Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Adraste

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In 2019 there was a FMS contract for the IDF acquiring 240 MTU GD883 to equip new-built Namer. My question is since the water-cooled MTU engine is considerably more compact than the AVDS-1790, do you think the IDF intends to increase the number of crew seats by shrinking the size of the Namer's drive train compartment? Will it be considered as the Namer Mk II? PS: I am putting a link of the report which went relatively unnoticed back then: https://www.defenseworld.net/news/24259#.YABCYehKhPZ
  2. How to polish the Merkava IV (Four long video covering maintenance aspect of the tank) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyMLYDPTFNVXfheEXo8mdDA
  3. Remind me of the Mini-Spike (cancelled). The warhead was tailored for anti-personal & light armored target role due to its small size.
  4. IDF D-9 Bulldozer are also selected to be installed with Iron Fist Light Decoupled. Great news for the IDF Engineering Corps!
  5. Just last April the Indian Army made a small but urgent Spike missile purchase (240 Spike MR missile). They can make small acquisition up to $72 million worth of items for each deal separate from the Indian MoD. Once the Spike enters indian service, the Indian Army will probably purchase further batch as they cannot wait forever on bureaucracy's fairy tales. And the Indian Army might want something more potent like the Spike LR2, ER2 or/and NLOS. Strategic patience is needed when dealing with India's bureaucracy.
  6. I understand your first point but let me disagree with you. Until recently, Iron Dome was marketed mainly as a semi-mobile C-RAM system which very few countries needed except maybe South Korea thus limiting its potential worldwide. Now that Iron Dome's live testing and process qualification against conventional threat such as cruise missile, UAV or air-launched PGM are in full swing, the export opportunities will multiply. The development of Iron Dome's spin-off variant such as the naval C-Dome and the fully-mobile all-in-one I-Dome should only emphasize my point. Possi
  7. Iron Dome was started as an exclusive Rafael venture (thus Rafael should theorically own all the IP) while David's Sling is a Rafael - Raytheon JV. Iron Dome was probably already sold to Singapore although it is a well-guarded secret. I don't see Iron Dome export as being impeded by the US, they even recently purchased 2 batteries for themself thus being the first operator officially outside Israel. As the first operational and effective C-RAM and SHORAD system, Iron Dome should sell like hot cake if and when the need arises worldwide. As far as David's Sling is concerned, the isr
  8. Contrary to Iron Dome, US paid for David's Sling R&D so they have part of its intellectual property. As a consequence they have every right to veto its export sale abroad. Incorporating the Stunner interceptor into PAC-3 is a smart way of boosting its capabilities and sale prospect. But the lack of a proper and operational 360 degree AESA radar will make the Swiss think twice before choosing the PAC-3. The Swiss could ask Raytheon to pick the EL-M 2084 multi-mission radar from Elta but it is wishful thinking. The $8 billion figure is misleading because it is the budget allocated
  9. It has yet to be seen whether the IDF will install Trophy APS on the 188th Brigade's Merkava mk3. Since the 188th will switch to MK4 Barak after 2020, I doubt the IDF will make the costly investment on tanks that were not initially designed to host such a power-hungry device like the Trophy APS. They didn't retrofit non-Trophy MK4 with the APS (yet), why would they do it for older and less capable tanks?
  10. The decision to replace the Merkava 3D Baz with MK4 Barak appears to be in line with the purchase of 270 GD883 (MTU883) engine to power the Namer instead of the Merkava MK3's old Continental AVDS-1790 engine. It will facilitate the jobs of the maintenance, logistics and repair units in the field and in the warehouse and be more cost-effective and time-efficient with one common powertrain for each active tank and infantry heavy armor brigade. It would have been a shame and an enlistment nightmare that the 188th Barak Brigade continues with older MK3 tanks while the 401th get two gen
  11. AFAIK during the Hermon missile attack, the Iranian guided-ballistic rockets were specifically targeting the military and civilian sites. There was no overfly per-se, the iranian rockets were in their final descending phase of the ballistic path when the Tamir missiles were launched to intercept them. There was an intelligence warning that the IRGC intended to attack the Hermon so an Iron Dome battery was positioned just next to the ski resort beforehand. I am not an expert in rocket science but the heavy caliber medium range rocket like the M-302 in Gaza should be able to reach a
  12. Iron Dome is falling under the V-SHORAD and CRAM category. An Iron Dome battery can allegedly protects an urban or military area of approximately 150 square kilometers. It would mean the Tamir has an effective range of about 7 km which is in line of what we can expect from a V-SHORAD system. To put thing in perspective Tel Aviv metro is >1500 km² and the IDF has only 10 operational Iron Dome batteries for the foreseen futur. On the other hand, David's Sling has no such range limitation. Even if the Tamir interceptor has been upgraded with later model and the area it can defend
  13. There is something fishy going on about David's Sling recently. After the political echelon proudly proclaimed its operational deployment in April 2017, David's Sling failed its 'baptism by fire' in july 2018 missing two SS-21 missiles launched by SAA as part of the ongoing civil war. I have no doubt the failure provided valuable informations to improve the David Sling which is about to undergo an upgrade according to the latest news. What is worrying is since the mid-2018 miss, it has not been used operationally neither against the Iranian SSM on the Hermon nor against the Hamas M
  14. For patrol mission in medium and high-risk area, the Oshkosh M-ATV (already armored by Plasan) coupled with IMI Iron Fist LC would be a perfect fitted for the IDF. The M-ATV would advantageously replaced the up-armored HMMWV in IDF service which are not deemed safe enough to patrol the Lebanese border anymore or any dangerous place for that matter and force the IDF to use NAMER instead. There is already a clear expectation that the IDF would procure the JLTV (Oshkosh L-ATV) and since the M-ATV is an up-armored variant, it would be a natural process. No need to reinvent the wheel a
  • Create New...