Jump to content
27 minutes ago, LULZ said:

I never said the type 90 was bad, but worse is worse

It at least matches the 2A4. Only real limiting problem, is the lack of improved ammo

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
54 minutes ago, LULZ said:

but why

 

franco-german collabs, probably as interim

 

dat turret ring doe

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read something about them not being able to improve upon the current itteration in any meaningful way due to legalities.

 

Seems kinda ''meh'' to me, also not sure what their plan for this thing is, if there even is one besides just establishing collaborative efforts?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Necrons31467 said:

Read something about them not being able to improve upon the current itteration in any meaningful way due to legalities.

 

Seems kinda ''meh'' to me, also not sure what their plan for this thing is, if there even is one besides just establishing collaborative efforts?

 

Theoretically, the Leclerc turret being smaller and lighter you could cram more armor on it than on a Leo turret (it won't make the weakspots dissapear though) and it could be used as an upgrade for existing Leo 2.

Problem is that economically there is no reason to throw away existing Leo 2 turret and make the expense of buying an upgraded Leclerc turret to integrate it with the Leo 2 hull.

 

By 2040 when the French army will start retiring it's Leclerc and that second hand turret will become available, it may become economically viable.

But I think that the main reason is indeed to show that Nexter and KMW are working together on some common projects.

Edited by Alzoc
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/06/2018 at 17:59, Alzoc said:

 

Theoretically, the Leclerc turret being smaller and lighter you could cram more armor on it than on a Leo turret (it won't make the weakspots dissapear though) and it could be used as an upgrade for existing Leo 2.

Problem is that economically there is no reason to throw away existing Leo 2 turret and make the expense of buying an upgraded Leclerc turret to integrate it with the Leo 2 hull.

 

By 2040 when the French army will start retiring it's Leclerc and that second hand turret will become available, it may become economically viable.

But I think that the main reason is indeed to show that Nexter and KMW are working together on some common projects.

I don't think anything will fix that mantlet design. 

Neither is there a way to add any armor considering it's already very close to blocking the driver's exit. It was already noted that the current EMBT lacks the Leclerc's armor module in front of the gunner sight. I mean, it still has armor there, it's just thinner compared to the more recent Leclerc's turret design.

I believe the only way to fix this is to relocate the gunner's sight to the roof and clear the area for armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

I don't think anything will fix that mantlet design.  

 

Indeed

 

1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Neither is there a way to add any armor considering it's already very close to blocking the driver's exit. It was already noted that the current EMBT lacks the Leclerc's armor module in front of the gunner sight. I mean, it still has armor there, it's just thinner compared to the more recent Leclerc's turret design.

 

It's indeed most likely a serie 1 T1 turret which lack the added armor bloc:

 

Spoiler

https://i.imgur.com/x2vLPUN.jpghttp://www.chars-francais.net/2015/images/stories/galery/1991_leclerc1-1/_6894-0084%20duroc%2002.jpg

 

On the plus side, if they keep the turret so high they may be able to mount Leo 2A5 like wedges, since the main problem with that type of armor package on the Leclerc was that it would basically prevent the driver to exit the tank. Now with a leo hull and a raised turret, that may be possible.

 

Spoiler

https://i.imgur.com/wCTwnfc.png

 

Alternatively they could go with the turret proposed for the turks:

 

Spoiler

http://www.armyrecognition.com/europe/Turquie/exhibition/IDEF_2005/pictures/Turkish_Project_MBT_IDEF_2005_ArmyRecognition_01.JPG

 

Or a combination of both

So the problems are not irremediable, and the main advantage of the Leclerc turret compared to the Leo one (size) remain.

 

But bottom line it's probably not worth the expense of upgrading a Leclerc turret instead of just keeping the Leo one (eventually upgrading it).

Edited by Alzoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LULZ said:

Speaking of tank power levels, what are the real results of SETC?

 

Unclear.

Basically Poland, the UK and France are claiming the 4th place, but since they are very close to each other (less than 50 points difference apparently) it doesn't really matter.

Edited by Alzoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tantor57 said:

That contest is a pure comedy imho

 

then what is tank biathlon

 

j2ZJLlL.gif

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any luck with the Chinese tanks, @Nope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

Any luck with the Chinese tanks, @Nope

 

Not much. Though there are interesting things I could technically extrapolate from what Aselsan offers (collaborated with the Chinese for the VT4's FCS, which might be C-FCS), things like ammunition data are still tricky to find.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/06/2018 at 18:55, Nope said:

 

Not much. Though there are interesting things I could technically extrapolate from what Aselsan offers (collaborated with the Chinese for the VT4's FCS, which might be C-FCS), things like ammunition data are still tricky to find.

