The last thread was gifted to Korea
Véhicule de Combat d'Infanterie Edition
> What's this thread about?
As usual this thread is for the discussion and pics of tracked and wheeled AFVs of all kinds from MBTs to supertanks to self propelled AA guns. Please keep it civil and cite sources for statistics.
By the mid-1960s, France, having pulled itself out of the immediate post-war glut of the 1950s sought to modernise its armed forces, leading to a series of sweeping changes across the board, in large part proceeding with the replacement of its WWII era and early post-war combat vehicles. The AMX-10P was one outcome of this response, as the French initiated a programme to develop a vehicle to replace the obsolete AMX VCI, which had morphed from its role as an infantry carrier to a quasi-IFV in the late 1950s with the M-56 iteration incorporating a 20 mm cannon and turret. The AMX-10P project began in 1965, taking into consideration the evolution of its predecessor, under the auspices of Atelier de Construction d'lssy-les-Moulineaux. By 1968, the first prototypes were ready to be trialed, features including the ubiquitous array of NBC systems, a centrally turret mounted 20 mm GIAT M693 traversing -8 to 50 degrees, waterjets to propel it amphibiously and aluminium frame armour. By 1973, the AMX-10P was finalised, and sent for mass production. Overall, 1810 were produced until 1994 for markets both domestic and overseas. By the 2000s, a decision was made to begin phasing out the vehicle in favour of the VBCI, although delays in delivery meant that a limited upgrade was undertaken from 2006-2008, including passive armour packages and a powered ramp; notably, however, proposals such as the Galix and engine improvements were not adopted.
> Gun
Rifled 20 mm M693
> Dimensions (l w h)
5.9 x 2.83 x 2.83 m
> Weight
14.5 tonnes
> Engine
260hp diesel
> Speed
65 km/h
>>30393928
OP: As always, feedback, suggestions wanted and appreciated.
I continually lament my inability to read French fluently, as I’ve only been able to pick out a handful of stats, with the rest of the information being cobbled together from news articles and Jane’s Information Group tracts. In particular, I’ve had a bit of confusion regarding the plentiful range of variants. In addition to all the standard derivatives, such as the HOT, command, recovery, multiple artillery assistance and ambulance vehicles, I’ve also read about as of 2000, there being ongoing trials for the AMX-10P 25 ICV, a newer permutation with a 25 mm gun. However, I’ve been unable to get information on these trials past 2000. However, Singapore’s export models of the Marine clearly sport the 25 mm DRAGAR developed by GIAT (alongside the TS-90, another export gun system), which does make me wonder if the projects were just merged for the export market. It does seem strange, however, that the superior system not be fielded on domestic French AFVs as well – could this be a result of the AMX-10P’s replacement by the VBCI, and therefore not being deemed as worthy of recent upgrades? I would appreciate if Frenchfag could elucidate some of this, plus some details on the protection of the more modern models, as information is limited to nebulous armour addons and aluminium.
A final observation about the AMX-10P, it did not include firing ports like the British Warrior, perhaps indicative of French doctrinal aspects in the post-war period. Also, I think I’ll address the AMX-10RC separately in the future.
Addendum: Considering what other people said in the previous thread, I may do a thread on Knispel, as part of a bigger series on tank aces and tactical luminaries in the armour world.
>>30393933
More tank news, as per the new format.
If you have more queries regarding a news story, just point it out, and I’ll further elaborate and provide links.
In somewhat related news, Nexter has developed the 40 CTA turret series, which mount a CTA International 40 mm Cased Telescoped Cannon System (CTCS). With no hull intrusion, 60 ready rounds, 2900 kg weight and a full 360 degree traverse at 60/s with elevation from -10 to 45 degrees, it appears to be aiming for ease of use, modularity and a bent towards urban operations, an increasingly common form of warfare.
The Portuguese Army is to upgrade its KMW Leopard 2A6 MBTs to better its communication and battlefield management capabilities. 37 vehicles of the Mechanised Brigade will receive the EID ICC-251 digital communication system to replace its old Thales SOTAS, the contract being finalised this year.
Lockheed Martin has revived its old production line for its Highly-Mobile Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), for the express purpose of exports to the United Arab Emirates. The firm is seeking to diversify its customer base, looking for opportunities to upgrade legacy M270 systems and also restarting its production line of ATACMS for both domestic and export customers.
In addition, Lockheed and Raytheon’s Javelin ATGM scored 100% in five test firings from a UK Kongsberg M151 RWS in Wiltshire, England. The missiles flew between 1.2 and 4.3 km and consistently hit its ground target vehicles, confirming a greater than 94% reliability rate.
The US Marine Corps ACV is finally in the process of being assembled by contractor BAE Systems, with 6 out of 16 being on the factory floor, as SAIC concurrently plans to begin integration work on its vehicles this season. Both firms are expected to build 16 eight wheeled vehicles to be tested in 2017, selected in 2018 and then delivered in batches totalling 204 vehicles by 2020.
And that’s all for now.
>>30393955
Bumping with the AMX 13 HOT, my favorite French tank. Anyone have video of its use?
>>30393928
I don't get this tho. Why the frogs pushed for parallel acquisition of both VBCI and VBMR vehicle? They are both wheeled APC
>>30394101
Wheel mafia
>>30394101
>8x8 and 6x6 vehicles are the same
>>30393955
>Lockheed and Raytheon’s Javelin ATGM scored 100% in five test firings from a UK Kongsberg M151 RWS in Wiltshire, England
http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1679718-abrams-tanks-get-high-speed-force-tracker
>The Army is now expanding a new, high-speed, vehicle-mounted force tracking technology to include a wider range of combat platforms such as Stryker vehicles, Bradleys and Abrams tanks, service officials said.
