Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs. Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M.    https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.

Couple more of the Mk.3-based Ofek    

9 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Well... damn!

What's the conclusion on that? How much does it protec? Design considerations? Etc.

Nothing, the paper is more about methodology and not so much about the results of that specific design.

 

The authors completely "namedropped" that design though. Some talk about simulations vs real life tests, and suddenly, *boom*, this is our scale model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Screenshot_1.png

 

This is supposedly a Merkava 4 tank damaged in 2014 during operation Protective Edge, in which a couple Hamas militants managed to infiltrate the Zikim beach area, which was full of dunes that made their concealment very easy. They then proceeded to plant a bomb on the rear door of the Mark 4 tank. It detonated but only caused external damage. The tank was there on patrol duty, but could not engage them because of the terrain that made it very hard to maneuver, and because the gun could not be depressed far enough (honestly no tank I know of could). They were later killed by helicopter fire.

 

And just another older image of a Mark 2 just for fun:

Screenshot_9.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the 15th to 16th of May, a ground warfare conference will be held in Israel, where among the topics there will be a debate about future AFV programs in the IDF. It's not going to give it as much focus as there was in last year's conference, but I expect we will get a (relative) wealth of new details about the current running projects:

  • Barack MBT
  • Eitan AFV
  • Namer AFV
  • New howitzer (yet unnamed)
  • Carmel
  • An up to 8 ton light AFV to replace the M113 in some utility roles, and perhaps even some HMMWV.

 

I do not expect as many details as we got last year, and most will likely be repeated. But here is a small list I made of details that we still need to know about these projects, that weren't talked about in a long time.

  • Barack - Will it receive a new engine? Is it on schedule? Were the HMD tests successful? What is the status of the APS development? Will it have additional upgrades to the non-active armor, gun, or other internal structural changes?
  • Eitan - At what point will it be prioritized to get the next gen tech to replace current gen? i.e hybrid instead of diesel, next gen APS instead of current Trophy. 
  • Namer - When will it receive the new turret? When will it receive a new engine? And if it does get a new engine, would it be spare GD883 from Merkava 4, or the new hybrid engines of the Barack (if it does get them)?
  • Howitzer - When will it enter service? Is there going to be a tracked version for maneuvering warfare?
  • Carmel - Is there any progress with the bid for the cockpit design?
  • Light AFV - What will its designated purpose be? 
  • 30mm turret - At what point will it be integrated with the next gen Trophy APS instead of current one?
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2018 at 5:59 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

On the 15th to 16th of May, a ground warfare conference will be held in Israel, where among the topics there will be a debate about future AFV programs in the IDF. It's not going to give it as much focus as there was in last year's conference, but I expect we will get a (relative) wealth of new details about the current running projects:

  • Barack MBT
  • Eitan AFV
  • Namer AFV
  • New howitzer (yet unnamed)
  • Carmel
  • An up to 8 ton light AFV to replace the M113 in some utility roles, and perhaps even some HMMWV.

 

I do not expect as many details as we got last year, and most will likely be repeated. But here is a small list I made of details that we still need to know about these projects, that weren't talked about in a long time.

  • Barack - Will it receive a new engine? Is it on schedule? Were the HMD tests successful? What is the status of the APS development? Will it have additional upgrades to the non-active armor, gun, or other internal structural changes?
  • Eitan - At what point will it be prioritized to get the next gen tech to replace current gen? i.e hybrid instead of diesel, next gen APS instead of current Trophy. 
  • Namer - When will it receive the new turret? When will it receive a new engine? And if it does get a new engine, would it be spare GD883 from Merkava 4, or the new hybrid engines of the Barack (if it does get them)?
  • Howitzer - When will it enter service? Is there going to be a tracked version for maneuvering warfare?
  • Carmel - Is there any progress with the bid for the cockpit design?
  • Light AFV - What will its designated purpose be? 
  • 30mm turret - At what point will it be integrated with the next gen Trophy APS instead of current one?

