David Moyes Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 Trophy MV confirmed for Challenger 3:https://www.joint-forces.com/defence-equipment-news/44450-rafael-trophy-aps-selected-for-uk-challenger-3 Clan_Ghost_Bear, Laviduce, Beer and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted June 30, 2021 Report Share Posted June 30, 2021 Ajax situation is ramping up. Trials have been suspended for a second time and Ministers now believe that senior officers hid the extent of problems so that it would not get cancelled during the integrated review. Tricking Ministers will likely be Ajax's death knell. Dragonstriker, Clan_Ghost_Bear, 2805662 and 1 other 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 1, 2021 Report Share Posted July 1, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-L-M Posted July 1, 2021 Report Share Posted July 1, 2021 WHAT? SPEAK UP! Ramlaen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTibere Posted July 2, 2021 Report Share Posted July 2, 2021 This should really shake up UK procurement. Ramlaen, Dragonstriker and Kal 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 2, 2021 Report Share Posted July 2, 2021 CR2's failure should have shown Britain that their procurement was flawed. Nimrod's failure should have shown that. Warrior failing officially but not Ajax should have sparked a lot of eyebrows being raised. CR1's inadequate performance should have shown that. What's Ajax gonna do? All the MoD is going to do now is to play victim like they always did and wait until the heat dies off and do it again. They're dumb, and it's fun to watch. Dragonstriker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 To quote Indiana Jones “It belongs in a museum!” Warrior trials vehicles disposed of. David Moyes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 "The data from the trial suggests up to an 80% drop in detection with the naked eye abs hand held optics. We also tested it against other sensors but that’s not for twitter. One of the hypotheses was “it’s possible to spoof AI and create delay in the targeting cycle”." Sources: Spoiler Serge 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 7, 2021 Report Share Posted July 7, 2021 How it started ^ How it's going: Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krieger22 Posted July 14, 2021 Report Share Posted July 14, 2021 GDLS UK has announced that it will be providing verbal evidence to the Defence Select Committee on July 20. Also released ahead of the testimony is their written evidence: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/37866/html/ Quote Ajax is developed in the UK to meet more than 1,000 requirements and provides the highest levels of survivability, lethality and mobility, along with the most modern and capable sensor suite and digital systems. Extensive trials and testing is highly progressed and provides the evidence that demonstrates the full capability: Ajax has completed over 60,000km of design proving trials and fired over 4,400 rounds of the CT40 cannon. Progressive training is underway for British Army crews using the advanced training simulators delivered to British Army training centres. No other vehicle is available at this level of maturity to meet this requirement. At this rate my suspicion is that in short order, this will be the case because nobody sane will want anything to do with British cavalry scout vehicle programs after this. N-L-M, Dragonstriker, BaronTibere and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 Contract for Challenger 2 armour trials:https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:358117-2021:TEXT:EN:HTML&src=0 Source: Spoiler Ramlaen, Korvette and Laviduce 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 (Removed) A questionable person has yet again thrown out some photos and schematics. Measurements are far from accurate (in the hundreds of mm). Utilizing a more realistic and accurate estimation and utilizing the true length of the L94 barrel (703mm), the armor is around 500-550mm LOS at most, considering the air gap between the yellow and blue pieces is equal in size to the yellow block (As shown in photo below), can be around 200, it leaves only approx. 300mm of LOS remaining for the blue piece due to the barrel length. Also noting that the usage of a cylinder for the elevation rotor/gear instead of a regular trunnion, the thickness will vary and usually decrease depending on the height at which you measure from, being the thickest possible in the middle (Around the longitude of the coax barrel) while getting much thinner the higher or lower of that midpoint. Not only this but if the rotor pins continue through the rotor, it leaves a susceptibility of damage/jamming of the elevation gear in general, let alone that more than half of the construction utilizes regular RHA, heat/energy from a projectile can be a problem. Spoiler David Moyes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Moyes Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 Foxhound demonstrator with hybrid drive neutral steering: SH_MM 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 13 hours ago, Korvette said: A questionable person has yet again thrown out some photos and schematics. Measurements are far from accurate (in the hundreds of mm). Funny how the "tip" of the coaxial machine gun is labelled with "150 mm", but is depicted longer than the "200 mm" of yellow armor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 3 hours ago, SH_MM said: Funny how the "tip" of the coaxial machine gun is labelled with "150 mm", but is depicted longer than the "200 mm" of yellow armor Yes lol. However the scale in general of the schematic