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
    Probably save some time and brain pain if we just go by the scenario detail provided. Armour materials are detailed.
  2. DIADES
    Agreed. I don't intend using it - I am watching the adults discuss solutions and will adopt something from the resulting menu. Basic config will drive the answer as much as amour drives config. Explosive forming/bonding in one operation is actually pretty low tech. Tank of water, stuff to go bang, two plates (to be formed/bonded) massive mould (concrete backed) Could make nice curved modules. But, I ain't going there. Crouch, Ian?
  3. DIADES
    Cimpoeru?
  4. DIADES
    Quick check at my end - I am guessing yous ref something like "Metallurgical Factors Affecting the Behavior of Steel Targets" 1972 ? That is still referenced and absolutely supports your comment. That work reports on roll bonding from the 1960s (deeply appropriate!). More recently explosive bonding has been used, much, much better results. Also isostatic hot press but explosive is better/easier. I am still digging for my bonding ref - pretty sure it was in the context of dissimilar metals. But, we can use explosive bonding....
  5. DIADES
    Publication dates? Steels definitely can be easily metallurgicaly joined.
  6. DIADES
    All that is required in the end laminate is intimate contact. The softer, tougher plate behind is to protect the hard front plate from bending stress. The hard plate has high harness but low toughness. The two plates do not need to be metallurgicaly joined although that is relatively easy if we are talking two steel plates. It does require high pressures and time as a substitute for heat - heat would make it fast and easy but there go the properties of the hard plate. Bonding processes provide very nearly the same performance but I am not sure if we have the requisite vacuum epoxy technologies?
  7. DIADES
    It turns out I thought I was looking at at what I had searched for rather than what was delivered. The data I used was for LEO 2 and found in Armour, Nov, Dec 1976. Actually for a LEO2 proto and it differs slightly from your better looking data. It gives track on ground length as 5,030mm rather than the 4,733mm in your data. Track width was 630 rather than your 635. Track centres at 2,710mm rather than your 2,785mm (hard to read that one?). Other primary dimensions agree. Interesting - the track on ground length in your image is actually centre to centre of first and last road wheel. True track on ground will be longer but not by a lot. Anyway! My point was and is that 1.5 is not a limit as such so if designs are presented that exceed this metric, knowingly, then they may well be valid.
  8. DIADES
    All good - where are these hit probabilities from?
  9. DIADES
    OK, just to be certain. In this case, 20 stowed rounds = 20 stowed kills?
  10. DIADES
    Stowed kills. Being able to penetrate a given target at a given range is one thing, being able to hit it in the first place is another. Agree, the 2A46 is up to the job from a round performance POV, but 4k? Anybody have any data on accuracy at that range? It will be probabilistic which will directly feed into how many rounds need to be carried to meet a particular stowed kills goal. 20 is of course the only rational goal....
  11. DIADES
    The rule of thumb 1.5 is just that, a rule of thumb. It dates to the 50s and there was work in the 80s that continued to advocate it in public domain material. It is the outcome of a calculation that has several simple parameters. The most critical of these relate to the structural limits of the soil/sand whatever that the vehicle is maneuvering on. The magic number can go a high as 3 depending on the soil data used. Does not correlate well with experiment and the experiments are limited to very hard flat ground. I reckon the professionals have their own metrics. I calculate LEO 1 to be 1.85 - comfortably over the 1.5 limit. I don't recall the users complaining about LEO1 maneuverability! Recent publications also show that number of road wheels has an effect. More road wheels = better theoretical maneuverability. Track tension also important, lower is better.
  12. DIADES
    I will make my own tomorrow.
  13. DIADES
    This ignorant worm abases himself
  14. DIADES
    Respectfully, when does her Serene Highness require us to complete this glorious task?
  15. DIADES
    i suspect that you are confusing design with manufacture. yes, by you dates, Puma is a 17 year old design. I am trying to be dispassionate about this. I am not invested in either product and at no point have I attacked or denigrated you. I see no point in continuing this conversation.
  16. DIADES
    I disagree - Rheinmetall clearly state theta the Puma carries a LANCE turret - the first of the family. This makes sense at turrets and guns were what Rheinmetall brought to the PSM ( Projekt System Management GmbH ) partnership with KMW. Puma is not a KMW product - it is a PSM product. Which is a problem for both parties as it limits where/when they can bid it.
  17. DIADES
    I disagree - Rheinmetall clearly state that the Puma carries a LANCE turret - the first of the family. Statement was made to CoA in support of maturity during Ph2 bid. This is supported across various sites on the web. I suspect that the LANCE name was not being used during the initial development tho. This makes sense at turrets and guns were what Rheinmetall brought to the PSM ( Projekt System Management GmbH ) partnership with KMW.
  18. DIADES
    yeah, note that later generation LANCE reverts to gun on centerline of turret. Probably to reduce traverse drive loads
  19. DIADES
    OK, so if I use your dates, Puma is 17 years old... Please don't assume that I am automatically pro-LYNX merely because I disagree with design trade offs that the Puma team made. LYNX is not perfect. I do not accept that two slatted grilles gives 30mm APFSDS protection. I just can't imagine how that could be done and still have adequate airflow. Maybe that is a failure of my imagination, It just seems too easy given what I know is required in terms of layered plate structures to achieve that level of protection (multiple materials, spaced etc) and if somebody decided to optimize for counter-insurgency at the cost of usefulness in peer to peer, that could only be called short sighted.
  20. DIADES
    Indeed - yet Puma reverts to a side exhaust cooling system. Big thermal plume sticking out of the side plus in all the images of up-armoured Puma, the exit air grill is unchanged. Look at where it is - in the frontal arc and not up-armourable...
  21. DIADES
    Good pics - sure as hell look like windows in the armour to me.
  22. DIADES
    Nice to see a reasonable number of antenna mounts but very unusual to see them on the glacis? It will put them out of the way to the extent they can be standardized in that location across non-turreted versions. But it does place them in harms way and must compromise frontal protection? Then again, they are over track - I wonder how they are routed - at some point they must penetrate the hull.
  23. DIADES
    Yep, and Yugoslavia and Kosovo. Which all makes sense - the design of Puma is 20 years old.
  24. DIADES
    No, I don't. I mean specific similarities - don't confuse similarity with copy, that is not what I am saying. But the cooling system is very, very similar. Different design teams coming up with similar solutions.
  25. DIADES
    All agreed - people do not separate the actions of those serving from the crap they were given to fight with. Sadly, the rising jingoism is not restricted to retrospective glory or the UK. We talk about past wars in these forums, but we will be too busy fighting the next pretty damm soon. Aircraft were my thing growing up - as I aged and engaged more brain cells allied with technical education and broader reading, my views on many iconic aircraft changed significantly. These days I see the Spitfire as over-rated (the marks get lumped together, some were average at best, some were adequate, some good) for example. I still love aircraft, but armour is my thing these days - a nice synchronicity between interest and occupation.
×
×
  • Create New...