The chinese are also very clever: they came only with small mockup models...while you'd need a big stick to keeps away  delegations  from the people's republic trying to swarm vehicles with camera and measuring tape..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/06/2018 at 23:42, Nope said:

 

then what is tank biathlon

 

j2ZJLlL.gif

All tank challenges are...  you simply cannot compare tanks performances and crew performances as long as they all use different machines meant  for different doctrines. 

 

This tank challlenge should be seen as nothing but a good occasion for different armies to see how the other armies work. Because not only ranking criterias have nothing to do with how good the tank is but also because some trials are completely fubar like track fixing in the field or several other quick maintenance trial which a tank crew would never perform in a war zone. They would either bail the vehicle and attempt to save their life or call support and recovery and all the maintenance **** would then be done by specialized mechanics once the tank got recovered. Not by the crew.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tantor57 said:

All tank challenges are...  you simply cannot compare tanks performances and crew performances as long as they all use different machines meant  for different doctrines. 

 

This tank challlenge should be seen as nothing but a good occasion for different armies to see how the other armies work. Because not only ranking criterias have nothing to do with how good the tank is but also because some trials are completely fubar like track fixing in the field or several other quick maintenance trial which a tank crew would never perform in a war zone. They would either bail the vehicle and attempt to save their life or call support and recovery and all the maintenance **** would then be done by specialized mechanics once the tank got recovered. Not by the crew.

 

In SETC the criteria are for a rather wide variety of tasks for the crew to perform, with some less useful than others for the current type of war. It's kind of why the US and UK tend to fall behind as they have tasks that have higher priority for their Middle East adventures while the typical high performers literally have nothing better to do but drills. This also means the Bundeswehr lacks the combat suck of the US Army yet probably doubles down on base suck.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nope said:

 

In SETC the criteria are for a rather wide variety of tasks for the crew to perform, with some less useful than others for the current type of war. It's kind of why the US and UK tend to fall behind as they have tasks that have higher priority for their Middle East adventures while the typical high performers literally have nothing better to do but drills. This also means the Bundeswehr lacks the combat suck of the US Army yet probably doubles down on base suck.

 

While there are a lot more US soldiers deployed in the sandy places, there are a lot more of them in teh 1st place. I know NO soldier in our army(well execpt some very fresh ones) who did not do at least 2 tours ...

 

5 hours ago, Tantor57 said:

All tank challenges are...  you simply cannot compare tanks performances and crew performances as long as they all use different machines meant  for different doctrines. 

 

This tank challlenge should be seen as nothing but a good occasion for different armies to see how the other armies work. Because not only ranking criterias have nothing to do with how good the tank is but also because some trials are completely fubar like track fixing in the field or several other quick maintenance trial which a tank crew would never perform in a war zone. They would either bail the vehicle and attempt to save their life or call support and recovery and all the maintenance **** would then be done by specialized mechanics once the tank got recovered. Not by the crew.

 

Track maintence is crew lever maintenance. Yes, you do not repair a track while in contact...but even in a war zone, most of the time you are not.

Track get damaged or need care for all kinds of reasons: accident, wear and tear, hitting an mine/IED, comming under arty fire.. etc etc.

The next level maintenance is there for fixing more serious ****, they will not waste their time with a simple track job...

70% of a tank crew job is not sluggig it out with OPFOR, but keeping their maschine running.

Edited by Ronin_GE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
41 minutes ago, LULZ said:

Challenger 2 black night still looks like ****, APS in nice tho...

 

Looks like? It WILL BE garbage, if it enters production anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

 

Looks like? It WILL BE garbage, if it enters production anyway. 

It won't. We'll see what will be entering production once the LEP and HAAIP come to an end.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LULZ said:

Challenger 2 black night still looks like ****, APS in nice tho...

 

oh neat a challenger 2 upgrade hopefully togs ii is replaced

 

oh wait

 

well hopefully it's stabilized now

 

oh wait

 

well maybe they finally figured out charm-3 ain't cutting it

 

dammit

 

basically the main thing to be hyped about is the panoramic sight that puts situational awareness back on track with the rest of the modern world currently, though it holds no candle to the xlr's literal cheat tier situational awareness package

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...