APC Development and related topics. - Page 3

FASTBOAT TOUGH · #21 February 14th, 2010, 03:48 AM

Don,
No problem. Look forward to the patch when it's available, I have a sense this will be one of the biggest to date. In the meantime the AI awaits my return as my Japanese forces fight the Russians and North Koreans.
Take Care and the best to you on the MANY hours still ahead of you and the others. Do not hesitate to ask if I can help in some way.
Regards,
Pat
We know the risks in advance, yet we still volunteer to go deeper and further then most. Never fearful, never afraid but always respectful of the ocean cold and deep. Many have given their all whether by war or folly of man, just ask those still on eternal patrol, revered, remembered and never forgotten.
- Me.

FASTBOAT TOUGH · #22 February 15th, 2010, 03:19 PM

All,
BAE unveils their demonstrator at last weeks IAV show in London. This is BAE's entry in the British MOD FRES program on an CV-90 chassis with British turret. It's worth watching BAE's You Tube "commercial" to see the guns firing on target as the chassis does continous 360 turns. See earlier post on topic and tracking for 2010 as a decision is to be made later this year on the winner.
http://defense-update.com/features/2...or_100210.html
Enjoy,
Pat

Imp · #23 February 15th, 2010, 07:39 PM

Another nice find the only problem I see with that gun is if we end up as the only user that said if your going to mount one it wants to be capable of taking out taxis etc & they are becoming tougher, more potent HE etc as well as larger. Does nicely get round the issue of bigger gun less ammo loadout, if the tech transfers 140mm tank guns might just make an appearance at some point though how long are the barrels going to be if that happens?

EJ · #24 February 15th, 2010, 09:59 PM

Fastboat,
Impressive find. How do you always find such great info on military vehicle development? This looks like a good replacement for the Bradley. We will see how many countries embrace it besides the UK.....

FASTBOAT TOUGH · #25 February 16th, 2010, 10:04 PM

IMP just for you:
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/t12_black_eagle.htm
Note it's designed for a 135mm - 152mm main gun though I can't remember how it's armed in the game for S. Korea. You can plainly see that's no 120mm gun pictured. Also a couple of articles have indicated that the Case Enclosed 40mm for the FRES and Warrior SV programs are here to stay. With the round being
3x more powerful then the current 30mm round why not? And I believe the round also is "self sharpening" in flight as well as I believe the 30mm round used by S. Korea is as well on their new K2 IFV, though I'm going by memory here (Might be Singapores TERREX Bushmaster II round.)
EJ: As I mentioned elsewhere, It took me a year to post again after following my primary five sources for that period of time to track and verify their info against each other and still other sources in my areas of interest. Bottom line I take my research seriously to be as accurate as possible and not waste each others time. Treat yours like a reporter trust the good ones and forget the rest. And thanks!
Pat

Imp · #26 February 17th, 2010, 05:45 AM

Cheers Pat is great for us a easy quick look at whats coming up.

Quote:

With the round being 3x more powerful then the current 30mm round why not? And I believe the round also is "self sharpening" in flight

Whoa I had seen stuff saying it was more powerful did not realise just how much thats a huge jump,serious ammo tech going on there thats a leap like Chobham. You would think export sales is a big possibility which stops you being the only people fielding it.
If it can be transfered to tank main guns no need to go bigger you just powered up.

DRG · #27 February 17th, 2010, 09:59 AM

My my but that "black Eagle" certainly has long legs. Did you note the information that the companys been bankrupt since 2002 ?? It was one of the first "what if's" we put in and it's now been removed from every OOB that had it and a good reason why we don't add things like this any longer.

Don

Imp · #28 February 20th, 2010, 08:01 AM

Due to your posts stopped looking at APCs etc but protection seems to have come a long way certainly on current crop of IFVs.
There was the story of the warrior driver that extracted a squad with wounded I think & took over half a dozen RPG hits doing it. Current testing policy seems to be fire 2 RPG7s at it to prove armours ability to take multiple hits. Okay its an old RPG but someting has happened here I would call that good protection.

FASTBOAT TOUGH · #29 February 20th, 2010, 12:58 PM

IMP and others,
You then might find this article interesting as an example of where we're heading:
http://www.defense-update.com/produc...ps_291009.html
Survivability is turned into a big market area and I think this is why we're not seeing much in advancement of new models in MBTs, it's cheaper to tech up, gun up and increase protection on existing equipment. This is allowing for instance British MOD to plan for a service life increase of the WARRIOR until 2030. The M-60 with the packages available as I've posted for consideration for Don already, are looking at service life extensions of 15 to 20 more years. All this tech allows everyone to stay in the game longer especially during these economic times.
Pat

Imp · #30 February 20th, 2010, 03:43 PM

Well thats a novel idea got to hit it with machine guns just a fraction before fire the RPG tricky, should send warhead designers off for a rethink.
Slightly off topic I see US modified Phalanx ship missile defence system for ground use, recalibrated to intercept incoming mortar rounds, would assume cant cover much of an area.