Hello, Nero
Coupé… VBCI sing exactly modern and pls don’t be the Type of frenchie who calls your 40mm scout car and ifv.
Yes, CAN-BUS was introduced on Strv 122s. Irrespective of that, the Leclerc was the first tank to be designed around a digital data bus. And whilst there have very likely been upgrades to the electronic architecture of both the Leopard 2 and Leclerc which we can’t know anything about, it must be considered that as early as 2013 the Germans still encountered issues with handling the data feed from the possible installation of new thermal cameras:
ATTICA Megapixel is form and fit in the appropriate optics configuration but current tanks are still not able to handle the higher data rate in the harness and the monitor
From: Cassidian Optronics - A modular packaging approach for upgrading tanks with staring thermal imagers
Meanwhile, the French had installed a comparable (if not more capable) system on the Leclerc 10 years prior with deliveries of batch-9 Leclercs in 2003. In this respect, the Leclerc has certainly demonstrated greater growth potential.
There’s also other things that could be argued, for example the depth of either tanks’ vetronics: The Leclerc could keep track of the ammunition (and its type) used and on standby and relay it to nearby tanks to coordinate attacks. But alas, I can’t be bothered going to that level of depth.
No re-arrangement of the armour layout (especially the breech) to accommodate the new gun? No structural changes to incorporate an autoloader? No additional stress on the gun drives which would need to be resolved?
The VBCI isn’t exactly old, and in any case it will be modernised in the coming years and will likely be fitted with a similar turret to that found on the EBRC Jaguar. This would make it a far better weapon system than an IFV like the Boxer RCT30 which Germany is in the process of procuring.
Let’s also not forget that the VBCI manages to be a protected vehicle than the Boxer whilst not being nearly as obese…
Last time I checked even the official KNDS France dossier about the Vbci talks about up to 30mm apdsfs protection due to modular armor the standard fitted to in service Vic’s is Stanag 4569 lvl 4 . We both know the only ones fitted with the addon are the VBCI 2 protos which weigh as much as boxer if not even more with the possible introduction of the jaguar turret you mention. So the weight argument makes no sense. is Boxer is Stanag 4569 lvl 6 frontally always and 5 on the sides by the way.
2 Likes
These are the add-on modules which consist of UHH steel and titanium:
It would weigh ~29 tonnes. About 10 tonnes less than the Boxer Waffenträger if the suggestion for it is correct despite the VBCI Mk2 being a far more potent weapon system lol.
It’s not though? It’s only rated as STANAG 4 on the sides.
The VBCi 2 proto alone is 32 tonns already. And it would get even heavier with the big turret of the jaguar.
1 Like
You’re seriously not citing War Thunder Wiki as a source, are you? 32 tonnes is the maximum permissible weight of the VBCI Mk2 - do tell how it could possibly be more…
Erm… Guys , off topic
2 Likes
I’m not citing wt wiki. The VCI alone already weighs 25 tons and your trying to tell me that all the addon armor to get it to lvl 6 front and lvl 5 sides from 14.5mm protection+ a turret with a 40mm only weighs 4 tonns sure
1 Like
What are you waffling about?
The VBCI Mk1 has an empty weight of 17.7t. The VBCI Mk2 has an empty weight of <19t. The VBCI Mk1 VPC here:
Has a combat weight of 23.3t. I wonder where those almost 6 tonnes come from (surely not the 12.7mm RCWS)? Or is this all beyond your comprehension?
In all seriousness - what sources are you citing? Your Wehraboo wet dreams?
Turret, loader system ammo storage, stronger engine for all i know. Eletronics thermals.
U csm get quickly up in weight
The best main battle tank battle rating 12.0 in rank 8
Please keep it on topic.
As it’s been told earlier, keep it on topic.
3 Likes
As Wareta has said, please keep the suggestion on topic.
Weak turrets right now is the standard for inmanned mbts.
Its the easiest way to save on weight there is no arguing for or against that
Nah but that breach give that tank a big forehead look. And I’m honestly not sure it’s a great direction to go to weak turrets. This make the fire control systems very weak to heavy machine guns and auto canons. Granted, there’s a video of a T90M being basically disabled by a Bradley,; but that required heavy, and dangerous fire density around its optics and turret drive, which are still fairly small targets (especially considering there’s the gunner and commander optic acting as hunter killer). Meanwhile, on something like the t14 armada, you see very lightly armoured turret that could potentially be disabled much easier due to their fairly big profile (compared to optics or turret drives)
Reason why almost every nation trying to develop light-armored unmanned turret is simple. Current MBTs were being too heavy to operate in open field, and heavy-armed manned turrets are failed to protect crews from new threats like HE shells with accurate FCS and drones. So nations have to gain both weight-reduce and crew protection. So they decide to make turret smaller with lightly armored unmanned turret, and rather focus on enhancing hull frontal and roof armor.
Besides, even with manned turrets, sights are prone to heavy machine guns and auto cannons.