where is the blowout/ejection port?
and how would it be competely sealed and seperated… it must be reloaded into the magazine using the reloading tray.
It’s quite evident from those pics Ajax is missing a lot of armour
2 Likes
not really, the internal strcuture is modelled as 10-20mm of aluminum(??). We cant really see much else
I wonder if someone mixed up the seemingly triple layered armour arrangement on the PSO kit for the double layered standard (MCO) kit and decided the armour should be single layered???
The loading port is tiny. Feeding unlinked ammunition in one by one, and sealed behind a door inside the turret when not loading into the AHS
That square metal panel at the bottom and the black part surrounding is the face of the loading port drawer that pushes out into the turret interior though the aperture in the turret wall. The cylinder to the right is the motor that pushes the tray in and out
I don’t have pic inside of the Ajax turret citadel, but you can see the internal aperture in the WCSP turret here
Whole point of the Lockheed turret designs for both WR and Ajax was that the magazine and AHS was outside the crew compartment
2 Likes
you can actually see the sealing port on the picture too
1 Like
Indeed, but like i said we would need to prove it has some kind of sliding door. And more importantly, some form of blowout panel.
The whole side casing for the magazine just blows off. The outer armour for the magazine is supported on these kind of outriggers, not welded or bolted directly to the side of the turret.
And you can see the seams where the box separates in Puffy’s photo from the turret shop floor
If something pens the armour and has managed to hit a round in the magazine, that whole part of the mechanical feed system is going to be buggered anyway. So there’s no reason to limit any kind of exposure to the feed system in the event of a catastrophic cook-off.
8 Likes
Not much point in it if it can’t resist the standard round from a contemporary enemy recce vehicle.
I’d say that looks about 1/2 inch
1 Like
a report on boxer crv
[UK]Boxer CRV block 2 APS protected sector horizontally wrong // Gaijin.net // Issues
1 Like
Doesn’t it also have the wrong turret? As the actual block 2 should have the turret from the LF41 Lynx instead. Shouldn’t this be renamed to the land 400 demonstrator if it’s got the puma style turret.
1 Like
yup, there’s a report about the name
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/d1zLFyX5UjW0
1 Like
I think they should swap the turrets over
There’s also some differences with the state of the hull
The production Block 2s (and Block 1s) have different wheel hub covers, different driver’s thermal viewer, mounts for ECM on the front above the headlight, and cladding over the equipment racks that hang off the back of the vehicle
Realistically they wouldn’t have the StrikeShield APS either - it was rejected for being too heavy and Aus have been pursuing Iron Fist - Light Decoupled, or the newer Iron Fist - Light Kinetic instead, but are yet to integrate it.
It’s probably best left as the demonstrator, and simply renamed.
Give us a tech tree one when they model a proper Block 2 for the German sWaTrgInf
1 Like
Uhhhh…?
6 Likes
the driver is quite safe :)
What’s Ajax armour looking like right now can anyone provide some screenies?
Definitely not ready. It can’t even withstand 14.5 AP !!