>The technology, called Joint Battle Command – Platform, has already been fielded with the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division and 10th Mountain Division. Future plans include a wider deployment across the Army with units traveling to strategically vital operational parts of the globe, Army officials told Scout Warrior.
>JBC-P uses an upgraded, high-speed GPS satellite network called Blue Force Tracker 2, an improvement to the previous network that is, at least, ten times faster, Army officials said. “BFT 2 provides 10 times the speed on the forward link which improves latency,” Lt. Col. Michael Olmstead, JBC-P product manager, told Scout Warrior in an interview.
>As one might expect, improving latency or lag time is a crucial element to combat success. With the previous Blue Force Tracker system, units on-the-move in vehicles needed to wait up to five minutes for digital maps to refresh and show new or emerging information. With BFT 2, that latency is reduced to as quick as 10-seconds.
>BFT 2 allows for data rates of 120 kilobits on the forward link and up to 3 kilobits on the return link on an Inmarsat 4 satellite channel, officials added.
>When using the technology, Soldiers were drawn heavily to the value of the instant chat function, Olmstead said.
>The force-tracking software is connected to JV-5 hardware computer technology and a system called Mounted Family of Computer Systems.
>JBC-P is also integrated with a technology called Tactical Intelligence Ground Reporting, or TIGR, which provides a historical intelligence data base giving Soldiers combat-relevant information along a given route.
>>30394853
>When using the technology, Soldiers were drawn heavily to the value of the instant chat function, Olmstead said.
Holy moly, we've reached a higher plane of shitposting.
>>30394853
http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsus-army-evaluates-new-blue-force-tracking-system-at-nie-142-4288129
>>30394853
the stuff in your picture is the decrepit old system theyre currently replacing with the JCR, by the way. same program same functions, no more antenna or giant modem
>>30394101
>>30394567
>IFV and APC are the same.
One is a 6x6 APC with Stanag 4 protection that cost no more than 1m euros per unit, the other is a 8x8 IFV with Stanag 5 protection on the flanks and probably nearing 6 up front (for the 32tons series, the 27tons one is Stanag 4 on the sides) which is iirc above 2m per vehicle. One of the cool thing about the Griffon is that, while it looks like a very ugly truck, it is actually designed to handle like a truck which means anyone trained to drive one (far from rare in the french army) could drive the APC wtih very little converion effort, in comparison with the VBCI which demands specific training.
>>30393933
I think the AMX-10p was definitely considered at the end of its operational life and with the VBCI development ongoing it was probably not considered worthy of diverting that much money for upgrading the 10p with a whole brand new turret.
That's still a nice looking metal bawkse
>>30395384
JBC-P is an upgrade of JCR
>>30393955
>360 degree traverse at 60/s
>60/s
Whats that, it takes 60 seconds for the turret to do 360 degrees?
And in terms of doctrine and all that, is the HIMARS pretty different to the BM-21? Ive seen videos of the HIMARS on youtube and it normally fires off 1 rocket at a time and the whole vehicle bounces around but the BM-21 just spams 40 rockets at once.
>>30396100
Pretty sure he means 60°/s
>>30396124
Ahh thats actually obvious and I should have known.
>>30396100
>>30395599
>>30396100
My apologies, I was typing this up on a non-Word processor so I neglected to have the proper degree symbol.
>>30396100
Well HIMARS offers a level of range and precision a BM-21 couldn't dream of. This comes at a loss of dakka and a hefty pricetage obviously.
>>30393928
I was looking around for French AMX pics to post in the thread, and I found this person.
Who the hell is she? She's apparently some kind of franchise owner for hobby models and a photographer, but how the fuck did she get into all these Franco-German military exercises and even Eurosatory?
>tfw you will never have a treadhead waifu
>>30397159
Frenchfag, do you know this person? (And have you maybe had a drink together)
>>30397166
I'd actually sell a kidney to have her job and be in her position.
Here she is in a Leclerc.
>>30393928
>traversing -8 to 50 degrees
Wait, it couldn't traverse 360 degrees? Or did you mean elevate?
>>30397204
Definitely elevate, as the AMX can turn the turret 360
>>30393933
>did not include firing ports like the British Warrior, perhaps indicative of French doctrinal aspects
How were they different?
>>30394081
Your photo is an AMX 13 75 with SS11.
The HOT version had another profile.
>>30397179
I'd let her omelette on my baguette
Btw, anyone here ever hook up in an AFV?
I fucked a girl in a CV90 once, my knees have never felt worse
2S35 Armata concept
>>30395518
With nowadays technology of RWS/unmanned turrets, the limit between APC and IFV will be blurred. The only difference will remain on the doctrine of use.
>>30397159
That's the french equivalent of the israeli female ninja stripper I guess...
Last time she was posting photos of a Leclerc with ERA cavities open... When I talked to her she was more pro-active into correcting the mistakes she made in her article than removing the photos that endangered the crews...
Definately not my type of girl...
>>30397179
Leclerc ARV.
>>30397264
I can never un-see the face on that thing.
>>30393933
Here something for you OP, you got english and french (and spanish on some pages).
http://imgur.com/a/FDZfP
>>30397290
>israeli female ninja stripper I guess...
I have to know the context behind this
>>30397308
Requesting smug tank pepe please
>>30397411
>I have to know the context behind this
Some israeli tankers complaining about female taking unauthorised pictures showing the thickness of the glacis, etc.
Can't remember where it was first used but I guess it was on militay forums such as Tanknet or something along those lines.
>>30397421
Maybe Merkgunner has some info on it?
>>30397290
Would be lolworthy if that was Frenchfag's waifu
>>30397438
Maybe. Would be great to have his thoughts regarding this.
