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

DIADES

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    405

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by DIADES

  1. DIADES
    My apologies
  2. DIADES
    A little patronizing toward the Czechs there - they are far from stupid and I am pretty sure they can tell the difference between Kf31 and Kf41, In any case, Kf41 is what is being offered, PUMA = no chance. I would love a Ferrari but I have a Toyota budget. Pretty hard to do a cheap PUMA, it is a very integrated beastie.
  3. DIADES
    Yeah, looks like a scale problem to me. Turret too big and not in correct location. A problem for Hanwha, no actual vehicle t photograph. The APS config is very poor. The port and starboard launchers are limited to their own hemispheres and there are good size dead zones. Then again, the whole turret is just vapourware at the moment and probably deliberatly deceptive. Elbit and Hanwha do know their stuff so I am sure the actual turret will be competitive. LYNX is 3.7m wide in full MCO config,
  4. DIADES
    Unfortunately, Australian BOXER is much heavier and does have very significant change in the drive module to deal with higher loads due to higher GVM
  5. DIADES
    Not correct - Yes, CV90 and AJAX date to the 80s. But Redback is new. It is not a tart up of the previous k21. LYNX KF41 is new. Definitely not a tart up or carry over. Not to be confused with the KF31 proto which has muddied the waters.
  6. DIADES
    Remember, LYNX is designed around the Australian Requirement. The vehicle is already tailored to Australian needs. Redback (hate people thinking they can make something Australian by using the name of one of our critters) has to be optomised for South Korea (main volume) and modified for Australia.
  7. DIADES
    What future for C90? Fail in Australia, no bid in US. BAE made the Australian failure worse for themselves by claiming they offered an all new vastly improved CV90....
  8. DIADES
    Seems to be some confusion about the relationship between Phase 2 and Phase 3 of LAND 400. Phase 3 has just seen down select. That means 12 months before RMA starts. 12 months for RMA and 12 months for CoA to digest the results. The decision on the Acquisition contract for Phase 3 happens in 3rd quarter 2022. Phase 2 is already in Acquisition. There is no possibility of retrospective changes to Phase 2, Zero chance of radical change like using the T2000 on BOXER. Even if that were contractually possible, turrets are not plug and play.
  9. DIADES
    For once, you and I completely agree. Just more lipstick, same pig.
  10. DIADES
    You are looking at a demonstrator - that is not armour, that is space claim.
  11. DIADES
    it is always wise to assume the people you are debating with are at least as well informed and intelligent as yourself.
  12. DIADES
    LANCE is not a turret - it is a family of turrets. A bit pile of turret component and sub-system lego. The Puma turret is the first production turret in the LANCE family.
  13. DIADES
    I think we are misunderstanding each other. My original post was poorly worded. So, my intention was to point out that the trunion is very low and the turret roof is high in the context of hull down. Yes, assuming the glacis is out of the way, more depression for any given gun behind trunion length and trunion height will push the roof up. But the combination of all the geometry is what limits real world tactical use. If the crew finds a perfect forward slope (one that matches max depression), they will have a lot of turret sticking up above the barrel compared to, say, a Leo or Abrams.
  14. DIADES
    https://www.canadiansoldiers.com/glossary/glossaryh.htm apparently i need an image to explain hull down and why one does not want a lot of turret above the trunion. Yeah, I know its only a Sherman and a simplified image. If somebody can provide accurate T14 (please image a triumphant brass chorus) line image and trunion position, I will happily construct appropriate comparative diagram with Leo (Long Live The King)
  15. DIADES
    LOL, so can a Sheridan
  16. DIADES
    Not as simple as that. There are two key parameters - length of gun behind trunion and trunion height. The third factor is glacis profile but the first two are key. As LoooSeR pointed out, Soviet armour tends to have very limited depression and, yes, low depression allows very low turret height. In the case of Glorious T14 (barf), the set of compromises chosen looks like it will make hidden hull down harder to achieve. Does anybody have an accurate line drawing side elevation of the vehicle?
  17. DIADES
    First layer of protection is don't be seen - if a hull down position with the barrel on the enemy, there will be a lot of turret visible. We don't know the specific depression but with the gun that close to the hull, it simply can't have much depression.
  18. DIADES
    Really striking in these images - there is a hell of a lot of turret above the gun. That means very little depression available and there will be a lot of target sticking up when the vehicle is hull down.
  19. DIADES
    Great drip! Subscriber access unfortunately. I can't find any English language reporting of this stuff. Anybody?
  20. DIADES
    Agreed - but that is not a practical posture. More modern hulls have enough vertical space to allow legs tucked under instead of stretched out.
  21. DIADES
    Wow. Great pics. Seriously cramped. Note the legs extended to rest on opposite seat. These look like pics of a mine blast test setup. Feet off the floor is always needed. It looks like there is not enough interior height to mount the seats high enough to allow the dismounts to rest their feet on a footrest that is part of their own seat.
  22. DIADES
    We can't simply compare %iles unless we know that we are talking about the same population data set. Australia now uses a data set based on actual serving Australian soldiers. In the past we used various DEF STAN and MILSTD data. If German designers are using data that is German population specific, then %ile comparisons are pointless. We would need to look at actual dimensions for the same %ile in each data set to make valid judgements.
  23. DIADES
    You can't average this stuff but you can say that the difference between the top %ile and the bottom %ile you have designed for represents the fraction of users who are suited to the design. Knowing that Puma suits 86% of serving German soldiers (not sure if Germany uses German specific data) doesn't actually tell us much. The top and bottom for each sex impact the overall number and there are multiple ways of coming up with 86% Puma may seat 6 x 75%ile dismounts but that is a very long way from 8 x 95%ile. Its even a long way from 6 x 95th%ile. KF41 can seat 8 75th%ile but that is not 8 95%ile by a long way too. I said Europe deliberately rather than Germany. I don't know what BAE (Hagglunds)did but I suspect that they took the same approach as contemporary KMW/Rheinmetall - same market etc.
  24. DIADES
    Europe is using 70th% not the full 95 to 5%, male and female.So 8 euro seats equals 6 US/AU seats.
  25. DIADES
    Not as simple as that. Protection levels are protection levels. So if a vehicle meets Level 6, manned or unmanned turret, the crew have the same protection - by definition. What is true is that an unmanned turret is lighter (say 4 tonne) which means that in theory, a vehicle with an unmanned turret can be lighter for the same level of protection.
×
×
  • Create New...