Yep, the early LCTS-90 turrets exported to Kuwait Pandur 6x6 and Saudi LAV-AG 8x8 uses a FCS solution called Primary Direct Fire-Control System (PDFCS) based on Kollsman’s Day Night Range Sight (DNRS) and Carl Zeiss’ PERI-CDR commander’s panoramic sight.
PDFCS
In addition to ELOP’s FCS selected by Belgium, CMI also provides an improved French FCS solution for the Saudi LAV-AG upgrades, which is based on SAGEM’s SAVAN-11gunner’s primary sight and commander’s Observation Panoramic Stabilized Sight (OPSS), which can add a guidance sight located in the center of the turret for Falarick 90 GLATGM if necessary.
SAVAN 11
OPSS
1 Like
Very cool. In my opinion, one of the major roadblocks for any potential additions of Cockerill turrets was a lack of info on the sights themselves. But this clears things up.
Is PDFCS also used for the CT-CV 105HP turrets? Also would you be able to upload a zip file of OPSS, please? I seem to have missed it during my deep dive of the SAGEM web archives and I would like to add it to my collection.
These days, Cockerill procure all their sights from Safran such as MPS and PASEO but there’s next to nothing known about the specifications unfortunately.
The first CT-CV prototype turret actually used the French FCS based on SAGEM’s SAVAN-15 gunner’s day/night sight and commander’s OPSS panoramic sight
CT-CV FCS
Here are the brochures, I uploaded them.
2 Likes
I initially thought it was SAVAN 15 too, but the stated elevation angles did not align with SAGEM’s brochure and the performance for the thermal imager in that brochure falls far below either the IRIS TGS or MATIS STD which are used in the SAVAN 15:
But it appears to be a case of Cockerill understating performance for the latter and it makes sense that the elevation angles would be modified.
Thanks!
here as well, updated the suggestion with your informations :)
UP+1
Hope Gaijin consider more BeNeLux vehicules
Since the DF90 shares the Piranha III plateform, i hope Gaijin would considerate the addition of the DF30 and for many additional nations the LAV-25.
2 Likes
Also Piranha V I like the one with the Elbit UT30 MK 2 turret my country has it too so it will be a pleasure to add it.
+1
This would be around 8.7 right?
Yeah. Depends on how they’ll implement the APFSDS round. It would come at 8.3-9.3.
Im expecting basically the same as the mars 15’s/Rooikat 76’s APFSDS round
Probably higher considering the LRF, LWS, and 3rd gen thermals, like 9.0-9.3
2 Likes
Well, both of those vehicles have worse performing, but comparable APFSDS:
The Rooikat’s 76mm APFSDS is 1,5 kg less in mass and penetrates a little bit less.
If you want an in-game almost equivalent APFSDS round, then the 105 mm C76A1 round fits clostest in wieght, length and RHA penetration values (but still with a lot of differences).
These are the ones for the DF90:
| Designation |
Gun |
Caliber |
Type |
Velocity |
Weight |
Penetration |
Notes |
Fire rate |
| M690 |
Cockerill Mk 7/8 |
90 mm |
APFSDS |
1345 m/s |
3,7 kg (2,05 penetrator) |
150 mm at 60° at 2000 m |
Penetrates more than 300 mm at 2000 m (slightly better than M603) |
|
| M691 |
Cockerill Mk 7/8 |
90 mm |
HESH |
703 m/s |
7,2 kg (1,6 charge) |
100 mm |
|
|
Paired with the more modern FCS like @WalletWorrier said, it’ll be (in the current BR system), most likely 9.0-9.3, comparable to the Centauro I 105.
Sadly 90 mm guns are just really underrepresented currently in-game, so it’s hard to say either way.
was more thinking the inconsistent damage of low diameter APFSDS (both have the same 26mm penetrator diameter in game)
If the shell doesn’t have a super massive amount of left over penetration the post pen is awful
1 Like
That’s a fair point to make and that could indeed lead to a lower BR. Either way I just want it in-game already… :-)
1 Like
I believe that’s A2 and not the basic M691, but yeah, both were used.