without any measurements are questionable, the air gap is depicted to be way too small and the front yellow piece weirdly conforming to the blue rotor is somewhat unusual and maybe even unfounded. Spoiler The coax tip is most definitely shorter than the front mantlet piece, but the air gap is most definitely the same size as the front mantlet piece, keeping in mind that the coax is also partially imbedded (by a few mm) into the gun trunnion/rotor itself, meaning that the amount of space here is highly stretched especially with the huge air gap. Some pixel measuring has to be done but utilizing the L94 barrel length it must be considered that at least around a third of the gun barrel length is spent free floating in air, only about sub 500mm of barrel length remans that is actually imbedded within armor, including the slope of the front mantlet piece and then the thickness of the trunnion, it's just embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTibere Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 I don't particularly trust this source either but he does have access to the actual vehicle so its very possible and i dare say likely that at least some of these numbers are from actual measurements, and not scaled from the drawing. That said I wouldn't trust them without seeing his actual measurements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 1 minute ago, BaronTibere said: I don't particularly trust this source either but he does have access to the actual vehicle so its very possible and i dare say likely that at least some of these numbers are from actual measurements, and not scaled from the drawing. That said I wouldn't trust them without seeing his actual measurements. If for some reason the L94 magically had a 1000mm barrel then you might as well have fitted a 50 cal in there. Half of all the measurements are entirely unfounded. The only thing I'd agree with is the measurements of the yellow pieces, both of which are incredibly inefficient usages of space due to the design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 I have since removed the photo about my initial post, it appears the schematics are still classified and hasn't been approved at all for public release, I am however willing to answer some questions about the content if that's allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaronTibere Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 24 minutes ago, Korvette said: If for some reason the L94 magically had a 1000mm barrel then you might as well have fitted a 50 cal in there. Half of all the measurements are entirely unfounded. The only thing I'd agree with is the measurements of the yellow pieces, both of which are incredibly inefficient usages of space due to the design. He's said in the past that the L94 on the CR2 is slightly longer and posted this image a while back (horrible quality) Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 15, 2021 Report Share Posted July 15, 2021 1 hour ago, BaronTibere said: He's said in the past that the L94 on the CR2 is slightly longer and posted this image a while back (horrible quality) Hide contents Cutting away from the front tip you are left with around 34 inches of barrel length to be used, considering 5 inches of excess. This would mean, that if it is accurate, SHMM's point is proven, the exceeding tip of the coax MG is most definitely longer than the front mantlet piece and that then, the air gap is even larger than what I initially made out to be. It would mean that the armor then hovers around 550mm LOS refuting my lower bound of 500mm LOS due to the cylinder being thicker than initially theorized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted July 16, 2021 Report Share Posted July 16, 2021 19 hours ago, Korvette said: I have since removed the photo about my initial post, it appears the schematics are still classified and hasn't been approved at all for public release, I am however willing to answer some questions about the content if that's allowed. Seems like he is getting a lot of attention now: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/classified-challenger-tank-specs-leaked-online-for-videogame/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 16, 2021 Report Share Posted July 16, 2021 1 hour ago, SH_MM said: Seems like he is getting a lot of attention now: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/classified-challenger-tank-specs-leaked-online-for-videogame/ Never thought I’d be on international news because someone got mad at me and wanted to prove a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 16, 2021 Report Share Posted July 16, 2021 Spreading to communities entirely unrelated like a wildfire. Anyways to switch the topic to something a little more bright. I did a bit of an analysis of the CR2 turret and its protection coverage. I would like some feedback but imo this gives a pretty good insight to the tanks turret, I will be maybe working on a full analysis of the turret mantlet soon if I feel like it to see an accurate representation of its armor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanch90 Posted July 17, 2021 Report Share Posted July 17, 2021 22 hours ago, Korvette said: Never thought I’d be on international news because someone got mad at me and wanted to prove a point. He did prove you wrong though. Victory at any cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Korvette Posted July 17, 2021 Report Share Posted July 17, 2021 12 minutes ago, alanch90 said: He did prove you wrong though. Victory at any cost. More like he posted very inaccurate measurements to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.