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

Recommended Posts

Thanks for uploading it. For some reason I was unable to.

 

Sadly, it's only a very simple and static demonstrator. Not integrated to any platform. Probably only to show the autoloading mechanism and nothing about projectile and charge management.

It's not supposed to show the complete system, but only that the next howitzer will be automated, but it has been, what, 4 months since we got new info about it? 

 

Either it's stuck because of red tape, or they just don't want to reveal something but it's quite unusual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple pictures posted in Otvaga forum by @Wiedzmin:

 

Shaping of the armor plates on the UFP is diagonal. Would like to receive an explanation on why it could be beneficial:

Spoiler

1.jpg

 

Just a couple pics of the Merkava 4's UFP:

Spoiler

2.jpg

 

3.jpg

 

4.jpg

 

 

 

In a factory:

Spoiler

5.jpg

 

6.jpg

 

7.jpg

 

9.jpg

 

10.jpg

 

11.jpg

 

12.jpg

 

13.jpg

 

Namer UFP:

Spoiler

14.jpg

 

15.jpg

 

16.jpg

 

17.jpg

 

18.jpg

 

19.jpg

 

And a damaged Namer:

Spoiler

20.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video from 1981 about the Merkava.

Talik says it's the cheapest tank in the world, and is quite confident about its export capabilities (which eventually, for political reasons concluded in export of systems but not a complete tank), and its capabilities against the T-72 the Syrians were buying at the time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Shaping of the armor plates on the UFP is diagonal. Would like to receive an explanation on why it could be beneficial:

  Hide contents

1.jpg

Is-it the coating ?

Namer very front UFP is made of diagonal modules. Don’t know why. 

9 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

18.jpg

 

19.jpg

So the UFP is cooled. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Serge said:

 

So the UFP is cooled. 

 

 

It has to be.  Any engine powerful enough to drive a modern tank needs lots of air; either air to run through the engine core of a gas turbine or air to cool the cylinders or radiator of a diesel.  This is one major disadvantage of the engine-in-front design; there needs to be a set of big-ass holes somewhere to let the air in and out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:

 

It has to be.  Any engine powerful enough to drive a modern tank needs lots of air; either air to run through the engine core of a gas turbine or air to cool the cylinders or radiator of a diesel.  This is one major disadvantage of the engine-in-front design; there needs to be a set of big-ass holes somewhere to let the air in and out.

There are exhausts on the right side of the hull of the Mark 4 as well as some sort of filtration system at the very top of the UFP (where it's completely horizontal). 

On the Mark 1-3 they're above the tracks.

The armor itself is not really affected. That whole module is one solid chunk of armor, with nothing to maintain in it, other than the vents on top.

 

Because the turret is moved to the center-rear, there is sufficient space to put air vents where it wouldn't negatively affect the armor.

 

One more upside it has is that more rear placed turrets allow for better concealment and armoring of the turret ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Serge said:

Yes, but I was thinking about something different. Something like the CV90 to reduce the thermal signature, not only to cool the engine compartment. 

 

It's possible that's what they were going for, but it's possible to camouflage a vehicle from IR sensors quite well without any active cooling.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Serge said:

So the UFP is cooled. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Collimatrix said:

 

It has to be.  Any engine powerful enough to drive a modern tank needs lots of air; either air to run through the engine core of a gas turbine or air to cool the cylinders or radiator of a diesel.  This is one major disadvantage of the engine-in-front design; there needs to be a set of big-ass holes somewhere to let the air in and out.

Whut?

The cooling unit is right behind the UFP, you can see the air intakes on the pictures.
The UFP just carries the main air intake (plus the air filter, I believe).

37219772_10156430965663187_2545447492216

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Toimisto said:

Whats the reason IDF is going with a 30mm gun for its IFV, when these days everyone and their mother is going for larger and larger IFV cannons? Do they think that a larger gun is not necessary?

 

30 mm is the most common calibre size for modern IFVs. It is considered the perfect balance between firepower and ammo storage by most users. Only a handful of IFVs are using larger guns (i.e. the Type 89 from Japan, the CV9035NL and CV9035DK, the CV9040, the K21 and the Warrior, if the WLIP is no canceled).

 

Autocannons chambered in 30 x 173 mm and 30 x 170 mm are used as main armament of the IFVs operated by Austria, Germany, Norway, Lithuania, Sweden, Finland, Spain, Sweden, Singapore, South Africa, the UK and others.

 

The Australia , the Czech Republic, Poland and the US Army are all considering to buy/upgrade their IFVs with 30 mm guns. The Stryker Dragoon and the Boxer CRV, while not being IFVs, also make use of 30 mm guns.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus, if there is ever a need, these can be upgraded to 40mm. This is why even though the IDF clearly uses 30mm barrels for it, it says 30/40mm in official publications.

 

A truly well thought, potentially locally developed medium caliber gun will be bought or made for the Carmel, due to enter service in some version by 2027.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, if a win win deal could be reached.

 

But it may not meet their particular requirements.   

 

40mm starts being too large to cost efectively shoot at infantry, but too small to shoot at fortifications/AFVs

 

The bigger the main round gets, the more useful the secondary gun becomes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MRose said:

 

Would Israel license CT40?

Very unlikely. 

The CT40 is a joint UK-French project. Both these countries are considered unreliable arms exporters by Israel.

 

The only other existing high caliber guns that I know of are made by Bofors, which is a Swedish company. And as far as I know Sweden still has an embargo on Israel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Very unlikely. 

The CT40 is a joint UK-French project. Both these countries are considered unreliable arms exporters by Israel.

This seems to be no issue when it comes to ships and submarines since Germany is a lot less export friendly compared to out neighbours

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Jägerlein said:

This seems to be no issue when it comes to ships and submarines since Germany is a lot less export friendly compared to out neighbours

Germany has never imposed an arms embargo on Israel though, not in past wars, and not in recent ones.

Plus, submarines are one area that the seller cannot regulate because all activities are secret, including the installation of nuclear weapons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Plus, submarines are one area that the seller cannot regulate because all activities are secret, including the installation of nuclear weapons.

 

The seller can regulate the delivery of spare parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, SH_MM said:

 

The seller can regulate the delivery of spare parts.

It can also prevent the entire sale, but my point is that one cannot really prove the submarines are used in a way the German gov't would not approve of, because of the nature of their operation.

AFVs, on the other hand, which were a heated topic between Germany and Turkey, as well as Canada and KSA, can be very easily tracked even by civilians with access to the internet, and thus are far likelier to get hurt in the supply chain when there's an inter-governmental feud.

 

It's true that the chances of any European embargo on Israel are now getting lower and lower as Europe turns more to clean energy, but it's not something anyone in Israel can count on in the near future. It takes decades. 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...