What's it called and where I can I see live coverage of it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, no new information was given about any AFV, with 2 very small exceptions:

1)They gave some info about the Carmel cockpit design - By Q3-Q4 of 2019 the 3 major companies involved (RAFAEL, IAI, and Elbit) are supposed to demonstrate their concepts to the IDF, and thus the Carmel program will end. After the demonstrations, the Carmel program will move onto stage 2 and will likely be renamed. 

 

2)The Barack MBT will not get a hybrid engine, yet. The Carmel will be the first one to get such an engine, and the time it will take for it to reach down to the Merkava-based AFVs is unknown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.israeldefense.co.il/he/node/34334

 

Apparently Israeli defense industries are in disarray, tens of thousands may lose jobs, and manufacturing is pretty much all American now. I'll try to make this as short as possible.

 

Context on the US aid to Israel:

  1. The past aid deal that will expire this year, allowed Israel to use 25% of the money domestically, and to purchase fuels. 
  2. Current aid deal removes the conversion of USD to NIS for domestic purchases, as well as the ability to purchase fuels. 
  3. About $300 million were used on fuels, and over $800 million for domestic purchases.

The big industries were given a very short notice on this, and they may lose over $1 billion in acquisition on a yearly basis. Small industries have no option to brace for impact, and warn that local production capability may be lost eventually.

 

But they also gave a few other details, that are relevant to this thread:

  1. Eitan is almost 100% made in the US.
  2. Namer is 70% made in the US.
  3. Merkava 4 is 30% made in the US.

It's also easy to notice that the more recent the AFV is, the bigger its share is in the US. This could mean that Israel might have some good chance of selling the US one of these, eventually. Especially for a Stryker replacement and NGCV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know about vehicles but;

 

Iron Dome experimentation and assessment for short-range air de- fense


The budget request included $38.0 million in PE 64020A for cross functional team (CFT) advanced development and proto- typing.
The committee understands the Army established six CFT pilots to examine how the Army could leverage existing resources and ac- celerate getting needed capability to the warfighter. The Army’s critical capability gap for Air and Missile Defense (AMD) remains protecting the maneuvering force and is aware the AMD CFT pilot is focused on accelerating delivery of a maneuver short-range air defense (SHORAD) capability. The committee commends the AMD CFT for getting an approved directed requirement for an interim- maneuver SHORAD capability that accelerated the original sched- ule by 5 years. The committee notes the AMD CFT is also review- ing other AMD capability gaps for the protection of fixed and semi- fixed sites. The committee expects the AMD CFT to immediately address capability gaps in the areas of indirect fire protection capa- bility and AMD.
Since 2011, Congress has provided over $1.5 billion for the pro- curement of Iron Dome batteries for the State of Israel, a system with demonstrated capability against a wide-range of threats. There is value in experimenting with the Iron Dome system through demonstrations to assess operational suitability for the fixed and semi-fixed site AMD mission, and M–SHORAD missions. Such demonstrations will evaluate challenges associated with inte- gration of the Iron Dome command and control system with the ex- isting AMD C2 system and sensors.
The committee recommends $68.0 million, an increase of $30.0 million, in PE 64020A to support the acquisition of Iron Dome hardware and associated integration activities, for the operational demonstration of the Iron Dome system against a range of threats to evaluate issues associated with the following:

(1) integrating the Iron Dome launcher into a U.S. Army AMD architecture for complimentary support of fixed, semi-fixed, and M– SHORAD operations;
(2) re-designing the Iron Dome launcher to be compatible with the Indirect Fire Protection Capability Multi-Mission Launcher; and
(3) potential options for accelerating development of the Skyhunter missile.
Further, the committee directs the Director of the AMD CFT to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by April 2, 2019, on the Army’s plans for this experiment and dem- onstration. If warranted by the demonstration results, the com- mittee directs the Director of the AMD CFT to provide a follow-on briefing on the advisability and feasibility of rapidly transitioning Iron Dome hardware for immediate use, with budgetary rec- ommendations and schedules for accelerated procurement of addi- tional systems.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Yes. The dude who made it said he didnt like boxy cars.

Does this actually have to do with protection, or is it just for fashion? Because I feel a lot of armored car producers try to make their vehicles cool over practical in some cases:
Oshkosh-JLTV-side-profile-01.jpg
SandCat-4x4-light-armored-vehicle-ambula

crab-armored-vehicle.jpg

5435789_original.jpg

 

Link to post
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.