>>30397445
Indeed.
>>30397411
4U
>>30397166
>>30393933
Sorry man, I don't know much about the 10P, save that it's freaking tiny and that its engine is underpowered. They struggled to follow the Leclercs, in Lebannon, whenever there was a hill to climb.
Right now only the OPFOR keeps using it.
>>30394101
The VBCI is not an APC but an IFV. (which, btw, is literally what VBCI means because there is no spark of life left inside the hearts of Nexter's engineers).
The usual difference between APC and IFV is the armament, above 20 mm = IFV.
>>30397159
>>30397166
I think that's the kind of girl every geologist dreams about, what with the many, many layers of plaster she uses to conceal her true visage.
So no, don't know her and alas, I'm very faithful so no drink.
>>30397445
>>30397456
Nah I actually have good taste. But you're both right, it'd be laughable.
>>30397229
The US wanted a platform with some firepower and utility even with troops in transit, hence the firing ports and tiny port rifles, same goes for the Marder.
The Bongs and Frogs concentrated more on the whole battletaxi system, albeit with added lethality due to the IFV's armament, but used only after the primary mission which was ferrying troops and then getting to a safe or safe-ish range to support.
>>30397179
>her
>she
looks more like a feminie penis
>>30397643
>I think that's the kind of girl every geologist dreams about, what with the many, many layers of plaster she uses to conceal her true visage.
>Nah I actually have good taste. But you're both right, it'd be laughable.
Fucking savage based Frenchfag
>>30397643
>I think that's the kind of girl every geologist dreams about, what with the many, many layers of plaster she uses to conceal her true visage.
So no, don't know her and alas, I'm very faithful so no drink.
LOL!
I got a degree in geoscience and I can tell you she's as intesting as a Holocène deposit...
>>30393928
>AMX-10P
Hey OP the AMX-10P is a total mystery, exactly what it can do and not do is unkown judging by what is seen and the age in when its been developed, it most likley is similair to the m113
>>30397290
>>30397353
>>30397421
>>30397456
>>30397713
Sovngard, maintenant Darklabor... En fait y a tout AD.net sur /k/
>>30397742
Serge? Is that you? xD
>>30397660
>this image name
>>30397730
more like, BMP 2 I'd say.
>>30393928
>AMX10P thread
Nice.
>>30397421
>>30397438
I don't know of any specific incidents, but female instructors in Shizafon have a habit of taking a "last picture" with the tanks before they are discharged. Alot of the tanks in Shizafon are there for rank B and C maintenance with their armor modules and whatnot taken off. So it makes sense some instructors took pictures with these tanks and shared them on Facebook/Instagram.
>>30397861
Thanks Merkgunner!
>>30397643
Merci pour le top bantz,you keep the patrie safe.
>>30397915
Bantz ?
>>30397411
>>30397742
Sovngard had been treated as a namefag and never came back.
>>30397643
>which, btw, is literally what VBCI means because there is no spark of life left inside the hearts of Nexter's engineers
You don´t like nexter, do you?
Why did they name this wheeled vehicle the AMX-10RC, why didn´t they just name it something different like the AMX-12 or something.
Its like a completely different vehicle and the name is almost the same.
>>30398056
Well it still has commonality with the 10P in its automotive components.
>>30398056
Because the AMX 10 is a familly of vehicles.
This familly was split into two hull variants, both hulls were using common parts.
>>30398087
>>30398076
Ahhh ok thanks I assumed they were completely different.
>>30394081
It's my favorite too. If I ever have stupid money to throw around, it's the one tank I want to buy if I could find one in South America or some shit. I'd dress up like the Frenchman Garham Chapman played in MP and the Holy Grail, and act like a French stereotype.
>dreams that will never come true
>>30398047
From a lifetime of abuse by the tyre committee
>>30398380
True.
Don't you guys have the feeling that Nexter is no longer innovating as Giat Industries used to?
Vextra being the last innovation driven concept.
Nowadays we only see integration of off the shelf tech.
>>30398460
Cheaper to use already available equipment and tech. Why to "invent the wheel again" Nexter engineers might ask from each other. Cheap R&D directly makes the vehicle cheaper and therefore better looking for politicians
>>30398571
Yeah...
Why reinventing the wheel when we can do something new.
As such, XP1, XP2 and XP3 fail in that regard.
At the same time, I don't think the products are really cheap. It becomes cheap if and only if there are a decent number ordered. R&D costs are spread to a larger number of units.
>>30398003
When did he ever post here under that name?
>>30397254
I demand a story.
>>30398460
You also have to realise that Giat had about 15000 employees in the 90's. Nowadays Nexter barely has more than 3000.
Everything kind of suffers as a result
>>30398705
Yes. The former workers and employees still live this as the greatest betrayal. To them their workshop/arsenal/etc was their family (hell, some whole families where working!).
>>30398056
FYI "RC" stands for "Roues Canon" or "Wheels Gun".
>>30398162
Brain fart, John Clease was the frenchman
>>30398762
Yet, something tells me that it's not the case.
At the time the marketing was emphasizing on "Reconnaissance" & "Combat".
When I asked to those who were involved in testing the prototype, they said "Roues-Canon".
Till this day, it's still not clear.
One thing is sure ERC 90 doesn't stands for "Engin Roues Canon" it stands for "Engin de Reconnaissance à Canon de 90mm".
>>30396100
>is the HIMARS pretty different to the BM-21
The HiMARS only carries one MLRS-type rack (as a lighter alternative to the heftier M270), so really it only fires 6 MLRS or 1 ATACMS.
On the other hand, those missiles are usually guided, so they're a lot more accurate than the BM-21 spamming its payload.
