tanques e blindados

[knigh7]

matéria completa em:
http://www.defaiya.com/news/Regional%20 ... rams-tanks

[Fábio Machado]

A preferencia do EB é pela continuidade na família leopard. No entanto, é mais fácil esse Abrams a diesel vingar por aqui do que qualquer coisa da Coréia, ainda que essa opção seja muito mais barata.

[FCarvalho]

Se a mentalidade for a mesma da FAB em relação a escolha do Gripen E, tavez o CC coreano possa ser o caminho mais longo, mas mais propício e rentável no longo prazo.
A ver qual das vertentes tem mais força. A pragmática ou a desenvolvimentista.
De minha parte boa sorte para ambas.

Abs

[FCarvalho]

Eu ainda não descartei os Leo II. Os alemães tem a vantagem de ter um pé aqui dentro. Algo que os demais não tem.
Uma troca por este CC seria menos complicado e mais econômica talvez.
Desde claro que esse escolha seja feita no menor prazo possível enquanto ainda há bldos disponíveis a serem negociados.
A ver.

Abs

[cabeça de martelo]

Army picks two companies to build prototypes for a new cannon-toting vehicle to back up infantry
By: Todd South


General Dynamics’ offering for the Army’s Mobile Protected Firepower combines a version of its latest Abrams turret with a chassis that leverages experience from the United Kingdom’s AJAX program. (Richard Watt/British Ministry of Defence)

The Army has selected two companies to provide prototypes of a new armored, tracked vehicle to give infantry units necessary firepower

Both Michigan-based General Dynamics Land Systems and BAE Systems will have the next 14 months to build and begin delivering 12 prototypes of the Mobile Protected Firepower vehicle.

BAE Systems will build an M8 Buford Armored Gun System with new capabilities and components.

GD submitted an offering that puts a version of its latest Abrams turret together with a chassis that uses past work on the United Kingdom’s AJAX program.

The ultimate product will be either a 105- to 120mm cannon and a tracked vehicle that can withstand a classified level of enemy fire.

At least two of the vehicles should be able to fit into the back of a C-17 aircraft.

The need is aimed at near-peer threats.

Brig. Gen. Ross Coffman, director of the Next Generation Combat Vehicle Cross Functional Team, said that the current and future battlefield will challenge the firepower of the infantry.

Right now, Infantry Brigade Combat Teams have artillery to knock out secured enemy positions.

“But there’s no precision munition to remove bunkers from the battlefield, to shoot into buildings in dense urban terrain,” Coffman said.

The MPF vehicle and weapon will be used to “disrupt, break in and breach those secure defensive zones,” Coffman said.

The requirement first emerged in the Army’s vehicle modernization strategy in late 2015


BAE System will build an M8 Buford Armored Gun System with new capabilities for its prototype for the Army's Mobile Protected Firepower vehicle. (BAE Systems)

The target was to give IBCTs a protected, long-range, cyber-resilient, precision, direct-fire capability for early or forcible entry operations.

In February, GD and BAE, along with SAIC partnering with Singapore’s ST Engineering and CMI Defense, all submitted proposals.

The SAIC team combined CMI’s Cockeril 3105 turret with ST Engineering next-generation armored fighting vehicle chassis.

Officials would not discuss the reasons behind the selection. They expect a final decision to be made by fiscal year 2022. Fielding to the first units is expected by fiscal year 2025.

The MPF is under the Army’s NGCV CFT program, which is overseen by the Army Futures Command.

The plans are for roughly 54 vehicles, initially. They will build 26 first, with an option to build 28 more and retrofit eight prototype vehicles.

For the existing vehicle fleet, there’s another program that’s been conducting recent testing to also enhance the combat vehicle firepower and protection.

The Army chose to evaluate two Active Protection Systems at a November live-fire rodeo, looking at whether either system could work as an interim protection system for one of its combat vehicles.

The APS will also go onto the MPF vehicle in development at this time.

The Israeli-made Trophy VPS by Rafael, a slimmer edition of the Trophy System already on the Abrams tank, and the German-made Active Defense System by Rheinmetall got a chance to showcase their products' abilities atop Strykers at the live fire, according to Military Times sister publication Defense News.

Rheinmetall partnered with Michigan-based Unified Business Technologies. They’ve dubbed their system “Strike Shield.”

Army representatives saw the Trophy VPS on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle at a demonstration in Israel in August, Defense News reported.

Earlier this year, the Army awarded a $193 million contract to Leonardo DRS for its Trophy APS on the M1 Abrams tank.

The program conducted four “soft kill” demonstrations using virtual threats with the system and controller.

The APS is an interim solution as the Army develops its Modular Active Protection System as part of a larger suite of Vehicle Protection Systems.

In late 2018, developers with the Tank Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center completed successful testing on the MAPS.

The MAPS base kit is an array of sensors and countermeasures used with the Modular Active Protection Systems Controller, giving vehicle crews a single solution to run APS for incoming threats such as enemy drones or anti-tank weapons.

Bill Beyer, MAPS Virtual Demonstrator lead, said in release following MAPS testing that the base kit would move into the vehicle program portfolio by mid-2019.

Rafael was selected to provide its Trophy APS for the Abrams while IMI, also an Israeli company, has put forth the Iron Fist for the Bradley.