  • Similar Content

    • By SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Monochromelody
      Disappeared for a long period, Mai_Waffentrager reappeared four months ago. 
      This time, he took out another photoshoped artifact. 

      He claimed that the Japanese prototype 105GSR (105 mm Gun Soft Recoil) used an autoloader similar to Swedish UDES 19 project. Then he showed this pic and said it came from a Japanese patent file. 
      Well, things turn out that it cames from Bofors AG's own patent, with all markings and numbers wiped out. 

      original file→https://patents.google.com/patent/GB1565069A/en?q=top+mounted+gun&assignee=bofors&oq=top+mounted+gun+bofors
      He has not changed since his Type 90 armor scam busted. Guys, stay sharp and be cautious. 
       
    • By Beer
      I am sure there are many very interesting stories to share about this topic. Let's start with couple of articles about the weird and sometimes downright crazy history of Czechoslovak assistance which helped Israel to survive its early days. It's true that Czechoslovakia asked a lot of money for bypassing the UN embargo but it doesn't change the fact that it helped in the critical time - before the change of course was ordered from Kremlin in 1949. It's also worth mentioning that the arms-smuggling to Israel brought up to 1/3 of all foreign currency income of Czechoslovakia at that time! It's all in Czech but well understandable with the google translate. 
       
      Here in short the story of the secret Czechoslovak operation DI - the military asistance to Israel from the website of the Czech Institute of the military history. The article contains rare historical photos from the covert military training for army specialists (pilots, tankers, mechanics and even an infantry brigade made of volunteers from the former Czechoslovak Army Corps in USSR). 
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vhu.cz%2Fprubeh-a-podrobnosti-cs-vojenske-pomoci-izraeli-na-konci-40-let%2F
       
      If you really like the topic, you can learn many more details from these six chapters of this superlong article (sure worth studying for anyone interested in the topic).
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14222-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-I%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14223-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-II%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14230-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-III
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14236-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-IV%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14242-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-V%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
      https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.valka.cz%2F14246-Ceskoslovensko-a-jeho-vojenska-pomoc-statu-Izrael-v-prvnim-obdobi-jeho-samostatne-existence-VI%3Futm_source%3Dvalka_cz%26utm_medium%3Darticle%26utm_campaign%3Dserial
       
      After that we have the totally crazy story of the Cairo bombing raid actually performed from the communist Czechoslovakia in 1948. Why don't we have yet any movie about three B-17s smuggled from USA, crewed by American-Jewish airmen, armed with former German machineguns and bombs and operating from an airfield located in then communist Czechoslovakia? If that doesn't deserve to be filmed than what does? 
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.idnes.cz%2Fzpravy%2Fdomaci%2Fnalet-zatec-kahira-b-17-izrael.A130712_105045_domaci_jw
       
      Most of you likely know that the first combat aircraft of the Israeli airforce were Czechoslovak Avia S-199 fighters. This stillborn stop-gap modification of the leftover Bf-109G airframe was rather useless in fact (Czechoslovakia had loads of Bf-109 airframes but no spare DB-605 engines whose reliability was absurdly low due to bad late-war steel, so the engines were replaced with Jumo-211 bomber units - completely unsuitable but available) but nevertheless it helped to stop the Egyptian attack on Tel Aviv and brought a very important psychological advantage on the Israeli side. More about these planes here. 
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.idnes.cz%2Ftechnet%2Fvojenstvi%2Fizrael-ceskoslovensko-vyroci-izraelske-letectvo.A180526_235424_vojenstvi_erp
      https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=cs&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.idnes.cz%2Ftechnet%2Fvojenstvi%2Fceskoslovenske-letectvo-stihaci-letadlo-avia-s-199.A200116_174150_vojenstvi_erp 
       
      To add to the absurdity of that time... the man behind the support for the Israel was Czechoslovak FM Vladimír Clementis who was executed just few years later as a result of an intra-communist power struggle.  
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

×
×
  • Create New...