Hosted by gatnerd
This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 19:59 by gatnerd
Latest 19:55 by gatnerd
Latest 17:41 by roguetechie
Latest 15:56 by poliorcetes
Latest 10:28 by graylion
Latest 5:32 by poliorcetes
Latest 1:18 by gatnerd
Latest 30-Dec by Refleks
Latest 2-Feb by roguetechie
Latest 1-Feb by roguetechie
Latest 1-Feb by gatnerd
Latest 31-Jan by DavidPawley
Latest 30-Jan by gatnerd
Latest 30-Jan by Guardsman26
Latest 30-Jan by Farmplinker
Latest 30-Jan by Farmplinker
Latest 27-Jan by stancrist
Latest 27-Jan by Farmplinker
Latest 26-Jan by gatnerd
Latest 26-Jan by autogun
Latest 25-Jan by schnuersi
Latest 24-Jan by ZailC
Latest 24-Jan by stancrist
Latest 24-Jan by renatohm
Latest 23-Jan by Apsyda
Latest 21-Jan by graylion
Latest 21-Jan by Farmplinker
Latest 20-Jan by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 18-Jan by nincomp
Latest 17-Jan by gatnerd
Latest 14-Jan by roguetechie
Latest 14-Jan by Refleks
Latest 13-Jan by EmericD
Latest 12-Jan by APFSDST
Latest 12-Jan by APFSDST
Latest 11-Jan by RovingPedant
Latest 8-Jan by wiggy556
Latest 7-Jan by roguetechie
Latest 6-Jan by roguetechie
Latest 6-Jan by autogun
24/4/22
Thanks, I had not seen that clarification about Challenger 2 to Poland. British Army of the Vistula, then?
24/7/22
Somewhat surprised at how low the CV90MK4 is in comparison to Lynx and Ascod , also that maned turret seems to be the choice for Czech and Slovaks given the internal volume
25/7/22
They are simpler and less expensive.
Not every military is convinced on the viability of unmanned turrets.
If the advantages are not (fully) applicable to a given use it makes little sense to spend the adiitional resources an advantages of a manned turret.
25/7/22
This is a common criticism of unmanned turrets.
Which may or may not be valid. Current experience by users indicates that its not valid. Of course this depends on several variables. For example how the turret and the crew stations are equiped. Which in turn has direct influence on cost.
25/7/22
Although looking at the Czech tender Unmanned turret, and many other unmanned turrets its seems they are actually higher than the manned turrets. and have additionally higher hull roof to accommodate crew under it
25/7/22
The height of a turret any hull depend on the desired characteristics and resulting design.
If the turret is not supposed to have a significant Intrusion into the hull, eg. no turret basket, it has to be higher if a large gun elevation is desired from a conventional gun mounting.
The deterimning factor for hull hight usually is not where the turret crew is situated but its about the required ergonomics and protection level.
Never the less vehicle height is of rather low relevance nowadays. As long as the railway transport dimension limits are met there are few constrains.
25/7/22
It seems no other IFV met Czech Rail transport standard dimensions , And as far as i understand the unmanned turrets also had issues with armoring as most were not capable of matching the vehicle armoring even in max up-armored versions. The turret on the pics was a Kongsberg MCT30 that is only Level 1 protected and can't be up-armored to match the protection levels of the vehicle which was one of the Czech requrements..
25/7/22
The Czech decision to buy the CV90 has online one reason: money.
The CV90 is the cheapest solution and the manufacturer made the required concessions for local production and involvement of the local industry.
The bidding and the program was formally stopped last year not for technical reasons but because the required documentation and/or above mentioned local involvement requirements have not been met by either bidder. Because of this no bid was concidered acceptable. The decision to buy the CV90 now was made as a government business decision.
P.S.: There is a NATO standard for rail transport and all contestants meet it. Demounting secondary armament and external armor and skirts is acceptable and pretty common.