Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

 

It can also be used to emulate the concept of Bright Arrow without burdening the interceptors/launchers themselves with the added weight of an RCWS.

Bright Arrow is basically a derivative of the Iron Fist LC in which an MG is attached to each launcher, and fires a burst immediately after the launcher fires. This way, in short range engagements it has a very high chance of eliminating the personnel who fires at the vehicle. At the cost, of course, of traverse speed of the launcher and thus increasing its reaction time.

 

Doesn't that support the vehicle is supposed to fight dismounts (like the Terminator), instead of serving as a MBT replacement?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 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.

Consider the geometry of actual armor without ignoring the LFP. In addition, the mass of the ammo is almost insignificant (25 kg per round and 40 or so rounds in the hull is 1 ton, vs 2 tons each

4 hours ago, MRose said:

 

Doesn't that support the vehicle is supposed to fight dismounts (like the Terminator), instead of serving as a MBT replacement?

As I previously said, there is a lot of commonality between the Carmel/Kaliya and the NGCV program.

 

Both are tasked to create some AFV that adds all these new ideas.

The type of AFV (APC/IFV/MBT/recon etc etc) is dependent on what the IDF and US Army think is most urgent for them at the moment. For the US it may be a Bradley replacement, and for the IDF it could be a medium IFV to replace Namers or an MBT to replace Merkavas.

 

Whatever the first version they choose, it's supposed to be a technological baseline for every other AFV type they field. 

 

If plans don't change, the M1A3 development will coincide with a certain phase of the OMFV's development, to draw on these technologies.

 

Similarly, the IDF plans to use the Carmel program as a baseline for an MBT program to replace the Merkava.

 

The vehicle shown in the video is nothing more than a show of a collection of concepts. It is hardly applicable as-is in modern combat between peers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
15 hours ago, MRose said:

 

Doesn't that support the vehicle is supposed to fight dismounts (like the Terminator), instead of serving as a MBT replacement?

As I previously said, there is a lot of commonality between the Carmel/Kaliya and the NGCV program.

 

Both are tasked to create some AFV that adds all these new ideas.

The type of AFV (APC/IFV/MBT/recon etc etc) is dependent on what the IDF and US Army think is most urgent for them at the moment. For the US it may be a Bradley replacement, and for the IDF it could be a medium IFV to replace Namers or an MBT to replace Merkavas.

 

Whatever the first version they choose, it's supposed to be a technological baseline for every other AFV type they field. 

 

If plans don't change, the M1A3 development will coincide with a certain phase of the OMFV's development, to draw on these technologies.

 

Similarly, the IDF plans to use the Carmel program as a baseline for an MBT program to replace the Merkava.

 

The vehicle shown in the video is nothing more than a show of a collection of concepts. It is hardly applicable as-is in modern combat between peers.

 

Elbit and Rafael might bid as a subcontractor for certain components in NGCV. It's hard to see the US developing a new heavy MBT anytime soon for a variety of reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MRose said:

 

Elbit and Rafael might bid as a subcontractor for certain components in NGCV. It's hard to see the US developing a new heavy MBT anytime soon for a variety of reasons.

The need for a new MBT as replacement for the M1 has been identified a while ago, and intentions to create a replacement based on OMFV technologies have also been declared.

 

Feel free to continue this discussion at the US AFV thread and ask other members who keep track over these things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
32 minutes ago, MRose said:

 

Elbit and Rafael might bid as a subcontractor for certain components in NGCV. It's hard to see the US developing a new heavy MBT anytime soon for a variety of reasons.

The need for a new MBT as replacement for the M1 has been identified a while ago, and intentions to create a replacement based on OMFV technologies have also been declared.

 

Feel free to continue this discussion at the US AFV thread and ask other members who keep track over these things.

 

There are higher budget priorities then a heavy MBT, a FCS solution might make a comeback which would be advantageous for the Carmel. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2019 at 5:42 PM, SPARTAN ARMED said:

What happen to the hybrid mrap ! and i see pics that tzahal use sufa jeeps inside cities palestinian cities it will be more safe with a golan mrap.

