Re: MBT's
 

Not just different languages but comm gear that can't talk to each other. This has been a serious on-going issue when US service branches need to talk to each other. Due to the close cooperation the USMC has with it's own air assets and the US Navy we can all communicate with each other (A USMC platoon commander, and often squad leader, can talk to aircraft, artillery, and ships). The US Army frequently can't talk to the US Air Farce except via their USAF air controller and his one, one, radio.

Re: MBT's
 

Email always seemed to work, till certain folks started reading more into those. However, you are right, for all the wonderment we do need to fix that issue of communication, the networks SHOULD be able to merge and talk at all levels.

Re: MBT's
 

Pretty much what I thought. Send email how several armies have shown the capability to track mobile phones now & send artillery that way very rapidly.

Re: MBT's
 

You need only to go back a 3-4 years or more and ask how that worked out for the Ukrainians. It didn't, as Russian COMINT and SIGINT systems compromised a cell phone app that was developed by a Ukrainian Artillery Officer. It ended up on You Tube and that's all the Russians needed. There were many bad days for Ukrainian artillery being counter-batterie in a couple of instances before even firing a shot, before they figured out they were hacked.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russian...p-compromised/
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...s-phones.shtml
https://www.voanews.com/europe/sinis...nt-ukraine-war
https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/ar...n-cyber-io-and
https://www.ausa.org/articles/russia...tronic-warfare

Here's some tank news to go with the thread from Australia concerning their ABRAMS...
https://armynews.partica.online/army...ing-our-armour

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Sorry for straying off topic & hijacking your post Pat as ever though you come through.

Re: MBT's
 

John,
No need sir!?!

But the Ukraine situation provided both a current combat situation as well within time. Just felt the need to wrap it up with pertinent data in regards to the posts.

You have a great weekend!! As always, I value your thoughts and insights.

Lunch/Shower and Work!

Everyone have a wonderful weekend!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Yes, there is a serious downside to everyone using the same system and codes if the other side knows what they are.

Re: MBT's
 

Agreed, but different branches of an armed force SHOULD (yes, there's that word, very bad word) be able to talk to each other on all levels of Command and Control, but more importantly at the tactical level that all deal with.

High tech doesn't mean much when you can't get your point across and wonder why your supply depot is fighting off two companies of enemy infantry and your sector is quiet.

Re: MBT's
 

Seems that Brits are keeping their armor:

https://www.tankroar.com/2020/10/16/british-army/

Re: MBT's
 

Yes but at a cost. The UK currently operates 227 CHALLENGER 2 tanks. All were planned to have been upgraded to the CHALLENGER 3 now that the Defense Review has been completed only 150 will be upgraded. Local papers are suggesting the remaining 77 are to be scrapped, which I believe would both a tactical and longer term a strategic error to do so.

I've already detailed a CHALLENGER 3 model. This tank will mark a significant change in the MG from previous decades by mounting a 120mmSB L/55 (This might change.).
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/brit...-148-from-227/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-...le-tank-fleet/

WARRIOR CSP is dead. Current WARRIOR will be around until games end which should coincide with RL replacement by the BOXER which is on track for IOC AGAIN IOC in 2025 under an accelerated program.

This will now cause a game issue, I looked further into one our WARRIORs 2-3 years ago and found it never got past the prototype stage. I didn't bring it up due to the WARRIOR CSP getting "kicked around" at the time. I'll be putting it up for deletion in next years patch based on this new information.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/warr...ng-in-service/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-l...tion-of-boxer/

The tendency of industry with a weapons procurement program that's facing review at "the highest level", is to slow investment and development (i.e. the WARRIOR CSP costs already incurred from above ref. of 430 Million Pounds. Which now is a loss.).

My point is, CHALLENGER 3 and AJAX will be affected by delays further due to COVID, this Defense Review (And it's decision to delay the release of the findings by almost 4-5 months.) and the ongoing technical issues with AJAX, as well documented in the threads.

What we need to do is watch and track these programs and not get ahead of ourselves.

I stand by what I said of some of these programs years ago, that it's likely some just won't see the "light of day" or better Full Operational Capability FOC..

HELD THIS UNTIL NOW...
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...-72500-by-2025

I'm on the 5 yard line, I need some sleep to come up with a plan :ghug: to get across the goal line later today to score a TGIF completion. :doh: ;) :p :cool: :shock: NO CHEERLEADERS HOWEVER... :party:

Have a great weekend everyone!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I'm posting this here for widest dissemination because of the current TO&E this article provides as follows for a French SGTIA (tactical combined arms sub-grouping). This UNIT is discussed at the bottom of the article. Now please, I haven't checked this against the OOB as I have important things to take care of after this is posted.

