Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Korvette

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Korvette

  1. Won't collapse yet for a fair bit. So many are still holding onto that mantlet, the suspension making the tank mobile, the 'dorchester', the L27 being a mythical round, the LFP not being an existent target. A tank failing in trials is somehow okay but a tank 'failing' in combat is indicative of bad design.
  2. It's definitely sub 700 no matter what. The air gap far exceeds the LOS of the front mantlet piece of the set up with some basic measuring, and consider that you can see the diameter of the trunnion in the turret shell photos it's very mediocre, so sub 600mm effective LOS down to 550. The trunnion is probably cast too considering the shape...
  3. More like he posted very inaccurate measurements to do that.
  4. What do you mean I can't just throw my entire tank fleet into a breakthrough point?
  5. That's actually very cool. Funny how so much stuff can be intertwined sometimes.
  6. Spreading to communities entirely unrelated like a wildfire. Anyways to switch the topic to something a little more bright. I did a bit of an analysis of the CR2 turret and its protection coverage. I would like some feedback but imo this gives a pretty good insight to the tanks turret, I will be maybe working on a full analysis of the turret mantlet soon if I feel like it to see an accurate representation of its armor
  7. Never thought I’d be on international news because someone got mad at me and wanted to prove a point.
  8. Cutting away from the front tip you are left with around 34 inches of barrel length to be used, considering 5 inches of excess. This would mean, that if it is accurate, SHMM's point is proven, the exceeding tip of the coax MG is most definitely longer than the front mantlet piece and that then, the air gap is even larger than what I initially made out to be. It would mean that the armor then hovers around 550mm LOS refuting my lower bound of 500mm LOS due to the cylinder being thicker than initially theorized.
  9. One book I can suggest, Armour: Materials, Theory, and Design by Paul J Hazell. (Probably found on libgen) Books and documents however are very sprawled out, unless its something rather minor, people don't really like to give away treasures that detail good info, I can however suggest if you are willing to buy it from amazon, Paul Werner Krapke's book on the Leo 2 or Walter Speilbergers book which mostly plays off Krapke's book (Krapke was the lead manager on the Leo 2 program). Both are in German but contain very detailed information about the development and design of the tank, but if you are looking for genuine armor design characteristics, Hazell's book works. Another thing is that I doubt a company is going to put you straight into the MBT design bureau, so understanding smaller vehicles and ergonomics/design is also important.
  10. I have since removed the photo about my initial post, it appears the schematics are still classified and hasn't been approved at all for public release, I am however willing to answer some questions about the content if that's allowed.
  11. If for some reason the L94 magically had a 1000mm barrel then you might as well have fitted a 50 cal in there. Half of all the measurements are entirely unfounded. The only thing I'd agree with is the measurements of the yellow pieces, both of which are incredibly inefficient usages of space due to the design.
  12. Yes lol. However the scale in general of the schematic without any measurements are questionable, the air gap is depicted to be way too small and the front yellow piece weirdly conforming to the blue rotor is somewhat unusual and maybe even unfounded. The coax tip is most definitely shorter than the front mantlet piece, but the air gap is most definitely the same size as the front mantlet piece, keeping in mind that the coax is also partially imbedded (by a few mm) into the gun trunnion/rotor itself, meaning that the amount of space here is highly stretched especially with the huge air gap. Some pixel measuring has to be done but utilizing the L94 barrel length it must be considered that at least around a third of the gun barrel length is spent free floating in air, only about sub 500mm of barrel length remans that is actually imbedded within armor, including the slope of the front mantlet piece and then the thickness of the trunnion, it's just embarrassing.
  13. The weird shifting on the barrel cover always make me think the barrels been bent.
  14. (Removed) A questionable person has yet again thrown out some photos and schematics. Measurements are far from accurate (in the hundreds of mm). Utilizing a more realistic and accurate estimation and utilizing the true length of the L94 barrel (703mm), the armor is around 500-550mm LOS at most, considering the air gap between the yellow and blue pieces is equal in size to the yellow block (As shown in photo below), can be around 200, it leaves only approx. 300mm of LOS remaining for the blue piece due to the barrel length. Also noting that the usage of a cylinder for the elevation rotor/gear instead of a regular trunnion, the thickness will vary and usually decrease depending on the height at which you measure from, being the thickest possible in the middle (Around the longitude of the coax barrel) while getting much thinner the higher or lower of that midpoint. Not only this but if the rotor pins continue through the rotor, it leaves a susceptibility of damage/jamming of the elevation gear in general, let alone that more than half of the construction utilizes regular RHA, heat/energy from a projectile can be a problem.
  15. Technical documents about what? I could quote you the angles the drivers hull wing rear mirrors can be at but that probably wouldn't help.
  16. CR2's failure should have shown Britain that their procurement was flawed. Nimrod's failure should have shown that. Warrior failing officially but not Ajax should have sparked a lot of eyebrows being raised. CR1's inadequate performance should have shown that. What's Ajax gonna do? All the MoD is going to do now is to play victim like they always did and wait until the heat dies off and do it again. They're dumb, and it's fun to watch.
  17. Under careful consideration in the House of commons defense committee and MoD, we've determined to modify the Challenger 3 program to instead opt for an 'off the junk yard' choice MBT in which we will then scrap all 408 built CR2 turrets and put a readily available, refurbished centurion and chieftain turrets onto the hulls and modify them to carry anti tank equipment and APS to handle the current and future threats. Note: current and future threats is in the span from the 1960's through 1980s threats.
  18. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-mod-was-offered-leopard-2-tanks-on-lease/ MoD explaining why they wouldn't buy leopard 2 in the 80-90s and won't do it again in 2021:
  19. Defusing an old RPG fuze is one thing but doing it reliably and also defending against other things is another. As this raises up an important point. Looking at the Stryker or CR2(Another thing is that the Stryker also can mount ceramic composite packages over the wheels and hull itself for additional protection which I'm not sure if the Jaguar has), these are very thick cages on them, but the Jaguar's looks almost like wire. I wonder if the cage itself seems to be strong enough to stop an oncoming projectile, and that is it even worth it to have the cage just for really old fuzes, while insurgents and terrorists/whatever probably only have old fuzes, we've seen tanks face up against RPG-29's and have damage inflicted to them even though the only expect threat was RPG-7's. This simulation shows a perfect scenario but I want to point out to the thickness of the cage here, in scale with the warhead, its very thick but the Jaguar's looks quite thin.
  20. Applicable and understandable. My main point is that while he has no technical bearing or direct indepth knowledge of things, he still has contacts and an agenda he is being told. So while he could just be saying something entirely wrong he didn't say it just to splurge something out there, in my opinion he's been told something here this time and he's said it, it again depends on who told him and is Drummond actually saying the thing he was told. Personally, I honestly wouldn't put it past Rheinmetall to do something wacky with the CR3 turret, the MoD has always been the worlds leading producer in project budget cuts and there's always going to be something f*cked in the end with whatever they put into service.
  21. Would this cage change anything? Sure it will prematurely detonate the incoming warhead (maybe) but would there be enough armor on the vehicle itself to stop the rest of the warhead?
  22. Nobody said you can't say anything though...
×
×
  • Create New...