Canada's tanks

[suffolkowner]

From the linked article:

And as for the timelines on the XM-30 (and for the M1E3 as well if they are able to align production) this is from the Congressional Research Service backgrounder on the XM-30

yeah i read it before. Not much there,there.

Im not going to get too excited over a tracked IFV but FRP for 2030 for the MBT is 6 yrs right off the bat but we wouldnt be getting any from the first production runs, thats why I threw out the 15 yrs. Yeah maybe we can assemble in London.

Weight reduction wise

autoloader?
less crew=smaller capsule?
fibre optics ?
composite armour?
hybrid drive?

 

[suffolkowner]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801221595467268421

another possible Leopard 2 evolution

KNDS manufacturer?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801288947420614980

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Niiiiiiice……

 

[suffolkowner]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801221595467268421

another possible Leopard 2 evolution

KNDS manufacturer?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801288947420614980

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801295618444267956

opinions on the pivoting gun? vs active suspension?

 

[FJAG]

That's an interesting post from several angles. For starters I've listened to some German reporters who seem to think this vehicle isn't so much the bridge to Leo 3 or MGCS but in fact is the initial version of Leo 3. Interestingly the speculation on MGCS was to be German Leo 2 type chassis with a lighter LeClerc 2 man turret which already had an autoloader. The Leo 2 A-RC3.0 will lose most of the weight of its forebearers by virtue of its lighter turret and the concept of moving the LeClerc turret crew into the hull is a small step. So we're possibly not only seeing the Leo 3 but also the MGCS here.

The question that I'm left with is whether or not there is an upgrade path from older Leo 2s like the A4 and A6 to the, let's just call it a Leo 3. From what I read the hull and automotives are essentially the same as current Leo 6/7. The hull changes are therefore relatively minor, dealing primarily with the crew move, with all the real new stuff happening in the turret.

Edited to add: The 30mm RWS with an anti-drone/anti-air capability is a nice touch although the absence of a coaxial machine gun could restrict its capability in urban settings. The German press also reported a capability to control drones from inside the tank but was a bit vague as to whether there was a drone launcher integral to the tank itself or simply if this was an ability to control drones launched by a support team of some type.

It'll be fun to watch this space for the next year or so.

 

[KevinB]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801295618444267956

opinions on the pivoting gun? vs active suspension?

Active suspension has been around for a while - it was in the predecessor for the Abram’s and Leo2 back when the Germans and Americans had a JV working on the MBT-70 concept. However it was notably dropped from both separate designs when the teams split.

I know some European tanks have used them - but there has always been questions about combat durability with the hydraulic setup for them and movement when the rear is raise to give extra gun depression in a hull/turret down situation.

That said, I cannot see the double trunnion system being light if it’s going to be robust.
When combined with the auto loader - one has to wonder if they are some specific loading positions it needs to be in.

 

[MilEME09]

Active suspension has been around for a while - it was in the predecessor for the Abram’s and Leo2 back when the Germans and Americans had a JV working on the MBT-70 concept. However it was notably dropped from both separate designs when the teams split.

I know some European tanks have used them - but there has always been questions about combat durability with the hydraulic setup for them and movement when the rear is raise to give extra gun depression in a hull/turret down situation.

That said, I cannot see the double trunnion system being light if it’s going to be robust.
When combined with the auto loader - one has to wonder if they are some specific loading positions it needs to be in.

Only way i can see that being light ish is using expensive materials like Titanium composites.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

In other news, C Sqn RCD won the Canadian Army Trophy (CAT) tank gunnery competition conducted in Latvia last month. There were teams from seven nations participating. This was the first time in 33 years that the CAT was conducted. A team from the UK came second, while a team from Italy came third.

Congrats to the Sqn and the team!

 

[OldSolduer]

In other news, C Sqn RCD won the Canadian Army Trophy (CAT) tank gunnery competition conducted in Latvia last month. There were teams from seven nations participating. This was the first time in 33 years that the CAT was conducted. A team from the UK came second, while a team from Italy came third.

Congrats to the Sqn and the team!

Well done!!

 

[KevinB]

Only way i can see that being light ish is using expensive materials like Titanium composites.

Which tends to limit the robustness as well...