Go to paras above (The big one.) and we know currently a French MBT Platoon is made up of 6 Leclerc tanks, Recon Platoon 8 VBCI IFV and so on as the "puzzle" comes together.

Maybe useful maybe not :dk:, but these type of articles are rare when they discuss TO&E matters.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...n_estonia.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

OMG!, we're getting real close now! A major milestone has just been completed after almost 1.5yrs.

I'll just let you read it, I've got lunch coming before I have to get ready for work.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...st_center.html

After following this for SOooo long, it's good to know we'll see something NEW!

Recommend no change to current timeline.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

One of tanks I thought we see by games from a list (My list.) I posted in here 2-3 years will now be "scratched" from it. I have some notes already developed for submission of this tank, which I'll keep "in the it'll take a miracle now" file, but I'm confident we won't see as the quote from the ref concerning dates uses the words "planned for", I speak of the CHALLENGER 3 the article is dated from today.

The killer quote...
"Full Operating Capability for the tank is planned for 2030, with initial operating capability (IOC mine.) expected by 2027."

The article also gives a little more data on the operational aspects of the CHALLENGER 3 as well. At the current rate of development, this won't be the only tank not to make it by DEC. 2025.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...tems_land.html

Have to get ready for work and get my J&J shot at "high noon" tomorrow. I really hate needles!?! :(

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

A few years down the line but....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HzhqGa2Mac

Re: MBT's
 

Copy unit 63.

Change the following
Speed 33 ( if 60MPH is indeed accurate )
TI/GSR 60
Stabilizer 7
And betting EW = 2
Icon 1998
and you have a Challenger 3

Re: MBT's
 

There's more: First this is who's been contracted to do the work back around 2017/2018, Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land. This should be enough to tell you the MG isn't going to be the same.

The turret will be of a new design and up armored. Also the British will be arming the CHALLENGER 3 with a 120mm SB (Why you new need the "new" turret.) with new loading system.

Also the hull will be receiving a new modular armor system as well, which might be very similar to the one the LEOPARD 2A7V might be getting ;), that I mentioned in my emails to Ralph Zwilling.

Again I will hold onto my model until and if and when things should change,however, don't hold your breath.

That timeline came from MOD.

How long, this long from my files from 2018 to present...
https://www.armyrecognition.com/febr...d_in_2018.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/sept...k_upgrade.html
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/deci...taken-in-2021/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-...edusa-upgrade/
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53909087
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...n_project.html
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...oured-vehicles
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...fence-strategy
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...tems_land.html

Additional reading the UK has it's own Plan 2030...
https://www.gov.uk/government/public...ssible-version
(Chapter 7.)
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-...le-tank-fleet/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/cont...enger-3-tanks/
"The programme will commence in 2021, with an expected in-service date of 2027."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ks-Europe.html
"The army is expected to receive the first tanks by 2027 and the full fleet by 2030." (This falls in line with IOC/FOC Dates.)
https://publications.parliament.uk/p.../659/65907.htm
(This I found to be a very interesting read.) :cool:

It's a done deal from what I can see, I'm not wasting anymore of my time on this.

2027 for either IOC or FOC shouldn't be on anyone's calendar.

I started tracking this as early as 2017 and whenever I posted that list in this thread 2-3 years ago, I thought for sure the CHALLENGER 3 was a shoe in for something possibly as early as 2024 or certainly by mid 2025.

Some people have completely disregarded the economics and the effects that COVID-19 has added to those "stressors" already emplace prior to it in many of the worlds major economies.

You have factor these things into the equation concerning weapons development. Beyond the technical issues encountered, A couple case studies include the Russian ARMATA (The "oil war" with Saudi Arabia last year as one example.) and the shortage of F-35 engines that will curtail operations and development until 2023 (COVID-19 Cited here for this situation.) and finally SADF the BADGER will be submitted for deletion due to economic and corruption reasons and I have plenty of refs to support it. One I submitted a longtime ago in a galaxy far...anyway it's DOA for game purposes now.

I don't deal in fantasies unless I'm watching say "The Game of Thrones" or some such. I invest and take a "world view" of things and therein lays one of the "tenants" of how things get done.

In context to CHALLENGER 3, at one point the whole fleet of CHALLENGER 2 tanks was to be modernized. Then it was reduced somewhat, depending on source, to 200 -250.

