Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

United States Military Vehicle General: Guns, G*vins, and Gas Turbines


Tied
 Share

Recommended Posts

Textron may have formed a team of its own. 
arv-innovations-gallery-1.jpg?itok=YPtXN

Both GDLS and SAIK contracts were devoted to technology demonstrators. 
Here, we can see something Textron can reach without help. A dedicated page is opened on there site.

https://www.textronsystems.com/capabilities/innovations/cottonmouth

Been the first to announce something about the ARV can be a pressure to save the whole programme regarding the changes into the USMC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2021/05/11/the-army-is-making-tank-upgrades-as-simple-as-switching-video-game-cartridges/

 

The C4ISR/EW Modular Open Suite of Standards approach — or CMOSS — would make replacing or updating capabilities as simple as plugging in a new VPX card — a rugged, standard chip about 1-inch big that’s used for defense applications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

An updated description of the M1A2 SEPv3 from the FY2022 budget request.

 

Quote

The M1A2 SEPv3 incorporates turret and hull armor upgrades, mine blast improvements, reactive armor tiles, lightweight belly armor, improved countermine equipment, Improvised Explosive Device (IED) jamming equipment, a Total Integrated Engine Revitalization (TIGER) engine, an upgraded transmission, an Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), improved power generation & distribution, Ammunition Data Link (ADL) for smart munitions, Embedded Training, Blue Force Tracker, Block 1 Second Generation Forward Looking Infra-Red (FLIR) technology, and improved computer systems with Line Replaceable Modules (LRMs) to include microprocessors, high-definition color flat panel displays, increased memory capacity, Gigabit Ethernet, and a new operating system designed to run the Common Operating Environment (COE) software.

 

I suspect this is the belly armor mentioned.

Cofihq3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 

A huge upset, ngl I didn't even know which turret Oshkosh was bidding.

 

Ah Rafael.

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/new-partnerships-formed-in-quest-to-snag-us-army-stryker-up-gunning-deal

I was chastened elsewhere on line for correcting commentary that this was a competition for the medium calibre turret, and not a stalking horse for Kongsberg. The Kongsberg implementation likely had a lot of the non-recurring engineering already sorted from the interim purchase. So, for Oshkosh to win with an entirely new (to the US Army) turret, there must’ve been something compelling there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we know if it's an otc turret or something new? If it's a rafael turret, I'm only familiar with the samson 30mm. 

In that case, it might also open the possibility for quicker APS integration as that turret can be  integrated with trophy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Reta said:

Do we know if it's an otc turret or something new? If it's a rafael turret, I'm only familiar with the samson 30mm. 

In that case, it might also open the possibility for quicker APS integration as that turret can be  integrated with trophy. 

 

 

A new turret, probably based on Samson II technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, alanch90 said:

That´s an ugly turret

 

IMHO, the updated MCT-30 was far and away the most attractive solution both aesthetically and in silhouette (the CMI and Rafael turrets are so tall!). Either Rafael has some really amazing tech promises or they went really aggressive with pricing.

 

Updated MCT-30 in the spoiler below for reference

Spoiler

General-Dynamics-Stryker-A1.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

 

 

IMHO, the updated MCT-30 was far and away the most attractive solution both aesthetically and in silhouette (the CMI and Rafael turrets are so tall!). Either Rafael has some really amazing tech promises or they went really aggressive with pricing.

 

Updated MCT-30 in the spoiler below for reference

  Reveal hidden contents

General-Dynamics-Stryker-A1.jpg

 

Well it doesn´t look like an (ugly) skyscraper, so thats a plus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:

 

 

IMHO, the updated MCT-30 was far and away the most attractive solution both aesthetically and in silhouette (the CMI and Rafael turrets are so tall!). Either Rafael has some really amazing tech promises or they went really aggressive with pricing.

 

Updated MCT-30 in the spoiler below for reference

  Hide contents

General-Dynamics-Stryker-A1.jpg

 

Rafael is more innovative in my opinion. RT-20 added too much height and weight to the Strykers. They added a giant top plate to hold this turret. Samson MKII appears to have the most growth allowing better integration of an APS plus the ammo capacity is higher than RT-20. Hopefully this new version of the Samson MKII will have the ATGMS mounted on the inside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By EnsignExpendable
      Volketten on the WoT forums posted some XM-1 trials results.
       