1995, Chechnya
>Rumors are going around about pretty good results of field tests of T-14. Vehicle does not suffer much of technical problems, electronics works pretty well overall. Turret tin cover did not survived tests, though.
>APS also were tested. There was simulated launch of 2 missiles (Shturms with no explosives), managed to intercept both.
>>30399651
>Turret tin cover
what is that?
>>30399717
The "RCS/thermal reducing" shell over the actual turret.
I think a lot of people don't expect it to remain on the in-service version of the T-14.
>>30398829
HIMARS and other MLRS are accurate fuck that thing particularly weapons and RM-70s and BM-21s fuck everything in that area weapons. Different roles for different weapons.
>>30399651
So these results would be deemed satisfactory then? Nobody can really say they are surprised that certain things did not perform well in tests and will probably be fixed/removed like field tests with most vehicles usually go.
>>30399717
this is the turret without the tin cover
>>30399651
got any sauce?
>>30399757
they should replace those with reactive armor module
>>30399769
seeing that they have more than 10 vehicle already
i think those test result are national level test
more test have been done before 2015 V day
>>30399798
>they should replace those with reactive armor module
Why would you do that?
The whole point of the unmanned turret is to focus all the armour in the hull, for the crew.
The turret itself is sacrificial .
>>30399913
>The turret itself is sacrificial .
>so it doesn't need any armor
to protect all the expensive equipment
tank turret get hit the most because it is the highest part of the tank
increasing armor on the turret would also increasing combat survival ability
Tanks are gay lol.
>>30399999
Pents don't lie
>>30399999
>>30399999
>>30399999
>>30399999
>>30399999
Waste of quints
>>30399994
So you prefer passive/reactive protection over the mobility and the hard kill protection, interesting...
>>30399999
THE PENTS HAVE SPOKEN
>>30399999
>Tanks are gay
actually MBT are male and heavy IFV are female
so that make BMPT gay
>>30400045
>over the mobility and the hard kill protection, interesting
NERA are light and T-14 have a small turret, so the modules wouldn't take much weigh, no more than a tons
and you cann't trust APS, more matter soft or hard kill
Aleppo show that those system have a short operation life
>>30400076
The problem is that you can't protect reliably some components such as optics. Simply because, they need to have a cleared LOS in order to work.
So basically you will always have holes in your plating/armour.
>>30400097
sure, you cann't protect the objective lens, but they are replaceable, can be done by the crew
thing like the part of the optic under the armor, auto loader, and fuck tons of wire are not that easy to replace
>So basically you will always have holes in your plating/armour.
still better than no armour at all
>>30400153
>can be done by the crew
This is beyond crew assignment. Such task is performed by maintenance team.
But keep in mind that a damaged optical device will not be limited to the lens. Depending on the way the sub system is designed you will have mirrors, motors for the stabilisation of the LOS, accelerometers, thermal imager.
>>30400153
>mounting explosives to sensitive electronics is a good idea
>soldiers can swap thermal sights in the field
>armor above HMG protection is small and light if you use NERA
wew
>>30400270
>mounting explosives to sensitive electronics is a good idea
so use something that doesn't contain explosives
>soldiers can swap thermal sights in the field
nobody talking about the whole sight
>armor above HMG protection is small and light if you use NERA
who are you quote this?
>>30400379
>so use something that doesn't contain explosives
I misunderstood your original post.
>nobody talking about the whole sight
You are not going to open up sensitive optics/electronics in the field.
>who are you quote this?
>NERA are light and T-14 have a small turret, so the modules wouldn't take much weigh, no more than a tons
>Strong Europe 2016
According to this the Slovenian team performed the best at tank recovery under NBC conditions and rapid fire gunnery (20 shots on multiple targets as fast as possible with penalties for misses).
>>30400379
>nobody talking about the whole sight
Yeah... It's clearly simplier to swap the damaged lens, refill in nitrogen the sight and check the optical conformity, then boresight than swapping sights and do a boresighting...
>>30400494
>rapid fire gunnery
reckon thats got anything to do with the autloader or are they just able to aim and hit the targets fast and accurately?
>>30400538
Consider how many ready rounds a Leopard 2, M1A2 and M-84 have.
>>30400045
your APS meme tech isn't 100% fool proof. Particularly when a solid designed armor is capable of defeating most threats in all conditions, and doesn't require power.
>>30400593
>Particularly when a solid designed armor is capable of defeating most threats in all conditions
Setting aside that the armor in question only covers the frontal of a tank.
>>30400482
any NERA is lighter than heavy ERA like Kontakt-5
and the whole Kontakt-5 package only weight 3 tons
and we are talking about T-14 tiny turret
>>30400494
Leopard 2 crew bring a lens with them for emergency repair, don't they?
and i am pretty sure Soviet TPD-K1 can be repair in the field if the sight aperture are damage, the crew bring a second aperture with them
pic related is the night sight 1K13-49
this one is much more complex with day and night channel and guidance system for the ATGM, it can not be replace on the field but are protected by two layer of thick RHA and a ballistic shutter
>>30400593
The typical "Conventional tanks are great why change?"
>>30400593
implying APS cann't kill APFSDS
>>30400611
>Setting aside
Setting aside that side armor on modern composite gen 2+ armored tanks will defeat the vast majority of chemical penetrators and anything short of a direct hit from an APFSDS, my point still stands that passive armor is ahead of anything the active protection market can defend against, short of top down attack missiles.
>>30400672
The typical "muh motherland plateu'd on armor development so I moved the goal post to exaggerate muh tanks protection ability"
Sorry, APS is a joke. It has its benefits, but if it was so effective we'd see it more often. Maybe in 15 years your argument will be relevant.