And now they'll get only 148 and will scrap 250 CHALLENGER 2 tanks. I understand why they won't sell them, they could remove internal and some external equipment to protect proprietary technical information but, it would be difficult to do the same with the armor and still make the tank affordable to a foreign buyer.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

I would say 60mph is theoretical emergency road use only its more a product of better acceleration which would be very useful.
How are they going to keep the tracks on.

Re: MBT's
 

Nothing I haven't already posted on CHALLENGER 3, EXCEPT, now we know specifically which Rheinmetall MG it'll carry. The MG will the 120mm/L55A1 which is their latest fielded version.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...hbore_gun.html

On tracks:
https://www.treehugger.com/rubber-tr...uieter-4857100
http://www.combatreform.org/bandtracks.htm

It's well documented that the ABRAMS and limited other tanks can get to 60 mph on the road or smooth off road conditions. But as John pointed out, this is more about acceleration then maintained "sustained" speed of advance on the road. This will change and it's almost here now (German LEOPARD 2A7) where "rubber" tracks will allow for sustained "higher speeds" during road ops. The articles above go into more detail on this.

CHALLENGER 2 currently has a 1200hp engine at a top rated speed of 56kmh/34.78mph.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/challenger_2.htm

CHALLENGER 3 will get at least a new 1500hp engine and possibly larger. There are designs for a 1800hp tank engine, of which Turkey for one, tried pursuing for the ALTAY.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Hi DRG

I don't see icon 1998 in the game

Re: MBT's
 

This is what I get when I enter icon1998 picture below.

Re: MBT's
 

That's the one and it's in Icon0005.shp and it's been there since WinSPMBTv1.

Copy the other info and the armour from the Leo A7 and you'll be as close as we can know right now to a Challenger 3

Re: MBT's
 

Ugh Thanks!

I was thinking he meant the LBM file...

Re: MBT's
 

https://www.military.com/daily-news/...stems.html/amp

The Army announced Wednesday that it is planning to divest all of its Stryker Mobile Gun Systems by the end of fiscal 2022.

Seems they are saying bye-bye to Stryker MGS, citing, according to the article, that the gun is obsolete and that the autoloader is not working as designed.

Pros or Cons aside, this was going to happen from day one really. The Stryker was rushed to get to Iraqi, I was part of 3rd Brigade 2nd ID when we went in 03/04 and the vehicle systems were all still going through teething issues.

So we will see what they replace it with or how many new ATGM versions of the Stryker they go with.

Re: MBT's
 

As Kerrigan has pointed out, this is now a done deal. The Stryker Mobile Gun Systems (MGS) will be retired by the end of fiscal year 2022/OCT 2022 at the latest. It was the first USA "tank" to have an auto loader which caused nothing but problems for the army.

It never received the improvements it's other peers did such as the V-Hull and the now standard Double V-Hull. The current gun can't even come close to matching the performance of the newer "high pressure" 105mm guns that are in operation such as Japan's MCV HP 105mm.

It served it's purpose for it's time, but it never achieved it's hoped for full capabilities. So I leave it to the USA for the official announcement...
https://www.army.mil/article/246274/...ile_gun_system
https://www.stripes.com/news/us/army...riant-1.673274
(The propaganda paper.) ;)

This affects UNITS 354/642/682/683 and I believe that's all of them.

Lastly, I remember very early on that I made a compelling "argument" that for "BIG ARMY USA, that having MP units served no real purpose in the game, and for other larger armies in general. I remember as well it was agreed to DELETE them TO OPEN THOSE SLOTS up for all the new equipment we saw coming "down the pike", which both happened.

During the above search however, I came across MP UNITS 106-109 , did we miss these by chance???

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

The problem is they are used in two scenarios ( correction... Three ) and that is probably why they were left alone whenever it was mentioned in the past but I'll look into it

Now removed and scenarios adjusted

Re: MBT's
 

Better do this thing "about" right...
BRAZIL to modernize some of it's tanks. I'm TRACKING this.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ard-1a5br-mbts

Now a little something different again from my world as we all get ready to start that summer "malaise". I have actual copies of the following documents on hand and though they are UNCLASSIFIED I never posted them. However, they are open sourced now, so 3 years+ of my life onboard the USS PROVIDENCE SSN-719, starting in 1986...