I love Ti for many things, I also wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole for others.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Even the Soviets with enough Ti to build subs, did not use it extensively in their tanks.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

In other news, C Sqn RCD won the Canadian Army Trophy (CAT) tank gunnery competition conducted in Latvia last month. There were teams from seven nations participating. This was the first time in 33 years that the CAT was conducted. A team from the UK came second, while a team from Italy came third.

Congrats to the Sqn and the team!

Audax et Celer!
Bold and Swift!

 

[Retired AF Guy]

The War Zone has a long article on the new Leopard variant"

New Leopard 2 Tank Packs A Big Cannon, Uncrewed Turret, Anti-Drone Defenses

The Leopard 2 A-RC 3.0, which also has a pop-up missile launcher, is a step toward a next-gen Franco-German tank.

www.twz.com

 

[Underway]

Only way i can see that being light ish is using expensive materials like Titanium composites.

Well considering there are no people in the turret the turret can be smaller, thus less volume required for wrapping armour around it and, I suspect less armour needed as there are no squishy people to protect in the turret.

The War Zone article points to it being 60 tons vice 72 tons so its not light its just 12 tons lighter.

 

[FJAG]

The War Zone has a long article on the new Leopard variant"

New Leopard 2 Tank Packs A Big Cannon, Uncrewed Turret, Anti-Drone Defenses

The Leopard 2 A-RC 3.0, which also has a pop-up missile launcher, is a step toward a next-gen Franco-German tank.

www.twz.com

This

KNDS has said that existing Leopard 2 variants can be brought up to the new A-RC 3.0 standard, which could be an attractive option for current operators of the type depending on the exact cost and complexity of that conversion.

One question on the 30mm anti-drone capability - where's the radar??

 

[IKnowNothing]

This



One question on the 30mm anti-drone capability - where's the radar??

If I interpreted correctly the article speculates that its tied into the APS radar

 

[KevinB]

If I interpreted correctly the article speculates that its tied into the APS radar

Which is were? Fitted for not with


Still a flat roof design, which based on the NATO tank losses in Ukraine doesn’t seem wise. Russia loves to throw an ass ton of munitions trying to hit the blowout panels for the bustle rack.

I think tank turrets are going to need a fairly drastic design change to having roof based blowout panels. Yes they save the crew - but take the tank out of the fight.

Pre drone it kind of made sense - as the hull and turret down fighting methods limited exposure, and the top of the tank wasn’t really exposed - as Russian missiles never really had a legitimate top attack option.

Now an APS system for C-UAS and C-AT Missile/Rocket may reduce that risk and the flat roof will give the APS a greater engagement zone depending on placement - but if one is running an auto-loader, the ammunition storage methods may want to be altered.

 

[suffolkowner]

This



One question on the 30mm anti-drone capability - where's the radar??

any hull? 2A4/2A5/2A6?

are all the usable hulls being made into 2A7's and 2A8's? Or are they complete new builds?

 

[Kirkhill]

This



One question on the 30mm anti-drone capability - where's the radar??

A lot of the systems being offered are relying on EO/IR systems and ballistic computers similar to the AimPoint sights being offered with the CG84, sights compatible with MGs, AGLs and cannons.

It is also note-worthy how many beam-riding and wire-guided missiles are still being actively employed.

Radars seem to advertise your location.

Threat management starts with eliminating the things you can hear and see.

 

[KevinB]

A lot of the systems being offered are relying on EO/IR systems and ballistic computers similar to the AimPoint sights being offered with the CG84, sights compatible with MGs, AGLs and cannons.

Those sights cannot work complex intercepts. They work fairly simple ballistic trajectories based on range, some will do some basic movement and wind, but nothing like what are required for an APS.

So far most APS for AFV's are fairly useless.

It is also note-worthy how many beam-riding and wire-guided missiles are still being actively employed.

Bird in the hand...

Radars seem to advertise your location.

Yes, but at the end of the day if you want precise targeting information on an incoming item, you need a radar to fix and determine its course and speed to engage it.

Threat management starts with eliminating the things you can hear and see.

Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock...

I'm starting to think that perhaps the 3rd and 4th tank in a tank Platoon may not end up being gun tanks - but C-UAS/C-RAM tanks.
If those are using 35-45mm guns, they are also able to work on Light Armored Vehicles, Soft Skins and Troops