MBT's

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

The answer as to the direction Poland wants to take it's heavy armor as I've reporting is now becoming more clear. The LEOPARD 2PL will take Poland's 2A4 tanks apparently to the 2A6 level (The Canadian's spec built excellent 2A6M variant has been mentioned.) once completed, Poland will take the fairly new bought 2A5s and apply those upgrades to them as well. This is the same successful strategy Turkey used in it's LEOPARD upgrade program TO the 2T.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-tanks-019466/

For those out there hoping for the new Polish indigenous tank this truly is a set back out past this games current status. The writing was the wall anyway for the last 5 yrs. or so when Germany started to flood the market (Dutch as well.) with inexpensive, modernized and well maintained LEOPARDS. Poland's second batch of 14 2A4s/105 2A5s plus supplies, trainers etc. for only EUR 180 million is extremely cheap to the point that the deal I estimate was at least 3x(+) less expensive then the R&D to Prototype stage for a new indigenous design.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well this is kind've like that "mystery meat" you would get in a bowl of soup, in a casserole or on your plate. It looks familiar, smells like something you should know and might even taste like something you've had before but your just not sure. The point is and this isn't to start a food discussion, that we have some information concerning Russia's new armor being applied to their latest equipment it's something but we're just not really sure what it is-yet.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/octob..._40710151.html
http://www.rusbiznews.com/news/n2658.html

And that's about it for now on VST-2.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

All we can ever do is guess armour levels until someone puts a round or missle into one since that info is not published

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well the next is always a subjective matter, however I overall have to agree with the lineup and these guys seem to get very reliable data about Russian and Eastern European equipment in particular (They're based out of the Ukraine.). Notable movement is the K2 to #2/ARMATA first time listed at #5. In regards to the K2 MANY refs are now really "onboard the bandwagon" concerning the K2. The previous list is in this thread about a year/year 1/2 back.
http://www.military-today.com/tankst...ttle_tanks.htm

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

I'll take a deeper look at that info in a month or so but for now I have adjusted the K2 gun stats to match the 2A7's. Overall though I think we are close with most of this but I will review this more closely before the next patch



Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Yes I believe a second look might definitely be worth the time as more data has come to light especially considering the KSTAM round they carry also, due to production delays it's my understanding the K2 has been back fitted with the "hard-kill" APS intended for the second gen K2 PIP tank, compliments the "soft-kill" equipment onboard already as standard equipment. Numbers vary and I believe the truth of it is closer to a 100 K2 tanks by now of somewhere between 40 to 100 K2 tanks in service. Refs hopefully in order of newest/technical data top to bottom. Last has a very good video especially at the end in it's fording abilities.
These are to assist you when ready!!

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product2311.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/south...video_sou.html
http://www.army-technology.com/proje...n-battle-tank/
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/...anther_mbt.htm
http://tanknutdave.com/the-republic-...k-panther-mbt/

Regards,
Pat

[MarkSheppard]

Not really a MBT; but eh. We don't get much US Army armor lately....

http://www.janes.com/article/55223/a...gunned-stryker

The army is working to up-gun 81 Strykers with 30 mm cannons on remote weapon systems and others with Javelin anti-tank missiles, a long-considered upgrade that was pushed through an operational need statement from the 2nd Cavalry Regiment based at Vilseck in Germany. Service leaders approved the plan in April and now testing and integration work remains.

The cost per system appears particularly high (about USD5 million per vehicle), and according to Heidi Shyu, the army's acquisition executive, this is partly schedule driven because it is through an urgent need statement that is seeking the upgrade as soon as possible. It is also for only 81 systems, so the limited quantity drives up per-unit costs. The price includes a design and integration element as well, she added.

These lethality upgrades are not for the heavier armoured Stryker Double-V Hull (DVH) vehicles, and rather are for the original flat-bottom configuration, although a Stryker engineering change proposal (ECP) effort may eventually include a 30 mm weapon for the DVH, Shyu said. "If we want more Strykers to have this capability beyond the 81 [requested in Europe], we will start a programme of record to do that," she said, noting that the cost could be lower with a procurement of thousands of units.