Quick facts for 1986...Volunteered from my 2nd boat the the USS JOHN C. CALHOUN SSBN-630G to fill an "urgent" manning request while we were conducting a refueling overhaul in CNSY (Charleston Naval Shipyard, South Carolina)/
Reported onboard 14 Feb. (That's why this was our favorite command.) PROVIDENCE is the Fleets first VLS boat./
Met CINCLANTHOME on 16 Aug. and we were married on 11 Oct. (5 days were all we had. First movie with her and at that time, her kids...ALIEN!/
The week before Christmas (Remember we work on the boat import as well.) I come home from work, ask about her Drs. appt. and she sits me down to tell me she's pregnant. For you young guys out there DO NOT provide the following response "How did happen?!!?", boy was that a mistake!?!
https://www.history.navy.mil/content...v/pdf/1986.pdf

1987 Quick facts LANTSUBASWEX 2-87 was the largest NATO ASW exercise to date and currently as I understand it./I would qualify Submarines on 18 May (Our sons 10th Birthday.)/And would be left import for the only time in my career, to be there for our sons birth on 13 Aug (Tragically we would lose him to a pool drowning in 20 Aug 1989.)
https://www.history.navy.mil/content...v/pdf/1987.pdf
(You can see the actual SINKEX pictures on my profile page if you want.)

Two days after we "out chopped" from the MED, this happened...
https://ww31987.wordpress.com/2019/0...-1987-part-ii/

I give you the rest below...
1988 we stand up and certify the VLS System/
That Dec inspection in PEV started out as a port visit which we were told was cancelled as we were entering port to pick up our "esteemed guests"
https://www.history.navy.mil/content...v/pdf/1988.pdf

Our final year 1989. In my/our time on PROVIDENCE we would be apart 89% of the time. It was our favorite command/We still maintain contact with a handful of couples and crew on the boats FB Page/It represented some of our best times and in this year, our most tragic event we've ever experienced. We are both stronger for it and in Oct. we celebrate our 35th. I would be left in on 5 May with TAD orders to COMSUBDEVRON 12 Ops Dept. until I executed my PCS orders to COMSUMGRU TEN down here with a report date in OCT.
https://www.history.navy.mil/content...v/pdf/1989.pdf
(We were supposed to pull into Portsmouth England in '87 before "chopping" into the Med. however, when LANTSUBASWEX 2-87 was completed the Soviets sent several boats into the area, we responded in kind (Several others lost port calls as well.) while we sat in a box until it was time to enter the Med as we had a special "appointment" to keep. :tough: :dk: ;))

A little something to keep you occupied.

To see how a command can have a positive affect visit the following and search under American subs. That sailor would be me and it would be signed at my retirement in 2002 by my C.O. Captain Terry Tehan Ret. USN (Was promoted when he departed the boat at the Change of Command.) when he attended as my guest speaker (Boy can I tell you some stories about him!! Best C.O. I ever had.)...
http://subart.net/
(In the 'sold out" section bottom.)


Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

an interesting compare/contrast article attached to that...

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...e-c3105-turret

with the recent decision to terminate the Styker MGS

Re: MBT's
 

That's because Big Army tried to save money (TM) by simply using surplus M68 105mm Rifled Guns left over from the M1/M60 programs.

Re: MBT's
 

Thailand has reportedly received the first of it's new VN-16s (Export version ZTD-05 105mm Amphibious Tank)

Jane's a bit back said:

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...uirement_12275

that the procurement was for 3 vehicles, with a second batch of 3 "likely" to come later.

Re: MBT's
 

I *think* this is what we have as the Type 2000 in the Chinese OOB.

??

It had been named ZBD-04 MGS then ZBD-2000 then in 2020 Type 2000. The date fits for the ZBD-05

Re: MBT's
 

This is because Chinese weapons development is confusingly mixed with different signals coming from them at different points in development; with people making up names as they see new prototypes or equipment; and Chinese manufacturers themselves flack marketing names.

The big difference is that unlike in the West, where you can tell that the M60-120S (put Abrams turret on M60 hull) is a private venture, nobody is quite sure who is sponsoring what until it appears in quantity in Peoples Liberation Army service.

Let's go to Chinese Wikipedia:

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZBD-05...88%98%E8%BD%A6

This is where everyone gets the "ZBD-2000" and "Type 2000" stuff from; because that's when the first developmental prototypes appeared, or the initial concept came from.

