DIADES
-
Posts
405 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by DIADES
-
-
1 hour ago, SH_MM said:
Spike LR and Spike LR2 both utilize the same hardware and software interfaces; just a "simple" software update should enable any Spike LR launcher too fire the newer version - at least according to Rafael.
The physical interface is the same and a launcher for LR will fire an LR2 but will not support all LR2 features. You are correct to put simple in quotes. There is nothing "simple"about changing the software in a turret, let alone software that controls ordnance....
-
11 hours ago, 2805662 said:
Iron Fist integration from 400-2 bleeds across to -3
Pretty much has to. Iron Fist is mandated by CoA - not chosen on its merits (there aren't any) by either tenderer. Iron Fist is a complete dud.
-
1 hour ago, SH_MM said:
These interviews in the DTR Magazine.
The CoA is very, very, very paranoid about impartiality. Did I mention very paranoid? The article was always going to be a waste of time. Zero possibility of any real content as the parties are in an active RMA. Yes, the marketing answers are nauseating as usual.
-
6 minutes ago, DIADES said:
Maybe they did fire it - but what happened?
Look at the Hanwha advert in the latest DTR. SPIKE "Successfully fired" but Iron Fist "Proven integration" Big difference'
-
Just now, 2805662 said:
Yep. And given all the fanfare around the SPIKE firing, with video and all, I struggle to take the Iron Fist claim seriously. Maybe they did fire it - but what happened? Is there a video?
-
16 hours ago, 2805662 said:
Or Iron Fist?
Hanwha dodgy on APS too, Hanwha have good claim for SPIKE integration (tho I reckon it was an LR2 fired from a turret set up for LR1 but still a good claim)
-
16 hours ago, Reta said:
So KF41 got 6 dismounts and Redback 8? Won't That make quite a difference TOE wise?
No. 6 is the Requirement.
-
-
Bottom line - 6 is the number and has been for years
-
On 3/16/2021 at 9:56 PM, Boagrius said:
Odd that the number of dismounts seems to have dropped on both vehicles from 8-9 to 6. Is there something I'm missing here?
The Requirement is six and always has been, 8 and even 9 is occasionally stated by the Primes. Utter bullshit. No matter how many bodies, you must carry their gear. 6 plus gear is a challenge for both teams. 8 is simply not possible.
-
-
-
2 hours ago, VPZ said:
Maybe IR mode.
Good answer
should have thought of that myself!
-
2 hours ago, 2805662 said:
t indicates LR2 launchers aren’t backwards
Mechanically yes, software etc - no No idea how I know that.....
-
8 hours ago, 2805662 said:
Perhaps to preserve how capable the seeker is from the public domain?
Possible. But I think it is more likely that the vehicle has integration to suit LR not LR2. The timing supports this. The move to LR2 by CoA is recent compared to the timing that Hanwha/Rheinmetall would have been working to to get LR integrated.
-
11 hours ago, VPZ said:
No doubts, it's LR2
Why no colour?
-
On 3/3/2021 at 9:27 AM, Cleb said:
Spike LR2
Probably not an actual LR2. The primary difference between LR1 and LR2 is colour camera. Note the footage in the PR clip from the missile is black and white = LR1
-
On 2/11/2021 at 6:30 PM, Kal said:
wide and as long as the abrams
Yep, these are modern IFV. Equals huge
-
On 2/5/2021 at 10:39 AM, Beer said:
See both USA and USSR who mastered the unification and serviceability
Can't comment on USSR but since there were such an immense range of radically different configurations of "Sherman", support was a nightmare. Yes, that is a modern retrospective judgement. The trade off was production and quantity delivered. Never mind the quality, feel the width. Production wins wars. The guy who can bring the most to the fight and keep bringing more wins - always. So "best"has many values, all relative.
-
22 hours ago, Toxn said:
US got it right from 1942 (Sherman onwards
You are kidding. Sherman is a PRODUCTION success, not a development success. T34 is both a production success and a development success. Production wins wars but in no way is the Sherman an exampe of development success. And what onwards?
-
10 hours ago, David Moyes said:
reliability
probably shoulda stuck a smiley face on my comment, own my share of British cars (Lucas, Prince of Darkness) - was just playing to stereotypes
-
-
14 hours ago, Steve said:
How many Chally's have been lost.
Including not making it to the fight cos made in England?
-
10 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:
German AFV development just really sucked that badly.
Aircraft the same (and ww1) but really, who did it well? UK? Don't make me laugh, US? What development? Russia? Perhaps?
United States Military Vehicle General: Guns, G*vins, and Gas Turbines
in Mechanized Warfare
Posted
Unit price is no guide to real costs. Lets wait and see down the track. Now there are 23k vehicles to be serviced... The old saying is "give them the vehicles for free, providing you get a support contract"