Warrior Armoured Vehicles (British Army)
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
I thought it interesting and pertinent that another country is spending that kind of money on a midlife update.
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
It isn't really a MLU but just the next in an ongoing series of "incremental" upgrades, something it appears nearly all users of the CV90 platform have been doing. The use of the term in the article is misleading.
Rubber tracks is something we should definitely looked at for Ajax for all the reasons mentioned in the article.
Rubber tracks is something we should definitely looked at for Ajax for all the reasons mentioned in the article.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1304
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Is that €500m for a rubber track? €3.5m for tracks doesn't sound like a bargain...mr.fred wrote:Just for the sake of comparison:
https://www.baesystems.com/en/feature/c ... ign=PS2020
€500m for a midlife update 144 vehicles, or about €3.5m each.
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
I’m guessing that there’s more to it than that. I just thought that the amount spent on an upgrade was interesting.RunningStrong wrote:s that €500m for a rubber track? €3.5m for tracks doesn't sound like a bargain
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1304
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
It's interesting in that we have no idea what is in that upgrade except for rubber tracks...mr.fred wrote:I’m guessing that there’s more to it than that. I just thought that the amount spent on an upgrade was interesting.RunningStrong wrote:s that €500m for a rubber track? €3.5m for tracks doesn't sound like a bargain
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
The text was from a BAE PR person. Soucy from Canada might be 'OK' for a mention, but perhaps the Israeli supplier was not?
- US Army (?) is buying the same stuff and they are not shy about it
Or is 'supershot' on its way? There are not many CV90 operators with the 35mm gun that can be easily modified
- US Army (?) is buying the same stuff and they are not shy about it
Or is 'supershot' on its way? There are not many CV90 operators with the 35mm gun that can be easily modified
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Member
- Posts: 509
- Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:54
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
accepted. but there seems to be some doubts about the cost-effectiveness and utility of CT40 in the naval role...ArmChairCivvy wrote:and fits much better into an armoured turretmr.fred wrote:widen use of the CT40, which is a very similar capability.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Let's let the French do the test run on their OPVs (the AA version for use on land is just a concept, in metal though)jedibeeftrix wrote: doubts about the cost-effectiveness and utility of CT40 in the naval role...
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Another part of the upgrade was the preparation to be able to fit the Israeli APS as and when required. The programme is more a case of that is the current budget for numerous upgrades over the next few years to keep the platforms at their highest capability level. It is not a single large programme carried out all at once like we are having to do.RunningStrong wrote:It's interesting in that we have no idea what is in that upgrade except for rubber tracks...
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1304
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
The only thing missing from CT40 to allow AA at this time is timed airburst rounds, though a 3 round burst of AP would provide better range.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Let's let the French do the test run on their OPVs (the AA version for use on land is just a concept, in metal though)jedibeeftrix wrote: doubts about the cost-effectiveness and utility of CT40 in the naval role...
It's then a decision of whether a passive thermal sensor is a better choice for short-range AA than an emitter. I'd personally prefer the former.
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Isn't a programable fused round already available for the AA version being pushed for both land and sea use?
Could we adapt the the ADADs Thermal sensor used in conjunction with Starstreak, for both mounted and dismounted operations for such a system?
Could we adapt the the ADADs Thermal sensor used in conjunction with Starstreak, for both mounted and dismounted operations for such a system?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1304
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
I've not heard any conclusion on the GPR-AB round optimised for ground use (circa 2016) but there have also been indications that an additional KE-AB round is being developed for AA use. I assume this is a smaller warhead with longer rangeLord Jim wrote:Isn't a programable fused round already available for the AA version being pushed for both land and sea use?
On an open architecture vehicle it would be possible.Could we adapt the the ADADs Thermal sensor used in conjunction with Starstreak, for both mounted and dismounted operations for such a system?
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
How will you determine range?RunningStrong wrote:The only thing missing from CT40 to allow AA at this time is timed airburst rounds, though a 3 round burst of AP would provide better range.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Let's let the French do the test run on their OPVs (the AA version for use on land is just a concept, in metal though)jedibeeftrix wrote: doubts about the cost-effectiveness and utility of CT40 in the naval role...