Production of the first "operational" units began in 2005 era; hence the family's designations:

ZBD-05 Amphibious IFV
ZTD-05 Amphibious Assault Vehicle (aka amphibious light tank)

These designations (ZBD/ZTD/etc) date back to 1987, when the PLA General Staff issued "Regulations on the Naming of Weapons and Equipment of the Armed Forces" 《全军武器装备命名规定》, which changed things from the old "Type XX" series; in which "Type 56" in small arms meant:

Type 56 7.62 mm semi-automatic rifles
Type 56 7.62 mm submachine guns
Type 56 7.62 mm light machine guns

The new 1987-onwards designations are generally revealed only after an item has entered service, because the designations themselves tell you exactly what the item is.

Back to the ZBD-05:

Going to another Chinese Wiki page:

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZTD-05...93%8A%E8%BB%8A

and

So let's review from Chinese Sources we get the timeline as being:

1.) NORINCO based on some prototypes or drawings, in mid-2000 submits a proposal for a modern amphibious vehicle family.

2.) The PLA General Staff approves development of the amphibious vehicle family in December 2003.

3.) The Amphibious vehicle family is type classified and adopted officially by the PLA in 2005.

4.) It doesn't get publicly revealed to the world (officially) until the October 1, 2009 parade.

Re: MBT's
 

In subject of tanks I d'like to add about polish modernisation of old T-72 from storages usually M1 variant

This new tank after rebuilding is called T-72M1R

So what is that. In geostrategical context Poland now need many tanks and fast. That is why army give local industry a green light to modernization of older models usually T-72M1 from storages build in 70s/80s
They are already in use since 2020 by 18th Mechanized Division
https://www.wojsko-polskie.pl/18dz/a...erwsze-strzay/

What was modernised in T-72M1R?

• New Engine W-46-6 573 kW
• New electric installation with accumulators
• manufacturer PCO add new observation devices (PNK-72 Radomka instead of TWNE-4B)
• for commander (POD-72 Liswarta instead TKN-3)
• Periscope PCT-72, with thermovision 3rd generation KLW-1 Asteria for gun crew (instead of TPN-1-49-23).
• New caterpillars and basket in rear of tower for tools.

In case of armour none was added so that is still T-72M1 but with better optics/electronics and reliability and communication.

https://milmag.pl/2021/wp-content/up...pard2pl_01.jpg
https://www.defence24.pl/upload/2021...72M1R19bz2.jpg
https://www.defence24.pl/upload/2021...72M1R19bz6.jpg

Text about this tank https://en.topwar.ru/180612-moderniz...i-t-72m1r.html

A description of future vehicles now considered by Polish Army T-72M1R is also there
https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/10...ge/6/#comments

Re: MBT's
 

https://bydgoszcz.wyborcza.pl/bydgos...Redirects=true

Re: MBT's
 

That's true first time T-72M1R were delivered in December 2019

There also exist T-72R which is older model modernised with the same parts.[ (I'm not certain about this)

https://translate.google.com/transla...kazane-wojsku/


Manufacturer Bumar Łabedy S.A official press note
https://www.bumar.gliwice.pl/news/zm...rly-do-lublina

Here some additional articles
https://translate.google.com/transla...idoczne-zmiany

That's true they are another critical articles that changes are too small. I suppose that this that is fast and dirty modernisation which is result that situation in Europe is deteriorating.

https://translate.google.com/transla...-zbrojeniowki/

https://translate.google.com/transla...jsk-pancernych

Re: MBT's
 

Found this year old article while digging around for a decent photo

https://www.defence24.pl/kto-dostarc...unicje-do-t-72

Re: MBT's
 

That is standard T72M1 without basket on rear turret!

Here is famous basket :) biggest visible mod
https://i.imgur.com/niz9UKh.jpg

Here are photos of T-72M1R from Field deploy
http://www.polska-zbrojna.pl/home/ar...h-czolgow-T72#
https://zbrojni.blob.core.windows.ne...2/Images/76987

Here is official military data about this tank also in English

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--JiaPyksA...20/jlzkVsq.jpg

And nice photos of interiors of T-71M1R with focus on modernised devices they are on photos
https://thedeaddistrict.blogspot.com...lish-army.html

And info with photos about new modernized tanks for army
https://translate.google.com/transla...-ida-do-wojska

In this last article is photo and description that Bumar modernizing also WZT-2 & WZT-3 recovery tanks to standard WZT-2M & WZT3M don't know what is a spectrum of this modernisation but maeaby is similar to this devices which we have in T-72M1R

WZT-3M
https://www.defence24.pl/upload/2021...2o15.31.21.png

Re: MBT's
 

Found also data about optoelectronics devices from
PCO (Przemysłowe Centrum Optyki - Industrial Optics Center)