------------

TBH; given past experience with US program cancelations; and the full state of the US OOB; I'd hold off until this actually does enter service.

[MarkSheppard]

From AUSA 2015; looks like the ECP Abrams has an official name: M1A2 SEP v3.

Who knows if it will actually IOC.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well I believe the SEP V3 will see service within the next two years. You must remember we have only 1 tank factory in this country, we can't afford to lose the expertise or manufacturing capability. The new Advanced Multi-Purpose (AMP)/M829E4 (This 5th GEN round will soon be type-classified as the M829A4) round is ready for production which means the current fleet of M1A2 SEP V1/V2 tanks will see them first. I'll assume the game engine won't allow for these three separate modes of operation and therefore we'll need to maintain the current AP, HE etc. categories however what is clear is the round (And this will be the only one carried on the ABRAMS.) will need the PEN values to be increased. There is no doubt in my mind that this round will have a "brain" onboard for how else can it defeat advanced AERA/or APS defense systems, it, has to have some kind laser jamming device on it of some kind. This is not beyond our current munitions capabilities concerning technologies along these lines when you consider Germany/Israel have already fielded an AMP munition of their own or the KSTAM munition for South Korea's K2 that acts more like an ATGW than a "normal" tank round (KSTAM is a shoot and forget, top attack, self adjusting round with a radar for ground/obstacle avoidance and target acquisition.) The other issue is the IFLIR, if you remember we had a discussion when I submitted the M1A2 SEP V2 & AH-64E GUARDIAN about the TI/GSR values (These are in this/or PATCH threads.) a couple of years ago, this is just laying the ground work for a "cross roads" decision on how far is too far within the context of the game. I see only really two options at this point 1)We can choose to ignore this but, feel more comfortable about the tanks we've already adjusted out to TI/GSR 50 (And I still have a couple of more to go.) or 2)Accept the fact that for the last handful of years left in the game we'll have less then a handful of OOB's whose tanks can see further then the rest but as we left it a couple of years ago I wouldn't want to see anything beyond a 55 or 60 value as it would take away from the games core objectives for the players-to have some fun and to use that "mush pot" inside our skulls. Let's face it and using the M1A2 SEP V2 as the perfect example-when submitted you'll see a quote from the Col. in charge of the SEP V2 Program who basically said "we finally have a FCS system that allows us to see the target beyond/at the range of our current ammo...", that confirmed (battle/or tested) kill range for the ammo was 4500m which means the SEP V2 could identify (not see but identify-there is a difference here.) a target to 4500m+ or a TI/GSR of 90-95 enough said.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/ausa_..._11210157.html

Our "Paras" have been wanting this for years now and they just might get it...our own light tank that can be air dropped. There is interest in this from the governmental side to get our Airborne troops back this ground support in the ongoing "asymmetrical" environment the military has been operating in.
My prediction-games end.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/ausa_..._11310152.html

Not where it goes but, since Mark posted it here's one from this past JUN. I was saving and by way of an update the European theater STRYKER's upgrade has been approved the USA is trying to get more upgraded but not likely the whole fleet.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/june_..._11006151.html

Yes tracking this all.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

In future years, the USMC M1A1 fleet will undergo modifications necessary to maintain combat relevance and readiness. The USMC M1A1 Abrams latest generation of upgrades include: Stabilized Commander's Weapon Station; Abrams Suspension Upgrade; Ammunition Data Link; Generation IV Abrams Ammunition Rack; and the Abrams Integrated Display and Targeting System.

The Multiple Purpose High Explosive Round was procured in 2009 and provides the capability to engage a wide array of target sets in three modes of operation: air burst; point detonation; and delayed detonation. The Ammunition Data Link allows the Tank Commander to select a mode of operation on the Multiple Purpose High Explosive Round while it is in the breach.

The Generation IV Abrams Ammunition Rack improves the ammunition handling safety aspects of the tank as well as increasing the high explosive round storage capacity by 50%.
================================================== ===========================

Perhaps a minor increase in the HE value of the 120mm might be in order as well, but not worth worrying about until the M829A4 gets implemented.

As to improved survivablity .. they're already at 6, the highest value WinSPMBT allows.