Eliz

On 6/29/2020 at 7:13 AM, Must Be Spoon Fed said:

Armor technology is something which had raised many questions to me. Armor is something which tends to gain more value the more you put it. For example, on a tank, extra 50 mm of raw armor thickness can sometimes mean over 500 meters of extra range where enemy fire is ineffective. In a same manner, we often do not prioritize protecting ours...anything and always seem to focus on other aspects rather than protection. In my eyes, it is like being in Imperial Guard army. You are just statistic on someone's excel spreadsheet. You do not gain any real combat performance increase if you survive being shot when you consider all the downsides. Thus, protection is here more for morale reasons and providing bare basic levels of protection for maximum benefit as cheaply as possible. Key point, cheaply. Our analogue SWAT officers were forced at one time to serve with expired body vests. Soldiers also seem to suffer from poor quality body armor issues from time to time and this is in USA, the best equipped military in the world. I can only imagine that body armor in less well equipped nations are long expired and is here more for a show.

 

This is also strange, because we do have technology to create video game equivalent of power armor. We have real cases of body armor stopping heavy machine gun rounds, helmets who can stop sniper rounds, body vests who can stop point blank grenade hits. Armor can be so much more, but we somehow do not care about it. Just look at how long it took us to figure out that creating an air gap between an armor plates makes them more effective...

No no and no, in war that happened last decade about 1000 man were saved with vests and helmets while about 200 died, had not they had vests those 1000 would have died too.  Face, neck and sides are big problem. 

does anyone know interior height of mtlb and bmp1-2?

does anyone know interior height of mtlb and bmp1-2?

On 5/14/2019 at 9:40 PM, TokyoMorose said:

 

I understand that, it's made clear in the article - but at 3'11" you're gonna have to be crouching - and I don't think that 19.5" per dismount is enough width to actually fit guys in - that's similar in size to notoriously cramped economy class airline seats, which aren't going to fit an infantryman, crouching, in combat gear.

3 feet 11 inches, about 120cm is normal interior height for most of the sedans.

70cm is absolutely enough for shoulders.

Why ifv are used like a troop transporter?! 

Why should you ask comfort or more number of dismaunts in a vehicle which is supposed to be on frontline taking hits from every direction.

Its disregard of soldiers life in favor or comfort and internal volume. Ifv should protect soldiers from more then just a bullets.

I guess design was inspired by otokar cobra.

How aps will protect you from artillery?! 

In mass artillery strike, with hundreds of rounds fired if only 1percent is precision guided how aps gonna help?

Or when 50kg high explosive is coming from above is aps gonna help?

In mechanized warfare we all talk about armor which protects from tank rounds and missiles which are fired horizontally but no one is worried about artillery and top attack munitions or threat from air (which also includes artillery) ? 

Is not that true that most armored and non armored vechiles are destroyed by non dedicated  anti tank  means?!

2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Laos, T-34-85s in active service. Vehicles were made in 1944.

 

 t34 at 13.23 killing and overrunning german anti tank gun 

http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/egypt-ah-64e-apache-attack-helicopters-and-related-equipment-and-support?fbclid=IwAR3nfSkD4HGke4l04cbYYtKU593FbZ1AYOEcs9-Kp96iToHIVsh7__uAwF8

Egypt buying apaches.

Reason claimed on media is that ka52 has technical issues.

45 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

 

 

 

You are simplifying too much, both in terms of size and weight available for armor.

 

 

It is much smaller than a Marder in terms of usable volume and the claimed protection levels are very suspicious. Parts of the UFP are directly taken from the T-64 hull on which it is based. But it won't matter, it is rusting away...

 

 

Marder 1 has 11-15 mm steel at the upper hull, 32 mm steel at the lower hull and 25 mm steel at the turret. Including slope you are looking at 32-72 mm steel armor. The Marder 1A3 added spaced armor to protect against 30 mm AP rounds from 200 m distance (on the upper hull, the spaced armor seems to be between 5 and 10 mm thick, so steel thickness along the line-of-sight would be about ~75-100 mm with slightly higher equivalent protection.

