Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

BaronTibere

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by BaronTibere

  1. Not to mention what you do gain is longer ranges at which the round is still in optimal velocities. Here is a better copy of the comparison image (stolen from the RBSL site):
  2. The whole mobility angle seems mysterious. I don't think it would be impossible for the "new" build standard to run at 1500hp in the CR3, and they keep dropping lines about improved mobility. The 60mph figure has ruffled some feathers and confused a lot but with 1500hp it doesn't seem that unreasonable for an unrestricted road speed, one that will likely not be the final top speed anyways (anecdotes say the current cr2 can hit 80kph on roads if pushed, so a 16kph boost with new suspension and more HP doesn't seem that far fetched, certainly not for a click-bait headline).
  3. From the British army twitter account:
  4. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-army-to-possess-most-lethal-tank-in-europe
  5. They really love that camo. I wish they didn't.
  6. I don't know if 5mm of extra bore and steel can make up for all this extra volume (excuse the use of steel beasts):
  7. The entries all seem somewhat phoned-in but that doesn't really surprise me considering how many failed programs to replace the bradley have preceded this one. BAE's entry seems lazy but perhaps the easiest to implement; GD's perhaps the most capable and at least the chassis has been well developed and paid for by other nations. The Lynx seems like Rheinmetall isn't even trying and i don't know enough about the other 2(?) options.
  8. Weren't the old soviet sabots also much smaller because the use of steel for the projectile didn't require nearly as many teeth/groves between the sabot and perpetrator? Seems like a totally irrelevant comparison.
  9. https://www.nexter-group.fr/en/actualites/nos-dernieres-actualites/nexter-prepares-future-battle-tank-armament.html I also did this while talking with someone else: It would seem to be a similar if not identical case diameter to current 120s and the Rh130. (obviously a good margin of error on those dimensions)
  10. Sorry it was referred to as a white paper elsewhere but yeah its only slightly less vague than the defense review itself. At least the name Challenger 3 is finally confirmed by the government.
  11. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-army-tank-numbers-drop-to-148-from-227/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/warrior-upgrade-scrapped-but-remaining-in-service/ The full white paper: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/defence-in-a-competitive-age/defence-in-a-competitive-age-accessible-version
  12. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/12/80bn-equipment-revealed-defence-review-tanks-jets-drones-hovering/ Looks like the defense review will be out on tuesday and the theme will be RIP warrior and "Boxers for everyone". Edit: annnnnddd no details, there is a more specific defense report coming on monday that might have them.
  13. He was spurred on this because the tank museum mislabeled the FMBTA1 as the FV4211 again.
  14. I believe earlier on (mid century) they provided more power than electric drives but seems like at least by the mid to late 80s pure electric drives were able to deliver similar speeds.
  15. Marconi IFCS (Chieftain Mk.9/10/11/Khalid, nearly identical to Challenger 1 FCS): There are more images in the entire brochure but these are the figures. Bold choice of colours.
  16. That's the only mention I've seen on the internet. Idk if he burried it in a book somewhere or not, I suppose there might be vickers archive documents about it.
  17. AFAIK the one at Greek trials still had TOGs installed but the CR2E spec at that point was to remove it, it just hadn't been done yet - I think the one on display was later on. The strange CR2E pictured above is for the South African proposal, idk much about it but it appears to be a slightly more austere version compared to full CR2E spec - euro powerpack but standard optics. In any case I believe it lost out to the Leclerc but neither went ahead. Source: Simon Dunstan,
  18. Lots of interesting details in there. New modular armour design at Porton Down (a Dstl site)? I assumed the armour would be some form of AMAP given Rheinmetall's lead on the project but I guess not. They also hint at a powerpack upgrade and indicated the weapon is at the same level as the new Leos and Abrams - seems more L55A1 than 130.
  19. He's working on a Vickers Mk.3 video next I think, and also trying to string together something on the MBT-80 but seems like a massive amount of sources to sift through.
  20. Thanks! Guess this is the wrong topic then. Seems it was a United Defense project but BAE bought them around that time.
  21. Does anyone know what the heck this thing is? Mid 2000s, turbine engine with electric drive and the hull is made of titanium.
  22. Think of it like wrapping a present. If the box is smaller, you use less wrapping paper than if the box is bigger. If the turret volume is smaller, you need less total mass of armour to wrap it to the same thickness as a larger turret.
×
×
  • Create New...