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

Something interesting about Merkava III's armor protection(in Chinese): Some of these images are come from Chinese course book《装甲防护技术基础》(The basic technology of armor protection), and others are

Couple more of the Mk.3-based Ofek    

2 hours ago, Serge said:

First appeared on BreakingDefense, written by (notoriously sensationalist) Arie Egozi, so credit goes to him. It does not offer any new information here, but it's interesting that they claim (in ArmyRecognition) that the Eitan will only be made available for export when local production ends. No citation was provided, and it seems to have been merely inferred while rewriting from the original.

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

Some NEWS my Bois:

  • 847th brigade (reserve) has completed the induction of one Merkava 4 battalion and is preparing to induct 2 more battalions.
  • 401st brigade (active) is preparing to receive tanks with improved FCS, and will be the first to acquire the Barak.

So it is confirmed that the "Barak" upgrade is mainly (and only?)  an FCS upgrade?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, alanch90 said:

So it is confirmed that the "Barak" upgrade is mainly (and only?)  an FCS upgrade?

It always was just that. The FCS of course includes everything related to sensory, which means sensor fusion, helmet mounted visors, VR training, additional sensors etc.

If you fantasized about a new gun, a new engine (which was speculated at one time but confirmed to be untrue), or generally anything that would require a very serious change to the logistical requirements for the tank, or an expensive structural change, then you're all out of luck. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting find on IMI's website. They recently uploaded a PDF for a new product called M755 Track Cutting Charge. It's a shaped charge placed on any AFV's tracks that allows cutting them when otherwise impossible.

 

http://www.imisystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/TRACK-CUTTING-CHARGE-TCC-M755_Final.pdf

 

 

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

An interesting find on IMI's website. They recently uploaded a PDF for a new product called M755 Track Cutting Charge. It's a shaped charge placed on any AFV's tracks that allows cutting them when otherwise impossible.

 

http://www.imisystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/TRACK-CUTTING-CHARGE-TCC-M755_Final.pdf

 

 

 

I read about this or similar charge several years ago (someone just mentioned it).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

From the document attached below (it is from Italian DoD) it seems that an IVECO engine could  be used on the Eitan.  Any information ? thanks

 

https://www.difesa.it/SGD-DNA/Staff/DT/TERRARM/AvvisoPN/Documents/2018/15_avviso_istallazione_Power_Pack.pdf

 

 

Google translantion:

 

Ministry of Defence
GENERAL SECRETARIAT OF DEFENSE AND NATIONAL ARMAMENT DIRECTION
TERRESTRIAL ARMAMENT DIRECTION
III DEPARTMENT - 7TH DIVISION
Address: Via di Centocelle, 301 -00175 Rome
NOTICE OF NEGOTIATED PROCEDURE
WITHOUT PREVIOUS PUBLICATION OF THE NOTICE OF COMPETITION

 

This Direction is planning the procurement engineering study for the installation and
the integration of a "POWER-PACK" (engine and gearbox) on the Israeli EITAN 8X8 vehicle in the field
of ITA-ISR Cooperation armored vehicles - Project Arrangement 1 (PA1).

The Management intends to adopt a negotiated procedure without prior publication of the call for tender with the
IVECO Defense Vehicles company as the holder of the POWER-PACK design Authority.
The use of the negotiated procedure is therefore justified pursuant to art. 18 paragraph 2d) of Legislative Decree 208/11
for reasons relating to the protection of exclusive rights.
Any information on the funding may be requested from the Public Relations Office - Via
di Centocelle, 301 - 00175 Rome - from 08.30 to 14.00 (Monday to Friday) tel. 06.46913.3102
- 06.46913.3103 - email: vdturp@terrarm.difesa.it - Code of Practice __________________.
THE DIRECTOR
(Ten Gen. Francesco CASTRATARO)
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Adraste said:

I am surprised we don't see any Merkava mk3 of the 188th Brigade upgraded with the Trophy APS yet. The whole brigade should have been equipped with it by now, I wonder why it is taking so long? Sounds worrying.

The tank upgrade rotations are one battalion per year. There are typically 3 battalions per traditional brigade (armored, pre-BCT), so it's a 3 year process (won't withdraw from the Merkava 4M production though), and it should initiate once the trials for the system are done and it's cleared for production.