Participants didn’t fully install their systems on the vehicle. They put up mock rigs for testing in front of Strykers mounted their system on a Stryker.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-arm ... -infantry/

[cabeça de martelo]

Spain’s Pizarro combat engineer vehicle takes shape
Christopher F Foss, London - Jane's International Defence Review 17 December 2018



The CEV has a new hull with a higher level of protection. The front-mounted dozer blade can be replaced by other attachments. Source: GDELS-SBS

General Dynamics European Land Systems - Santa Barbara Sistemas (GDELS-SBS) is completing the first of 36 Pizarro combat engineer vehicles (CEVs) for the Spanish Army at its Seville facility.
Following company trials, the vehicle will be handed over to the Spanish Army for formal qualification in early 2019, and will then be followed by 35 production vehicles with final deliveries due in 2021.

The Pizarro CEV has a new all-welded steel hull design with a higher level of ballistic and mine protection than the Pizarro infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) deployed by Spain; this is based on General Dynamics' Austrian Spanish Co-Operative Development (ASCOD) platform.

Mounted at the CEV's front is a Pearson Engineering Common Interface Attachment (CIT), which enables various engineer equipment to be rapidly attached. All vehicles are to be fitted with the hydraulically operated Pearson Earth Anchor Dozer Blade (EADB), which can be used for earth moving, obstacle reduction, and mobility support tasks. This can be rapidly replaced in the field by the Pearson Engineering Light Weight Mine Roller (LWMR) or Surface Mine Plough (SMP) to neutralise scatterable mines and munitions.

Mounted on either side at the rear of the hull is a Pearson Engineering Obstacle Marking System (OMS), known as Pathfinder. When deployed on mine-clearing operations these are swung outside of the hull and dispense marker poles into the ground as the vehicle moves through the cleared minefield.

The Pizarro CEV's crew consists of a commander, gunner, and driver, and it can carry six engineers. The latter can be reduced by one to enable anti-tank mines (ATMs) to be carried for manual laying.
The vehicle is fitted with a Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Mini Samson remote weapon station (RWS) armed with a stabilised .50 M2 machine gun (MG) that is fed from the left with a sensor pod on the right.


https://www.janes.com/article/85279/spa ... akes-shape

[J.Ricardo]

Olha o que um imbecil de um grafiteiro fez com um M-41 que fica exposto em um parque aqui de Presidente Prudente-SP.



http://www.imparcial.com.br/noticias/ex ... erra,25077

[saullo]

Ficou ridículo, passa um camuflado logo aí, ou ao menos um verde escuro.
Que saco, sujeito fica pintando tudo que vê na frente.

Abraços

[Viktor Reznov]

Eu ainda não descartei os Leo II. Os alemães tem a vantagem de ter um pé aqui dentro. Algo que os demais não tem.
Uma troca por este CC seria menos complicado e mais econômica talvez.
Desde claro que esse escolha seja feita no menor prazo possível enquanto ainda há bldos disponíveis a serem negociados.
A ver.

Abs

Bom, a disponibilidade dos Leo II Alemães está baixíssima, menos de 50 estão disponíveis dentro as centenas que a Alemanha possui. Se eles quiserem vender, estamos interessados.

[cabeça de martelo]

Se eles fossem vender tudo que tivesse inop ficavam sem Forças Armadas.

[gabriel219]

95% de chance de ser M1A1. Sempre foi o sonho de muitos Cavalarianos Brasileiros.

Que, ao menos, troquem o motor, pois há vantagens significativas em botar o 883 ali em troca daquela turbina. É quase a diferença de um Opala pra um Corsa!

Finalmente o EB caiu na real e esqueceu os Leo 1A5. Pensaram em modernizar M60, mas pelo visto não vale mais a pena. O EB quer um pra ficar uns 30 anos sem trocar e só vejo possibilidade do M1, que deve operar até 2060 no EUA, com sucessivas atualizações. O Leo II morre com o novo da KNDS, porém modernizado duraria até 2050 fácil, mas não há quantidades disponíveis com a mesma logística. Resta o K1A2 por fora, que é barato e tem alma Alemã, com um peso adequado para as nossas atuais infraestruturas (não precisaria trocar grandes quantidades de cavalos-mecânicos).

Isso é o que vejo, T-90 praticamente descartado. Apesar de ser um excelente CC, seria inviável por ser 100% diferente de tudo que já tivemos, tendo que reaprender absolutamente tudo. Logisticamente dificultoso, ainda mais pra quem deseja operar mais de 324 deles - se considerar a atual formação, seriam 400, se contar escolas e CFN.

[Marechal-do-ar]

Acho que você quis dizer, entre um Opala e alguma coisa que não seja fabricada pela Chevrolet

[gabriel219]

Acho que você quis dizer, entre um Opala e alguma coisa que não seja fabricada pela Chevrolet

Você entendeu

[Marechal-do-ar]

Hungria fazendo o dever de casa:
https://www.forte.jor.br/2018/12/21/exe ... -pzh-2000/

[FCarvalho]

Embora os M1A1 possam vir praticamente de graça, as modificações necessárias para deixar ele apto talvez não seja extremamente algo barato. Pelo menos não em termos de orçamento da defesa.
Neste aspecto o caso de se investir no K1a2 fosse algo mais coerente se a ideia for pensar no longo prazo.
A ver.

Abs