>>30400687
>3 x 45 cm broom stick flying at 2km per second
>yea we can stop that
You're an idiot, go back to RT news.
>>30400687
speaking of stuff to kill APFSDS, does ERA have any effect on them?
>>30400687
if it said it could defeat something flying at 20,000 m/s you would believe that too.
>>30400746
No, In the case of kontac-5 the M829A3 (read, the current best silver bullet KEP on the planet in service) added a 2 inch metal segmented penetrator onto the front, specifically to detonate the ERA so the main penetrator can burrow through the actual armor.
>>30400771
Well, I meant in general, not in this particular case.
>>30400664
>Soviet TPD-K1 can be repair in the field
Realize you are comparing a relatively simple day sight to thermal sights.
>>30400728
APS are a real thing it is just not as effective regarding KE projectiles.
In a tank with unmanned turret, the turret is considered as sacrificial. The whole armour is around the crew compartment. The rest is just the tank's structure which is supposed to protect against the "noise" of the battlefield (and by noise, I mean small caliber, spalls and whatnot...)
APS in this case are a great solution against ATGMs and RPGs.
KE aggression is supposed to pierce anyway APS or not... Even if the APS manage to fragment the penetrator, the KE of the debrits are enough to pierce.
Having an unmanned turret is a technical choice to limit the overall weight of the vehicle while giving the crew enough protection to withstand direct hit to the survival cell. Anything other than this cell is just sacrificial; the only crucial thing is the crew. It is a choice.
If you begin to put armour on low priority parts, you impact the mobility (and mobility is one key element of the "not being hit" factor of any AFV survivability).
>>30400728
>APS is a joke. It has its benefits, but if it was so effective we'd see it more often
APS is pretty common, you are focusing on hard kill systems.
Hard kill is only starting to come into use because most tanks do not have the spare electricity generation needed without upgrades, which adds to the high cost of such systems.
>>30400743
You don't have to stop it, just making it yaw is enough.
>>30400743
>You're an idiot, go back to RT news.
fuck off
>>30400746
yes, Kontakt-5 can stop M829A1, but stuff like M829A3 and DM53 defeated Kontakt-5 with pic related
but keep in mind that Kontakt-5 is a backwards moving plate system
>>30400757
western APFSDS muzzle velocity is much lower than that and they are keep decreasing the muzzle velocity
but did they really claimed that it can defeat 20 000m/s projectile? did not pat attetion to Armata thread on /k/
>>30400886
forgot the pic
>>30400881
>yaw is enough
It actually isn't. With the forward momentum and how they pierce armor it can still penetrate. If you got it enough to glance, then good on you. But you're talking extreme angles.
Dealing with the radar detection, processing unit, then the actual launcher, and the round itself there is serious lag trying to hit something flying at 13-1600 meters per second. Reminder a lot of ATGMs fly between 400-800.
>>30400886
>much lower
>25% lower
They still claimed it can defeat something flying 2000 m/s. Thats a huge fucking leap from p2 of this post >>30400911
>>30400787
Yes, heavy ERA like Kontakt-5, Relikt and Nozh work on APFSDS in general.
>>30400911
>It actually isn't. With the forward momentum and how they pierce armor it can still penetrate. If you got it enough to glance, then good on you. But you're talking extreme angles.
Do you not understand what yaw means? A penetrator that is perpendicular to its direction of travel is not equivalent to hitting sloped armor.
>>30400978
>perpendicular
This is why you are retarded
>>30400728
>Setting aside that side armor on modern composite gen 2+ armored tanks will defeat the vast majority of chemical penetrators
The side armor on the vast majority of gen 2+ armored tanks is not composite, nor capable of withstanding the now commonplace ATGM's like TOW and Kornet (let alone newer top attack missiles like Javelin and Spike).
>>30401001
Instead of jumping to ad hominem try explaining why a penetrator that suffered a heavy amount of yaw (or pitch if you prefer) has not lost most of its penetrative capability.
>>30400728
>Setting aside that side armor on modern composite gen 2+ armored tanks will defeat the vast majority of chemical penetrators and anything short of a direct hit from an APFSDS, my point still stands that passive armor is ahead of anything the active protection market can defend against, short of top down attack missiles.
Simple RPG-18 can penetrate the dinky side armor of abrams you fool.
>Sorry, APS is a joke
Nah, only morons like you and abrams designers rely on one tier of protection.
>>30401577
An RPG-18 is not enough unless you are talking an ass shot.
>>30400728
On the Abrams at least, composite packages cover only the frontal side skirts, with the rest of the side armor being more conventional.
>>30400818
That is a good reasoning. Well trained crews are expensive to lose while vehicles are something that can be replaced "easily"
>>30402401
>>30401577
>>30401046
The side armor of the SEP V2 contains composite and DU mesh. Using shaped charges on modern tanks is tantamount to tickling jimmies. Anything under 1000mm or RHA penetration the Abrams is going to laugh at it. Modern armor is 25%+ more effective at stopping these kinds of munitions then standard APFSDS. On the frontal arc you're just never going to penetrate when the resistance is rumored to be 1600-2000mm RHA, its pure speculation as the numbers are classified. So basically, all these examples of Abrams getting BTFO in Saudi Arabia and Iraq just plain wouldn't happen without a direct turret ring hit, or something in the lower hull/engine/bustle catching on fire. In most of these situations, the crew just walks away from it anyway.
TLDR your RPG 18/29 aint going to do shit outside of what an RPG 7 can do.
>>30402835
>The side armor of the SEP V2 contains composite and DU mesh.
hmm
>>30402835
>Being this buttmad and had to resort ti full on Damage control mode .lol
Lithuania's unique Boxer variant.