It's then a decision of whether a passive thermal sensor is a better choice for short-range AA than an emitter. I'd personally prefer the former.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1304
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
LRF, but there's a big difference to LRF seconds before engagement and a radar emitting.Ron5 wrote:How will you determine range?RunningStrong wrote:The only thing missing from CT40 to allow AA at this time is timed airburst rounds, though a 3 round burst of AP would provide better range.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Let's let the French do the test run on their OPVs (the AA version for use on land is just a concept, in metal though)jedibeeftrix wrote: doubts about the cost-effectiveness and utility of CT40 in the naval role...
It's then a decision of whether a passive thermal sensor is a better choice for short-range AA than an emitter. I'd personally prefer the former.
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
Many options including Laser range finders, Lidar and radar for active systems. while those emit, they can be tightly focussed so that only the target would see it.Ron5 wrote:How will you determine range?
If you want to maintain zero emissions then a computer-controlled stereoscopic or coincidence rangefinder would be an option.
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
My point is that you're going to have an emitter whether you like it or not, and for lasers, there's a dozen systems on the market that can detect and counter. Ajax is festooned with them.
The other thing of course is that lasers & thermal detectors have weather imposed limitations that won't impact your target to the same degree.
The other thing of course is that lasers & thermal detectors have weather imposed limitations that won't impact your target to the same degree.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
As said, point defence.
= you keep shooting at 'it' as long as it keeps coming. I guess AB rounds are programmed for the distance, though... are there any that are proximity fused?
= you keep shooting at 'it' as long as it keeps coming. I guess AB rounds are programmed for the distance, though... are there any that are proximity fused?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
That's funny, just reading today about a new 30mm proximity fuse being tested for the M230LF. Can't remember where I saw it tho'ArmChairCivvy wrote:As said, point defence.
= you keep shooting at 'it' as long as it keeps coming. I guess AB rounds are programmed for the distance, though... are there any that are proximity fused?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
A logical consequence of good quality/ all weather ranging being too expensive to install as an optional extra... but regardless, many more [already fielded] autocannons will need to be able to engage aerial targets
Ron5 wrote:just reading today about a new 30mm proximity fuse being tested for the M230LF.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
If we are discussing guns vs low speed drones, I think the answer is to go back to WW2 solutions. Same problem. Solved by radar directed guns & proximity fuses. AHEAD is a modern wrinkle that also applies.
Ajax, or any other platform, just firing EO directed dumb shells is just not going to hack it.
Ajax, or any other platform, just firing EO directed dumb shells is just not going to hack it.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
-too expensive, SPAAGs will still be used for armoured convoys on the way or HQ nodes (that will constantly need to move as they are heavy on radio traffic)Ron5 wrote: Solved by radar directed guns
-exactlyRon5 wrote:Ajax, or any other platform, just firing EO directed dumb shells is just not going to hack it.
- so what is the potential of proximity fused AB rounds; to fill the gap?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
I wonder where the cost goes. I was thinking something like this radar setup on an Ajax with CT40 ..ArmChairCivvy wrote:too expensive
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
That looks good (and compact)
... but is it a radar or an EO?
... but is it a radar or an EO?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
That setup is both but I was just showing it for the radar. That's from RADA and another config (without the EO) is advertised for static anti-drone so I was assuming they have a suitable FCS.ArmChairCivvy wrote:That looks good (and compact)
... but is it a radar or an EO?
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Warrior Armoured Vehicle Variants (British Army)
https://radausa.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... 024852.jpg
those gubbings below it (integral to its workings) would fit into the space in the back of the AJAX
... just that they would have to be on rollers for the maintenance man to reach all the other things already specced and in place
those gubbings below it (integral to its workings) would fit into the space in the back of the AJAX
... just that they would have to be on rollers for the maintenance man to reach all the other things already specced and in place
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)