Their products
https://pcosa.com.pl/en/home/

POD Liswarta https://pcosa.com.pl/en/pod-72-liswarta-2/

PNK Radomka
https://pcosa.com.pl/en/pnk-55-72-ra...ion-periscope/

Thermal Periscopes
https://pcosa.com.pl/en/modernisatio...ured-vehicles/

KLW-1 Asteria
https://pcosa.com.pl/en/klw-1-asteria-thermal-camera/

Re: MBT's
 

BTW niece photos of PT-91M Pendekar Malaysian model of polish PT-91 Twardy on proving ground.

https://thedeaddistrict.blogspot.com...&by-date=false

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--8wwh30Hs...01828176_o.jpg

This photos is a proof that Malaysian has also an engineering mine clearing devices for their MBT look on first tank on photo. Don't know if that is Polish or Russian made device but probably they are interchangeable between t-72 family
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FashRJ4xI...96638405_o.jpg

Re: MBT's
 

[/quote]

There is also more about this modern ammunition for T-72/PT-91 called 120x570mm APFSDS https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/10...comment=212028
https://i.imgur.com/DndcfZq.jpg

Re: MBT's
 

I'm thinking there's a fair shot we'll see these upgraded Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) Leopard 1A5BR tanks before games end based on this newer article from the one I posted around a month or two ago. This upgrade program is part of a longer term initiative to strategically
upgrade their armor between 2020-2039.

This current program is meant to extend the operating life of the Leopard 1A5BR by 15 years.

We now also have a better picture in regards to the extent of the planned upgrades along with a couple optional ones which I feel will be made considering the "neighborhood" they're in.

What I don't know is will they seek a new tank from outside the country which are what the "rumors" say will happen or develop their own tanks like they did with the following below. They know how to do it but, what killed the programs were time in development, no export orders and most importantly cheaper foreign tanks.

Both the TAMOYO and OSORIO never got past the PROTOTYPE Stage.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ard-1a5br-mbts
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/mb3_tamoyo.htm
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/osorio.htm

For you Vietnam Vets, 2 days until I catch "The Freedom Bird"!!
Though I concede the fact your I'm sure felt better.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Modernisation program "Wilk" in Poland which my be consider a way in which direction MBT's evolution and usage my go in next 20/30 years in this country. This tank is consider as a replacement for older and most numerous T-72/T-72M1 and PT-91 "Twardy" and also mentioned earlier T-72M1R. Leopards after future modernisations will be kept in units.

There are consider such options

• Domestic tank Wilk
  Designed by OBRUM IV generation 60t tank. Two man crew and remote turennt. Designed in some way similarly to T-14 Armata thick armour on front of hull and light armour in torrent. Armour with use of polish technology designed for PT-91 and also of german IBD Deisenroth, AMAP-B technology composites. Active defense system ASOP is planed in cooperation with Ukrainians - ASOP hard-kill "Zasłon". Also soft-kill SSP-1 OBRA-3 Picture and reactive armour based on polish experiences with ERAWA-3. As we talk about gun here is considered Rheinmetall 120mm Rh 120 LLR L/47 or Rheinmetall 130 mm Rh 130 L/51
  
  Early graphic of projected tank
  https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3E5_L4zwe.../s640/wilk.jpg
  
  https://2s14.blogspot.com/2016/12/ge...ich-wojsk.html
  
  
• M1 Abrams tank
  American government offers used Abrams definitely M1 variant
  
  https://translate.google.com/transla...onowane-polsce
  
  
  
• K2PL
  South Korea offers their K2 Black Panther in version K2PL with better turrent and hull armour than their variant which will be manufactured in Poland together with transfer of technology and know-how. They are already involved in production of K9 Thunder chassis for polish Krab.
  
  based on https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/10...zation/page/6/
  
  Quote:

  South Korea offers full technology transfer and polonization. K2PL itself is newly designed, better turret and hull for K2 Black Panther subsystems. South Korea offers to fund R&D phase and provide Poland with preferential credits to build production capabilities in Poland. Besides that this offer includes large cooperation in terms of both military and civilian industry. K2PL is considered as one of the favorites, also because South Korea is investing a lot in Poland, including large Ion-Lithium batteries factory and new Central Airport Hub

  also Czech army is interested in cooperation with Poland during production and introduction of K2PL probably as (K2CZ) to their armed forces.
  
  https://i.imgur.com/eaXAfWu.jpg
  
  
• Altay MBT
  
  Turkey also offers their main MBT
  https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/10...zation/page/6/

Re: MBT's
 

Just a quick shout out...
UK MOD has decided the CHALLENGER 3 WILL be equipped with the TROPHY APS after all.