>>30403153
>>30403185
Your point being? How is he wrong?
>>30403280
>>30403297
>>30403153
>the side armor of the SEP V2 contains composite and DU mesh
>posts the side of the tank
>not the add-on armor package
hmm
>>30403284
>DU side armor
>25%
>SEPv2's can take an ATGM to the turret rear unlike Saudi Abrams
>>30403280
ohh so they already got some delivered ?
more info on that turret ?
>>30403321
feel free to post a picture of the "add-on armor package"
>>30403336
Samson Mk II with the 30mm Bushmaster.
>>30403339
Are you saying that the protection of the Abrams on the side is just the bare steel without an addon? Because that's just stupid.
>>30403969
The tracks and skirts combined with the hull give it decent protection from HEAT but yeah, its all steel.
>>30403969
The hull sides are just steel, which is the norm. What is stupid is thinking tanks have thick composite armor on all sides.
>>30404020
>>30404130
No I know it's bare steel, but what I was saying was that wouldn't Engie's stats be correct with the addons?
>>30404193
What add ons?
>>30404203
The new composite packages he was talking about, which >>30403339 was demanding a picture of
>>30404222
They don't exist.
>>30401001
5 degrees yaw cuts penetration in half
They use this segmented penetrators now, which are even more vulnerable to APS
>>30400818
>the KE of the debrits are enough to pierce.
Pierce some sheet metal? Sure
Pierce the side armor of an MBT? Probably not
>>30404130
oly pic i have but the first one,two or three skirt plates are some kind of fucked if i know composite, the rest are steel
>>30402835
>>30403969
>>30404130
>>30405316
I'm just going to repeat what I said earlier, which is that the only composite on the side armor of the Abrams is on the frontmost part and not the majority of the side which is mostly a steel mesh.
>>30400664
>T-72 secondary sight unit.gif
thats a T-55A senpai
>>30404627
Only true for typical impact velocities ~1500-1600 m/s. Hitting much faster than that and the penetration channel becomes wider, allowing a yawed penetrator some more room before part of it not inline to the direction of penetration snags on the channel walls and erosion products.
>>30403969
That's exactly what it is - steel. More than 50 years later and Americans are still pinching designs from their German betters. Hilarious that it took you that much time to catch up with a schurzen of your own.
>>30405576
>only composite on the side armor of the Abrams is on the frontmost part
This is simply not true, for obvious reasons. Look at Leclerc and late model Leopard 2s, the frontal thirds of the skirts are noticeably thicker and they indeed house composites inside. The Abrams skirts are simply 2" give or take- not enough.
>>30406240
Schurzen was thin sheets of metal meant to cause anti tank rifle fire to keyhole, later versions of it were simply a mesh. Trying to compare it to armored skirts or spaced armor is laughable at best.
>>30406441
>Schurzen
>armored skirts
>spaced armor
>mfw
>>30406365
>Look at Leclerc and late model Leopard 2s, the frontal thirds of the skirts are noticeably thicker and they indeed house composites inside
Perhaps if you are talking about the recent urban combat kits, because neither have what you are talking about 'in service' currently.
what are some good reliable tank websites to use?
>>30406462
>mfw someone doesn't know what schurzen was for
>>30406514
>Perhaps if you are talking about the recent urban combat kits, because neither have what you are talking about 'in service' currently.
says this while posting a Leclerc in standard configuration.
>>30406584
Correct, note the steel plates in the frontal thirds of the skirt.
>>30406600
>Correct, note the steel plates in the frontal thirds of the skirt.
Yeah, because we have to take your word for it.
Just the fact that each self-contained unit has 3 visible layers of steel-air-steel(different hardness likely) means its technically a composite.
>>30406745
That would make it spaced, not composite.
>>30406745
>because we have to take your word for it
>irony intensifies
And mfw you had no idea what the panels consisted of.
>>30404649
I was only refering to the case of the Armata.
>Pierce the side armor of an MBT? Probably not
It all depends on the MBT and where. Take the Leopard 2's turret bustle and you'll most likely have penetration.
>>30406514
He actually is right. There is composite in the armoured skirts (what we call pre-armour).
Nothing fancy in terms of thickness or angleing... (as you can see in your picture)
Recent urban combat kits add to the pre-armour (which was a UAE decision for total security)
>>30406600
steel plates but not only.
>>30406822
Spaced armor is technically composite.
A composite is just something made up of multiple parts.
>>30406904
and compositions.
>>30406864
>steel plates but not only.
AFAIK they have rubber inserts as well.
>>30406922
In the pre-armour or the armour modules in the hull and turret?
>>30406929
In pre-armor and the turret array as well. Give the hard layers some rebounding effect.
>>30406945
*and hull.
In any case the modular design just means they can replace them with armor closer to what we know of composites, the steel and ceramic layered ones. And that's what they are doing with the new Leclerc versions.
>>30406945
Well, on pre-armour, there is no rubber.
If you have a chance to see a Leclerc, you'll see that the composite is directly on the steel.
>>30406522
Only Jane's Information Group and official government and company releases are 100% or at least more reliable than all the other sources. For everything else, you need books. Although Army Guide and Globalsecurity are Ok-ish with some backup.
>>30406974
Could be that they changed them for the latter series vehicles. The Series 1 that had them are mostly in storage afaik.
>>30407063
When I checked on a MARS (a T3 converted into a towing vehicle), I didn't see rubber neither.
S1 are nearly all into pieces by now.
>>30406904
Spaced is literally what it sounds like, a cavity existing between two surfaces.
Composite, in the armor plated sense, involves multiple layers of materials.
This distinction is pretty significant to make.
>>30407321
>two surfaces.