       
      Compare this to what the Americans claimed the XM1 will do:
       

       
      Seems like the XM1 really didn't earn that checkmark-plus in mobility or protection. 
       
    • By JNT11593
      So National Geographic has a mini series airing right now called The Long Road Home. I'm curious if any else is watching it right now. The show is about black Friday, and the beginning of the siege of sadr city in 2004. It's filmed at Fort Hood with cooperation from the U.S. Army so it features a lot of authentic armor. The first couple of episodes feature Bradleys quite heavily, and starting with episode 4 it looks like Abrams starting getting more screen time. It's pretty cool if you want to see some authentic tanks and vehicles as long as you can stand some cheesiness and army wife shit.
       
      Edit: Just realized I posted to the wrong board.
       
    • By SH_MM
      Well, if you include TUSK as armor kit for the Abrams, then you also have to include the different Theatre Entry Standards (TES) armor kits (three versions at least) of the Challenger 2. The base armor however was most likely not upgraded.
       
      The Leclerc is not geometrically more efficient. It could have been, if it's armor layout wasn't designed so badly. The Leclerc trades a smaller frontal profile for a larger number of weakspots. It uses a bulge-type turret (no idea about the proper English term), because otherwise a low-profile turret would mean reduced gun depression (breech block hits the roof when firing). There is bulge/box on the Leclerc turret roof, which is about one feet tall and located in the centerline of the turret. It is connected to the interior of the tank, as it serves as space for the breech block to travel when the gun is depressed. With this bulge the diffence between the Leopard 2's and Leclerc's roof height is about 20 milimetres.
       

       
      The problem with this bulge is, that it is essentially un-armored (maybe 40-50 mm steel armor); otherwise the Leclerc wouldn't save any weight. While the bulge is hidden from direct head-on attacks, it is exposed when the tank is attacked from an angle. Given that modern APFSDS usually do not riccochet at impact angles larger than 10-15° and most RPGs are able to fuze at such an angle, the Leclerc has a very weakly armored section that can be hit from half to two-thirds of the frontal arc and will always be penetrated.
       

       
      The next issue is the result of the gunner's sight layout. While it is somewhat reminiscent of the Leopard 2's original gunner's sight placement for some people, it is actually designed differently. The Leopard 2's original sight layout has armor in front and behind the gunner's sight, the sight also doesn't extend to the bottom of the turret. On the Leclerc things are very different, the sight is placed in front of the armor and this reduces overall thickness. This problem has been reduced by installing another armor block in front of the guner's sight, but it doesn't cover the entire crew.
       

       
      The biggest issue of the Leclerc is however the gun shield. It's tiny, only 30 mm thick! Compared to that the Leopard 2 had a 420 mm gun shield already in 1979. The French engineers went with having pretty much the largest gun mantlet of all contemporary tanks, but decided to add the thinnest gun shield for protection. They decided to instead go for a thicker armor (steel) block at the gun trunnions.
       

       
      Still the protection of the gun mantlet seems to be sub-par compared to the Leopard 2 (420 mm armor block + 200-250 mm steel for the gun trunion mount on the original tank) and even upgraded Leopard 2 tanks. The Abrams has a comparable weak protected gun mantlet, but it has a much smaller surface. The Challenger 2 seems to have thicker armor at the gun, comparable to the Leopard 2.
       
      Also, the Leclerc has longer (not thicker) turret side armor compared to the Leopard 2 and Challenger 2, because the armor needs to protect the autoloader. On the other tanks, the thick armor at the end of the crew compartment and only thinner, spaced armor/storage boxes protect the rest of the turret. So I'd say:
      Challenger 2: a few weakspots, but no armor upgrades to the main armor Leclerc: a lot of weakspots, but lower weight and a smaller profile when approached directly from the turret front M1 Abrams: upgraded armor with less weakspots, but less efficient design (large turret profile and armor covers whole turret sides) So if you look for a tank that is well protected, has upgraded armor and uses the armor efficiently, the current Leopard 2 should be called best protected tank.
×
×
  • Create New...