 

 

 

 

 

Is not that apc based on t80ud?! 

I got somewhere its drawings, hope i will find it.

Bmp64 has internal volume of about 10m3. Marder should have the same no? 

Bradley got 10m3 too.

Still dont understand, is that ukrainians or germans and  americans who are lieing?! Or maybe t64 drivetrain is too light which allows them to increase percentage of total weight used on armor.  

Do you know, Is not steel rha density 8t/m3? 

2 hours ago, rob89 said:

 

Thank you all for welcome and for your answer

 

STANAG 6 is for 30mm AP(FS)DS @ 500m.

 

As far as I know, modern 30mm AP(FS)DS have a estimated penetration of 100-120mm RHA equivalent, LOS. 

Do it mean that the last generation IFVs (not considering HIFV like Namer and T-14) have "only" about 120mm equivalent (vs KE) on the frontal arc ? and so they could be easily penetrate by 35/40/57mm autocannon AP(FS)DS ?   

 

Thank you in advance

My 1cent thoughts about ifv/apc protection.

 Protection from the low calibre cannons can be easily achived from the  front.

Rough calculations.

Most western ifvs have hull with height of 1.5m and  2m wide

100mm steel plate 1.5 meters high and 2meters wide will weigh 2.5tons.

Take in mind that this 100mm plate will be at some angle and if it is made with more advanced materials then just steel, protection will be higher then 100mm rha.

Here is uk bmp64.

Size almost same as marder

Weight 35t (same as marder)

Armor 300 front, 80 sides

(Marder armor unknown?!) 

https://goo.gl/images/ihTrpx

Germans are lying about puma stanag protection i think, they should  exceed it

Those are my thoughts which depend on steel density (8t/m3).

Any bashing will be highly appreciated 

On 12/8/2017 at 10:38 PM, Serge said:

It depends on what you want to achieve but the rule is the following : when heavy load must be carried, use track drive train. 

It more compact by a 1/3.

 

Considering just the weight, if you want to put Leclerc MBT on wheels, you will have 6 more tons. Abrams or Leopard will be higher by 2t. I don’t want to think about Challenger 2 or Merkava Mk4.

And I don’t think about cross country capability. 

Why? 

Independent axle with subframe, suspension and everything but the wheels and tires and load capacity with 15 tons weighs 1 ton.

Tires and wheels capable of 7.5 ton weighs 200-300 kg.

Transmission for trucks with max 3000 nm input weighs about 500kg compared to renk transmission for trucked vechiles which for 60 ton machine weighs more then 2 tons.

And wheeled vechiles multiply torque by axles and wheelhubs.

So for 4 axles and 8 tires with weight of 6 ton gives you capacity to carry 55-60 tons.

Ok there are driveshafts that are not used in track vechile, but those weigh not too much (i dont know how much but each maybe max 100kg). for 4axle you need 3 of them. 

Also because of torque multiplication and low resistance from wheels you gonna need less powerful engine then on tracked ?! (Maybe) 

https://www.tatratrucks.com/trucks/customer-segment-catalog/defence/more-trucks/8x8-high-mobility-heavy-duty-chassis/ this chassis with everything weighs 13 tons, but on it you got frame (tatra frame with it tube is robust but weighs too much) which is unnecessary on heavy vechiles.

Any approximate weight of  suspension of tracked vechiles of 60 tons?

On 10/18/2018 at 8:41 AM, David Moyes said:

Eitan uses Horstman suspension:
https://horstmangroup.com/horstman-products/horstman-shock-coil/

Thanks for information.

What about other automotive components?

Do we know anything about them?

Does anyone know about amx 13 engine?

Was it boxer or opposed piston (like 5td)?

In wiki they say it was opposed piston but engine has crank in the middle.