>involves multiple layers of materials.
>This distinction is pretty significant to make.
>>30407341
Composite might be made up of different materials, but spaced just means there's a gap.
>>30393928
Is it allowed to wear a Kepi inside a tank?
>>30407401
Parade purposes
>>30407481
Ah. I imagine the Kepi itself must be out of fashion for combat ops by now.
>>30393928
Why don't you watch the Chieftain's hatch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKKktWu6Rh0
>>30397969
Banter
>>30403336
This is the prototype and the they haven't signed the contract for procurement yet
>>30407619
We all do anon, it's great.
(Also I'm pretty sure Chieftain is /thg/ guy)
Recently went on a trip tocthe museum "Arsenalen" in Sweden, looking for tanks to burrow for my hometowns local military event. Got into some non-pubic garages and found a few rare tanks. Can post pics if anyone is interested.
>>30408137
Stridsvagn 103.
Could be fun to have one.
>>30408228
There was tons of them in storage, found a radio-controlled one and what might be the one from the napalm tests (pic related). Also found one of the test platforms for what became strv 103, kranvagnen, swedens heavy tank project.
>>30408247
Nice!
>>30408247
I saw one of those at Saumur, neat thing.
Eh, this thread seems a bit slow, might as well post the most interesting ones i found. Starting with the UDES XX20
Closeup between the two hulls, it was hard to get any good pictures. The place was pretty cramped with stuff.
IKV prototype, i think there was something new with the optics on the turret
>>30408325
Also Shermans, forgot about them. Here is Kranvagnen KRV.
>>30408306
>>30408316
>>30408325
Wow!
Just! Thank you so much Anon!
I recently read a series of books that introduce student engineers to AFV development and some concepts such as the UDES 19 and UDES 20 were shown (also the STRV S for its uniqueness).
And I can tell you, it's actually neat to have detailed views of such tech demonstrators.
Really old Swedish tank, can't remember the designation.
>>30408358
Thanks man, finding these tanks was like meeting legends for me. Fun to se more people interested in them.
Pic taken into the drivers hatch of the KRV.
This pic is really shit, even worse than the others. Ithe the tracks of the KRV, you can barely see it, but the first and last pair of wheels have been removed during the KRVs time as a test platform for strv 103
Here is a stug, one of the last of it's kind if i remember. It's to be renovated and brought to the event in my hometown.
Tamiya, one of the many companies who make plastic scale models etc, had over 1000 pictures taken of this tank to produce their own model of it.
Drivers hatch
>>30408400
You know, I never understood- why did super-flat pancake-style armor ever fall out of vogue? You don't see too many modern examples.
Further back into the drivers hatch
Another prototype, no idea what they were testing on it though.
>>30408363
Stridsvagn m/31.
>>30408369
It's actually interesting to see swedish concepts because, they dare and explore at the same time.
In addition, I find extremely interesting to see engineers exchange and take inspiration from each others.
By example I heard that Sven Berge used the data gathered during the evaluation of the prototype AMX 13 in Sweden to draw the specs of the STRV 103. He actually took the step further away to optimise the tank to hull down positions by installing the gun into the hull.
Artillery traktor
KP bilen
Swedens first tank, m/21, being restored to working condition. Also to me moved to my hometown for exhibition during the event, as we celebrate the tank 100 years.
m/21 turret. notice the armor around the main gun. as well as making sure the gun is protected it looks a bit like a tophat.
m/21 engine.
Can't remember the name of this one as well.
>>30408545
IKV 102 or 103.
Post-war willys jeep.
Kinda run out of interesting photos now, i have some different angles on the stug (two inside as well) and KRV if anyone wants em. Other stuff i found, but didn't photograph for whatever reason was:
a post-war Hetzer
a Comet
the radio-controlled strv 102
strv 90 recovery vehicle prototype
>>30408568
Correction, i meant radio controlled strv 103.
inside of m/31 turret as last pic.
>>30408574
Again, thank you so much!
Here a photo of the STRV 103 baptised in 1984 "Consul General Nordling". The tank was a gift from Sweden after several visits of Sven Berge at the CDEB (military entity behind the tank museum).
>>30408450
Its an early variant of the Strf 9040. Note the different lights and the dummy gun
>>30408568
>a strv 90 recovery vehicle prototype
Do you mean Strf 90 aka Bgbv 90?
>>30408751
Strf 90, i think, we just passed it by on our way out of a garage. I remember it having a bulge on its engine compartment.
>>30409078
I think i found it.
>>30409102
yep, thats a bgbv90.
>>30408358
you can actually find declassified analysis of S-tanks, leopards (1 and 2), T-72s, T-80s, M1 abrams, Leclerc and a few british tanks made by swedish army officers and engineers for evaluation purposes (with on-hand experience). They're pretty neat.
>>30409135
Link please
Just finished up at Tankfest in Bovington, grand time.
>>30409102
>>30409119
Infact that bulge has nothing to do with it being a Bgbv 90. During the trials of the Scania engine/Perkins gearbox more space was needed and hence the bulge.
>>30409135
I would love to read those analysis.
Especially the one regarding the Leclerc.
There is an actual controversy over here regarding how the tests were conducted.
>>30409135
link for the Leo 2, m8?
>>30409157
http://tanks.mod16.org/2015/04/02/report-from-british-strv-103-trials-at-the-baor-1973/
http://tanks.mod16.org/pdf/T-80%20rapport.pdf
(http://www.ointres.se/ryska_strf_till_sverige.htm )
I remember reading one about Leo2, Abrams and the leclerc as well, though i cant find it anymore.
>>30403280
>>30403297
>>30403308
Is it me or is Under the Turret Ring super biased towards German gear?
