot down with a patriot missile. Didn't a lot of the guys in Syria, also serve in Ukraine?
-
2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:2 hours ago, MRose said:
Or just get rid of the transmission if you go full electric. The largest benefit will probably the power source enabling KW lasers and high powered EW. I'd imagine Hezbollah has learned some new tricks from the Russians in Syria.
Such as?
There's been some stuff published on the subject. I'd imagine Hezbollah would be very interested in the conflict in Ukraine, although Russia used a lot of techniques derived from the Israelis.
-
6 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
With hybrid or electric engines, this problem is basically reduced to dust. You can place the transmission in the front and then either a small generator or some batteries in the front to beef up the protection, and whatever remains that would take up crucial space, could be placed elsewhere. This was partially also done with the Merkava 4, as in that same interview they've also said that other than using a smaller powerpack, they moved other stuff around like filters and batteries, so they won't get in the way of armoring the UFP.
Or just get rid of the transmission if you go full electric. The largest benefit will probably the power source enabling KW lasers and high powered EW. I'd imagine Hezbollah has learned some new tricks from the Russians in Syria.
-
1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
My personal guess is a replacement to the ELAWS. In case some of you haven't noticed, for a very long time now, the Merkava tanks have had these mounts for Elbit's laser warning systems (ELAWS):
But they've been empty for god knows how long. It's possible the IDF wants to replace them with something of similar size (new tanks are still built with these mounts), perhaps something that combines soft-kill or threat detection.
Why would that be censored then?
-
3 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
I just noticed that as well. But seeing as the blur is quite mild, I'm under the impression they're just trying to conceal some minor changes for now.
One possible theory
-
6 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:20 minutes ago, MRose said:
It's cameras, a computer and a helmet. Not exactly maintenance heavy, assuming the cameras aren't too exotic. There's no reason to believe they are.
Which are directly connected to the FCS, BMS, and APS. These are the most complex computer systems in the tank, and involve almost all sensors onboard the tank.
These connections are never simple to make and troubleshoot.
I'm not sure I understand how that would increase the maintenance requirements of those systems. On the F-35, which is the most direct analogue the cameras themselves require the most attention, and Iron Vision won't be using anything nearly that complex. Assuming that they integrated it the easiest possible way, only the FCS and BMS need to be integrated. The APS is already integrated with those systems.
-
19 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
I doubt it. IronVision is part of the Barak MBT. They're not going to just retrofit segments of the Barak to existing tanks because of logistical issues. It's also a complex system which may require revamped training courses for maintenance staff. And without the many upgrades going into the Barak, it may be somewhat out of context, and not fulfilling its potential. It's also why we're not seeing the IronVision tested on the Namer or Eitan yet.
It's cameras, a computer and a helmet. Not exactly maintenance heavy, assuming the cameras aren't too exotic. There's no reason to believe they are.
-
4 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:32 minutes ago, MRose said:
Elbit and Rafael might bid as a subcontractor for certain components in NGCV. It's hard to see the US developing a new heavy MBT anytime soon for a variety of reasons.
The need for a new MBT as replacement for the M1 has been identified a while ago, and intentions to create a replacement based on OMFV technologies have also been declared.
Feel free to continue this discussion at the US AFV thread and ask other members who keep track over these things.
There are higher budget priorities then a heavy MBT, a FCS solution might make a comeback which would be advantageous for the Carmel.
-
11 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:15 hours ago, MRose said:
Doesn't that support the vehicle is supposed to fight dismounts (like the Terminator), instead of serving as a MBT replacement?
As I previously said, there is a lot of commonality between the Carmel/Kaliya and the NGCV program.
Both are tasked to create some AFV that adds all these new ideas.
The type of AFV (APC/IFV/MBT/recon etc etc) is dependent on what the IDF and US Army think is most urgent for them at the moment. For the US it may be a Bradley replacement, and for the IDF it could be a medium IFV to replace Namers or an MBT to replace Merkavas.
Whatever the first version they choose, it's supposed to be a technological baseline for every other AFV type they field.
If plans don't change, the M1A3 development will coincide with a certain phase of the OMFV's development, to draw on these technologies.
Similarly, the IDF plans to use the Carmel program as a baseline for an MBT program to replace the Merkava.
The vehicle shown in the video is nothing more than a show of a collection of concepts. It is hardly applicable as-is in modern combat between peers.
Elbit and Rafael might bid as a subcontractor for certain components in NGCV. It's hard to see the US developing a new heavy MBT anytime soon for a variety of reasons.
-
3 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
It can also be used to emulate the concept of Bright Arrow without burdening the interceptors/launchers themselves with the added weight of an RCWS.
Bright Arrow is basically a derivative of the Iron Fist LC in which an MG is attached to each launcher, and fires a burst immediately after the launcher fires. This way, in short range engagements it has a very high chance of eliminating the personnel who fires at the vehicle. At the cost, of course, of traverse speed of the launcher and thus increasing its reaction time.
Doesn't that support the vehicle is supposed to fight dismounts (like the Terminator), instead of serving as a MBT replacement?
-
1 hour ago, VPZ said:3 hours ago, MRose said:
You don't think the two independent RCWS are significant? From where I'm sitting it looks like the IDF wants something along the lines of the Terminator's ability to fight in an urban and mountainous environment for the Carmel program. Why else the focus on suppressing multiple targets?
A was talking about chassis. But this vehicle concept is quite strange (for now). Maybe it will be a light/medium tank (to replace Merkava).
The whole more guns than crew hasn't struck you as a little odd?
-
5 hours ago, VPZ said:14 hours ago, MRose said:
I'd think it's probably closer to 20-25 tons, it looks like it has a pretty elevated V-hull, which makes a lot of sense.
The chassis in the video is not what will really be.
You don't think the two independent RCWS are significant? From where I'm sitting it looks like the IDF wants something along the lines of the Terminator's ability to fight in an urban and mountainous environment for the Carmel program. Why else the focus on suppressing multiple targets?
with IMI and Iron Fist is the outcome. The performance of that is very much less. 
Polish Armoured Vehicles
in Mechanized Warfare
Posted
That seems pretty slow.