 

Now, in February this year an experimental tank was shown with the system, along with an official statement that the process should take 3 years. Since the last enlistment cycle of the year is in November, I assume we should see the first battalion operational with the tank around January-February 2019.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Some random Namer photos:

4.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=1038

 

Spoiler

3.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=1038

 

 

7.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=1038

 

12.jpg?anchor=center&mode=crop&width=103

 

 

 

And this absolute LAD single-handedly takes into service a whopping 100 FMTV trucks, and an unspecified number of HEMTT trucks. 

The current contract for FMTV trucks is for a total of 250.

They said the process for assimilating additional HEMTT trucks has been going for 2 years now, and includes 'hundreds' of trucks.

whatsapp_image_2018-12-23_at_091937_0.jp

 

whatsapp_image_2018-12-23_at_091938_-3-_

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been reported that a report filed by a committee inspecting the readiness of the IDF, has presented 41 recommendations to the IDF Chief of Staff, all of which were accepted by him.

Among them was a recommendation to up the land army's budget by 1.5 to 2 billion NIS (or $400 mil to $530 mil) to fund acquisitions of additional Merkava, Namer, and Eitan vehicles. 

It should be noted that the Merkava 4's export price is $4.5 mil, the Namer's is $3 mil, and Eitan is said to be "half the Namer's cost" so ~$1.5 mil. 

The recommendation was for an annual budget increase, not a one time addition.

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 Monochromelody
      IDF had kept about 100 Tiran-6/T-62s since 1973, and remain service until 1990s. 
       
      I wonder if there's any modification on Tiran-6, like changing the powerpack into 8V71T+XTG-411, adapting steering wheel. 
       
      I also heard that British ROF had produce a batch of 115mm barrel for IDF, while MECAR or NEXTER produced high-performance APFSDS for 115mm gun. Did IDF really use these barrels for original barrel replacement? 
       
      And about protection, did IDF put Blazer ERA on Tiran-6? Or they use more advanced APS like Trophy? 
       
      Thank you. 
    • By Sturgeon
      The LORD was with the men of Deseret. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had chariots of steel.
      —The Book of Latter Day Saints, Ch 8, vs. 3:10, circa 25th Century CE
       
      BULLETIN: ALL INDUSTRIAL-MECHANICAL CONCERNS
       
      SOLICITATION FOR ALL-TERRAIN BATTLE TANK
       
      The Provisional Government of the Lone Free State of Texas and The Great Plains issues the following solicitation for a new All-Terrain Battle Tank. The vehicle will be the main line ground combat asset of the Lone Free State Rangers, and the Texas Free State Patrol, and will replace the ageing G-12 Scout Truck, and fill the role of the cancelled G-42 Scout Truck. The All-Terrain Battle Tank (ATBT) will be required to counter the new Californian and Cascadian vehicles and weapons which our intelligence indicates are being used in the western coast of the continent. Please see the attached sheet for a full list of solicitation requirements.
       

       
      Submissions will be accepted in USC only.
       
       
      Supplementary Out of Canon Information:
       