>>30409239
Well, the tank wasn't done during the trial, and it was the weakest tank of the three tested.
>>30409291
Oh, those articles. Yes he's got one on the testing somewhere. I think he said he Abrams lost partly because the Americans weren't willing to sell the best armor.
>>30409534
Wasn't just that; since DU armor was out of the question, the only other alternative would be the regular M1 armor which they concluded wasn't very good at all.
>>30409534
>>30409581
Leopard 2 beat it during the tests too.
>>30409419
Yeah, this is part of the truth.
Employees and workers agree on the fact that the two pre-series tanks sent there were not rugged enough to take part into a tank competition.
At the time, the engine wasn't at it's final stage. There was a lot of computerised protection in order to protect the engin (some sensors detecting fillings in the oil of the engine that were triggering for no reason ; those never made it to the mass product...) and there was serious problem with air pressure of the gas turbine, that resulted in surging.
One thing to keep in mind with the 6914-0178 (swedish plate : 204990) and 6914-0222 (204991) is that they were built in the mid 1991 (their purpose was to set the actual assembly line and define quality tests. They were sent not long after to the AMX/APX workshop for proper activation. Not long after they were sent to UAE for desertic tests (tanks travelled back and forth, by their own means, from Al hamra to the rocky border with Oman) and hands-on presentation to UAE militaries.
As soon as they returned from the UAE trials, they were shipped to Sweden.
But one part that strike me the most is that the former president of Giat Industries wrote his memoires and during the part dealing with the swedish tank trials he claimed that the trials were biased and sabotage was done. At the time the pre-series tanks were fitted with testing suspension with pressure sensors. And the values measured after an incident were out of range compared to those measured with french army technical section (whose crews are reputed to be harsh with the hardware).
When I asked a friend of mine, who took part to the trials, if it was sabotage or anything. He just replied to me that strangefully it was the only tank that shake off the support car (with constructor's technicians on board). He just showed me pics of the night following the incident with the tank's hull being restored (the suspension held on but the attach points suffered from the incident).
>>30409603
I think that a sabotage is a very unlikely scenario; sounds a lot more like french arms industry shenanigans. They have a really bad reputation since at least mid 90s and 2000s (which is really hurting french industry).
>>30409599
KMW has a habit of bribing customers too.
>>30409749
I don't give a shit. The abrams has twice the fuel consumption as the Leo 2A5.
>>30409773
Setting aside that is incorrect and does not account for usage.
>>30409715
I know.
It's just that I smell something fishy.
The suspensions spheres were put to pressures up to 1400 bars (french army and UAE armed forces only managed to go up to 900 bars) Above all, it is the only occasion during the lifetime of the Leclerc where the hull has been damaged by mobility constraints (there is an actual french tank that fell 4-5m into an old Magino line ditch but the damages were all focused on the turret...).
Marc Chassillan claimed that the french offer was more than competitive because, they were offering a production under license with any modifications required by the customer ; just like the UAE contract, the price was locked no matter what happenned to the french order.
Up to this date, I haven't been able to assess what actually hapenned to 204991...
>>30409794
Not him, but according to the swedish trials; Leo2 drank 72 liter/10km and the Abrams average was 148 liters per 10km.
>>30409794
Distance traveled: Leo 2A5 3730km M1A2 3800km
Fuel used: Leo: 2A5 26.874 liters M1A2: 56.488 liters
Consumption: Leo 2A5: 72 liters/10km M1A2: 148 liters/10 km
http://www.ointres.se/projekt_stridsvagn_ny.htm
>>30409825
Interesting link.
I wish google trad was more efficient...
>>30409825
For shits and giggles I did some math based on KMW and GD official numbers.
A Leopard 2A5's cruising range is 450km, meaning to go 3730km they went through 8.29 full tanks of fuel. At a 1200 liter fuel capacity that makes 9946 liters of fuel for driving.
A M1A2's cruising range is 426km, meaning to go 3800km they went through 8.92 full tanks of fuel. At a 1900 liter fuel capacity that makes 16948 liters of fuel for driving.
So its 2.67 liters/km vs 4.46 liters/km, which is a liter less than twice the consumption.
>>30394870
Maybe it's my age, but in my day the "instant chat function" was called a PRC-77.
>>30409812
It was a WW1 fort actually, near Verdun.
>>30409993
Actually, since the m1 used 56.488 liters to travel 3800km with a fuel tank of 1900 liters, it used ~30 tanks worth of fuel.
>>30410235
Au terrain de la chaume?
>>30410264
Correct
>>30410256
Both the Leo2 and Abrams used substantially more fuel to drive the stated distances than what was required based on manufacturer specs. That means the tanks spent a lot of time with the engines on while not moving.
>>30410313
D'accord...
Je suis prêt à parier que c'est la partie Nord-Ouest du terrain... :/
>>30410323
Or, more likely, that they drove in terrain, forced obstacles and other high-rpm activities. Travelling on a flat road is very different from driving through the sallad.
Its very likely that official specs are either theoretical or under extremely optimised circumstances. Plus, were talking an early model m1 without the recent engine improvements.
>>30400153
>but they are replaceable, can be done by the crew
This is idiotic in the extreme.
>>30407368
>Composite might be made up of different materials, but spaced just means there's a gap.
Air is a different material. Spaced armor is a simple composite, but it's still a composite.
The gap exists to amplify the effectiveness of the armor when compared with one solid piece of homogeneous armor (the opposite of a composite).
>>30411073
>Air is a different material. Spaced armor is a simple composite, but it's still a composite.
What the fuck is this idiot talking about?
>>30411115
If you click the red hyperlink you can read the post he's replying to, newfriend
>>30410612
or you are just too retard to read the thread