I'm on the IPad so you'll have too go to the armyrecognition.com site for today's news to get the story or wait until I get home.

Regards,
Pat
Alright then just imagine the Captain Emo-G-Ine here!

Re: MBT's
 

I'm posting the following as it provides a simple overview of what makes a post WWII/Cold War/Modern MBT a GEN 1-3 version and speculates on what might constitute a 4th GEN MBT. But my main purpose is the available and various color schemes of these tanks offered and many other combat vehicles as well. I'm sure somebody will find this useful. :dk:
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/modern-tanks.php

Still getting back into the "groove" at work...lots changed in the time I was gone.

Got things to take care of, have a good night/morning and as always a GREAT Day!!

I haven't forgotten about the articles I said I'd post while gone, however still tracking down some further information to confirm a tank I thought we'd see before games end apparently will now, not make it after all.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

So I posted this list of MBT's several years ago I believe there was 10 total, I thought might make it by games end 2020. But as you'll see, a couple would've made that deadline but for the extension to 2025.

I'll list them from memory though, I might fall short by a couple.

1. MERKAVA IVB -OPERATIONAL

2. ABRAMS M1AC (SEP 3) - IOC; expected FOC Mid 2023
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ltv-in-fy-2022

3. ALTAY -PROTOTYPE; 18 MONTH countdown clock is still at 0. DOUBTFUL

4. ARMATA - PROTOTYPE; what happens here affects the IFV version as well. Russia has shifted assets to the very capable T-90M. At best 2024. DOUBTFUL

5. K2 PIM - OPERATIONAL, but in very limited numbers.

6. LEOPARD-A7V Improved - PROYOTYPE; will transition with new designation. Also more likely to a transitional tank first. Assets moving towards joint development MBT with France, possibility UK and Netherlands. Looking in from the outside Poland. Possibly late 2023 or 2024.

7. LeClerc XLR (Scorpion Program); RESET, French are accelerating the whole Program. If EVERYTHING falls into place, FOC might be reached by Late 2023-Mid 2024.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ract-to-nexter

8. There's been talk of a new Chinese MBT I believe briefly touched on in my last Post. DOUBTFUL or 2025 at best. The focus is to build up the NAVY and AIR FORCE at present for continued POWER PROJECTION.

9. I can't remember.

10.The focus of this discussion; CHALLENGER 3 - RESET; From MOD, IOC 2027/FOC 2030. I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO STATE THE OBVIOUS HERE. With IOC already at 2027, things tend to shift more to the "RIGHT" then come to the "LEFT of NEVER."
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ger-3-contract
https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military-...icle-programme
https://euro-sd.com/2021/05/articles.../challenger-3/
https://www.forces.net/news/challeng...battle-tank-be
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-shropshire-57025266

That should cover it.

Todays my Monday-I'm out!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

FIXED SPELLING ERROR. :)

Re: MBT's
 

Now I remember what #9 should've (Though not the reason I'm up at this "ungodlily" hour. :D) been in my last post.

Of course and how could I even forget :rolleyes:...

9. INDIA!! - ARJUN Mk II "The Ferrari of the Desert" - Probably the best tank they'll have with possible exception of their T-90MS. Currently a compromise was reached between DRADO and the Army with the acceptance of the interim ARJUN Mk 1A which is a "world class" tank. It might need a date change though however. To ARJUN Mk II I believe they will get this tank (It's the transitional tank to their indigenous "Future Tank Program".) but I believe it'll be DOUBTFUL (Finally got that spelling right.) we'll see it see it in the game.

Back to bed!!

How could I forget INDIA!?! :shock:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Export version of the M1A2C (SEP 3) anyone?

Australia has already begun the process. Actually, initially they were looking at both the M1A2C or the M1A2 "SPEC" version modified to their needs. It seems now, it's the M1A2C from which Congress is pending approval of the foreign sales deal.
https://armynews.partica.online/army...ing-our-armour
"Initial operational capability is expected in 2025, with rollout to brigades expecting to be complete by 2026." NOTE: This ref. is from 9/20.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...uisitions.html
"According to the Military Balance 2020, Australia currently has 59 M1A1 (AIM) configuration tanks (hybrids with a mix of equipment used by the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps but ***without depleted uranium layers in armor).*** NOTE: Where indicated with ***, provides a PERFECT example of what I've been talking about for years. The "Big Boys" DON'T FULLY SHARE THIER TOYS-REASON-OPSEC.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...s-to-australia
NOTE: State Department approval.