       
      I.     Technology available:
      a.      Armor:
      The following armor materials are in full production and available for use. Use of a non-standard armor material requires permission from a judge.
      Structural materials:
                                                                    i.     RHA/CHA
      Basic steel armor, 360 BHN. The reference for all weapon penetration figures, good impact properties, fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 4 inches (RHA) 8 inches (CHA). 
      Density- 0.28 lb/in^3.
                                                                   ii.     Aluminum 5083
      More expensive to work with than RHA per weight, middling impact properties, low thermal limits. Excellent stiffness.
       Fully weldable. Available in thicknesses up to 4 inches.
      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1 vs CE, 0.9 vs KE.
      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.33 vs CE, 0.3 vs KE.
      Density- 0.1 lb/in^3 (approx. 1/3 of steel).
      For structural integrity, the following guidelines are recommended:
      For heavy vehicles (30-40 tons), not less than 1 in RHA/1.75 in Aluminum base structure
      For medium-light vehicles (<25 tons), not less than 0.5 in RHA/1 in Aluminum base structure
      Intermediate values for intermediate vehicles may be chosen as seen fit.
      Non-structural passive materials:
                                                                  iii.     HHA
      Steel, approximately 500 BHN through-hardened. Approximately 1.5x as effective as RHA against KE and HEAT on a per-weight basis. Not weldable, middling shock properties. Available in thicknesses up to 1 inch.
      Density- 0.28 lb/in^3
                                                                  iv.     Fuel
      Mass efficiency vs RHA of 1.3 vs CE, 1 vs KE.
      Thickness efficiency vs RHA of 0.14 vs CE, 0.1 vs KE.
      Density-0.03 lb/in^3.
                                                                v.     Assorted stowage/systems
      Mass efficiency vs RHA- 1 vs CE, 0.8 vs KE.
                                                               vi.     Spaced armor
      Requires a face of at least 1 inch LOS vs CE, and at least 0.75 caliber LOS vs fullbore AP KE.
      Reduces penetration by a factor of 1.1 vs CE or 1.05 vs KE for every 4 inchair gap.
      Spaced armor rules only apply after any standoff surplus to the requirements of a reactive cassette.
      Reactive armor materials:
                                                                  vii.     ERA
      A sandwich of 0.125in/0.125in/0.125in steel-explodium-steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 2 sandwich thicknesses away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 81% coverage (edge effects).
                                                                  viii.     NERA
      A sandwich of 0.25in steel/0.25in rubber/0.25in steel.
      Requires mounting brackets of approximately 10-30% cassette weight.
      Must be spaced at least 1 sandwich thickness away from any other armor elements to allow full functionality. 95% coverage.
      The details of how to calculate armor effectiveness will be detailed in Appendix 1.
      b.      Firepower
                                                                    i.     Bofors 57mm (reference weapon) - 85,000 PSI PMax/70,000 PSI Peak Operating Pressure, high quality steel cases, recoil mechanisms and so on are at an equivalent level to that of the USA in the year 1960.
                                                                   ii.     No APFSDS currently in use, experimental weapons only - Spindle sabots or bourelleted sabots, see for example the Soviet BM-20 100mm APFSDS.
                                                                  iii.     Tungsten is available for tooling but not formable into long rod penetrators. It is available for penetrators up to 6 calibers L:D.
                                                                  iv.     Texan shaped charge technology - 4 CD penetration for high-pressure resistant HEAT, 5 CD for low pressure/ precision formed HEAT.
                                                                   v.     The subsidy-approved GPMG for the Lone Free State of Texas has the same form factor as the M240, but with switchable feed direction.. The standard HMG has the same form factor as the Kord, but with switchable feed direction.
      c.       Mobility
                                                                    i.     Engines tech level:
      1.      MB 838 (830 HP)
      2.      AVDS-1790-5A (908 HP)
      3.      Kharkov 5TD (600 HP)
      4.    Detroit Diesel 8V92 (400 HP)
      5.    Detroit Diesel 6V53 (200 HP)
                                                                   ii.     Power density should be based on the above engines. Dimensions are available online, pay attention to cooling of 1 and 3 (water cooled).
                                                                  iii.     Power output broadly scales with volume, as does weight. Trying to extract more power from the same size may come at the cost of reliability (and in the case of the 5TD, it isn’t all that reliable in the first place).
                                                                  iv.     There is nothing inherently wrong with opposed piston or 2-stroke engines if done right.
      d.      Electronics
                                                                    i.     LRFs- unavailable
                                                                   ii.     Thermals-unavailable
                                                                  iii.     I^2- Gen 2 maximum
                                                                  vi.     Texas cannot mass produce microprocessors or integrated circuits
                                                                 vii.    Really early transistors only (e.g., transistor radio)
                                                                viii.    While it is known states exist with more advanced computer technology, the import of such systems are barred by the east coast states who do not approve of their use by militaristic entities.
       
      Armor calculation appendix.
       
      SHEET 1 Armor defeat calculator 4in-54 1200 yd
       
      SHEET 2 Armor defeat calculator 4in-54 2000 yd
       
      SHEET 3 Armor defeat calculator 6in HEAT
       
      Range calculator
       
    • 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. 
       

×
×
  • Create New...