 

The Sufa is used in non-threatening areas, but you wont see it driving a lot in hostile cities.

You may occasionally see it driving around Gaza with crowd dispersal means though.

 

In the MRAP role, the IDF so far has the Ze'ev (Wolf), seen in the 4th picture.

 

Currently the IDF is looking for an MRAP in the 8 ton category as a 3rd line supplement to the Namer and Eitan.

Search for such an MRAP began somewhere around 2014, but progress is slow because the main focus right now is on the Eitan, turreted Namer, and the new howitzer, all costly projects that are developed simultaneously, but with no budget hikes to compensate for it properly.

So it's possible we won't see any meaningful progress on MRAPs until the end of 2020.

 

The MRAP you see in the 1st photo, taken from a recent video from the maintenance facilities of the IDF, is not an indicator of meaningful progress or an intent to build it en mass. Even as far back as 2014 the IDF was testing a Wildcat MRAP by IMI in MEDEVAC configuration, with no decision on purchase so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right. I was looking at a couple different vehicles while writing this. The Ze'ev is definitely not an MRAP, and its protective qualities are limited to small arms fire only. 

It is very useful for the West Bank and patrols here and there, but overall it's not something the IDF wants to equip its maneuvering forces with. It goes to regional units.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather bizarre image I found in another forum.

A vision block above a hatch?

Not really sure how it helps, as it cuts into the armor now, leaving a vulnerable spot above the TC's head, and Mark 4 tanks are supposed to be getting the IronVision anyway.

Except this one specifically does not cut into the armor and seems to be just placed above the hatch without any visible attachment points. So who knows.

11.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Serge said:

It’s a LIC kit. 

Mk3 can have the same dome commander hatch. 

It's hardly comparable to the Mk3. The Mk 3's hatch is thin like in every other tank, and manually moved. So it's easy to install a new hatch there. 

The Merkava 4, however, has a very thick turret roof armor, and the hatch is of the same thickness as the armor, thus requires a special mechanism to lift it. To install such a hatch, you'd have to replace the whole thing, and create quite a serious vulnerable point in the armor. 

 

It should, however, be noted that this is meant for instructional purposes.

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

The Mk3 LIC commander hatch is vulnerable too.

it’s so complex to change the hatch, it requires a crane. 

But maybe, it’s something else. Do you have any other idea ?

With the Mark 3 it's a compromise in protection that is built in and thus accepted.

 

I think we're only going to see these in the instructional unit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.mako.co.il/news-military/security-q1_2019/Article-452dae857443961004.htm?sCh=3d385dd2dd5d4110&pId=1434139730ΣÏÏαÏιÏÏÎ¹ÎºÏ ÏÏημα ÏÏα αιγÏÏÏιακά ÏÏνοÏα (ÎÏÏείο)As usual idf use only jeeps on border with egypt and they destroy one even  egyptians use real MRAPs but they destroy also by IED so in the future there going to use better protection the egyptians are create even tunnels under suez.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SPARTAN ARMED said:

As usual idf use only jeeps on border with egypt and they destroy one even  egyptians use real MRAPs but they destroy also by IED so in the future there going to use better protection the egyptians are create even tunnels under suez.

 

Do I really need to explain again that the IDF IS getting MRAPs?

 

The Egyptian border is not dangerous enough to deploy current heavily protected vehicles.

This incident is very much an abnormality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For patrol mission in  medium and high-risk area, the Oshkosh M-ATV (already armored by Plasan) coupled with IMI Iron Fist LC would be a perfect fitted for the IDF. The M-ATV would advantageously replaced the up-armored HMMWV in IDF service which are not deemed safe enough to patrol the Lebanese border anymore or any dangerous place for that matter and force the IDF to use NAMER instead.

 

There is already a clear expectation that the IDF would procure the JLTV (Oshkosh L-ATV) and since the M-ATV is an up-armored variant, it would be a natural process. No need to reinvent the wheel and waste ressources on R&D while it is better need elsewhere. And it would still leave a space for a custom IDF-tailored MRAP APC.

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...