Poland it appears is leaning towards the same tank themselves, Though the ref besides their own sources, also comment on an interview conducted by Defense24. I follow this site and didn't see the article but it was released end of day by "ArmyRec", so it just might not have been processed in time by the "others" yet.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/defe...t-91_mbts.html

No we won't see them.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

Today 14.07.2021 was made a decision in Poland.
Poland will buy ASAP M1A2 ABRAMS SEPv3 and first tanks will be in next year 2022.

Official governmental website google translator because as for now no English version of this info

https://translate.google.com/transla...esnych-czolgow

Re: MBT's
 

So the question is does this have the same DU armour as the US version and if no how are they going to be built without it in a year...?

The next question is what shells are being supplied for the main gun.

As Pat noted above.............. The "Big Boys" DON'T FULLY SHARE THEIR TOYS-"

and I have a feeling that will apply in this case but exactly where and how is the other part of the question

Re: MBT's
 

I pointed this out specifically in my last post under Australia. The answer simply NO DU Armor for ANY foreign user of the ABRAMS.

When the Iranian militia were operating the Iraqi M1A1 SA tanks, and yes, we wished they hadn't but we really weren't that concerned about it because no OPSEC issues were compromised. If it were, trust me, their would've been any thing left of those handful of tanks they had except scrap.

That's why we've always recovered our tanks from the battlefield. This applies to all the major tank producing countries.

We never sell our Submarines (Though Russia has sold some out dated nukes to India.), Our foreign sale ships go into the shipyard and get completing stripped of our advanced FC, Sonar, Radar etc. etc.

UK did the same when OMAN bought a couple of hundred CHALLENGER 2 tanks w/o their advanced armor. OMAN actually upgraded the armor package on most of their "fleet" just a few years back.

We buy (As well as others.) Russian equipment all the time. And they buy ours. Except we don't buy them from each other. Hell we've even bought about 2 or 3 OPLOT-M tanks from the Ukraine just in the last couple of years that I know I posted in here.

Why would Israel always turn around and improve the jets we sell them if it were the "top shelf" USAF version? That's the first thing they did as they started to get their F-35's in country. Their "U.S." F-35 were/are getting upgraded to the F-35i improved Israeli version.

There's only about ten countries that could be considered major producers of heavy armor in the world, They keep the first tier tanks for themselves and always have. We're very happy to sell you a second tier or third tier version of our tank but, you won't get our Armor Package, FCS, Electronics, Comms, Ammo or our latest Powerplants and Packs. At best you'll be a couple of Generation behind.

However, you'll buy the tank anyway because you don't have the Industrial capacity, Financial resources, Technical know how plus it's better than what your using now, and I can go on and on, to build one yourself.

Foreign sales develop capital for the seller to advance their own technologies and future projects.
https://www.defence24.com/polish-arm...he-mods-budget

That's the English version above.

This is still pending full U.S. Foreign sales approval. Those tanks will need to be RESET to remove all sensitive Armor components etc. etc. There'll be integration issues at Poland's end, not least of which will be training T-72/PT-91 crews.

Let's NOT get ahead of ourselves here!!!!

We just don't have stripped down versions of these tanks laying around.

Poland has never operated these tanks. However, Australia has. What's my point here?

1. Crews are trained on ABRAMS.

2. Australia put their request in first and is ready to stroke the check.

3. China is the bigger threat then Russia.

4. 2 & 3 will ensure Australia get theirs first and will reach FOC also first.

5. We would do well to follow the Australian timeline as laded out in the refs I posted in my last.

I've been watching these things for a very long time, and I hate it when we feel the need to "jump the gun" on these projects to more often then not, have to turn around and change it, delete it or something else.

We're not in a race out here and I'm getting tired of all the rework we've had to do over especially these last few years, when I have years worth of equipment that is already in service but not in the game. I'm just simply ending this with...

WHY ARE WE LETTING THIS HAPPEN TO OURSELVES?!?

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: MBT's
 

That was my point... how DO you remove the DU armour? I have no idea how it's installed and one year from announcement to delivery is just too quick unless this is something that's been in the works for a few years already.

Announcements of intent are all well and good but I only get interested (generally.... there have been lapses ) .... when it's delivered and made operational so these are not going into the Polish OOB until that happens