Canada's tanks

[dapaterson]

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

Someone is channeling their inner signaller today...

 

[Underway]

'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

I was watching the Chieftan's channel about a year ago and he was discussing a conference he went to where they were talking about future armour and lessons learned from Ukraine.

The Germans had broken down all the tank tasks and decided that in order to do them they actually needed three to four different vehicles. As you can't just build a Bolo. So this idea of mixing in with the direct fire tanks with a local C-UAS kinetic system and a EW vehicle is not new.

 

[Kirkhill]

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 the gunner can only eliminate some of the vehicles that come close enough to be seen or heard. Lots of gunners with lots of bullets means fewer targets and safer gunners

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

Not looking for 100% efficiency. A lot of Mother Nature's processes, like photosynthesis, are less than 20% efficient, but are powerful enough to modify and sustain the environment.

Bird in the hand...

Absolutely. Any bird is better than no bird. And that goes for new birds. Better to have a 20% efficient bird than no bird.

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.

Don't think so.

How Electro-Optical/Infrared Provides Critical Warfighting Capabilities

New advancements in electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) capabilities by L3Harris Technologies help warfighters differentiate that speck, allowing them more time to react if needed.

www.l3harris.com

US Navy Awards L3Harris $205 Million Contract for New Passive EO/IR Capability to Protect Fleet

A team led by L3Harris Technologies has been selected to provide the Shipboard Panoramic Electro-Optic/Infrared (SPEIR) system to the U.S. Navy that will provide improved fleet protection.

www.l3harris.com

Defending our Airspace with EO/IR Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems

The need to defend sovereign airspace against Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) requires a rapid increase in innovative technologies that can identify, track and eliminate threats.

www.l3harris.com

British Army - Artillery - Air Defence Alerting Device (ADAD) - Armed Forces - a6a15

EARS Gunshot Localization Systems

The EARS® family of gunshot localization systems gives soldiers and military police the situational awareness necessary to respond instantly and accurately to hostile attacks to better protect themselves from snipers and other gunfire threats.

www.qinetiq.com

Things can be seen and heard, by day and night, and the soldier directed to the target.

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

As always. In combination. Covering each others' weaknesses.

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

But then you only have two large calibre guns per troop and the selling point of the "tank" is its large calibre gun, otherwise it is an IFV or Scout vehicle.

On the other hand parking 4x Slew-to-Cue 30x 113mm RWS, with EO/IR and ADAD passive sensors, will reduce the risk to the tanks even if the individual systems are less than 50% efficient. Mount a low cost 70mm calibre SAM like the APKWS or Martlet or some such missile on the same RWS.

Leave the Radars in the rear, or better yet roving, supplying umbrella coverage to the Brigade along with a suitable 50-100 km range missile.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

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

Look on the turret, same level as the main gun, on either side of it, you have small flat panels that seems to be bolted on the turret. Can't see them but suspect at least one more, but probably two on the rear of the turret. Those are your radar antennae. Not all radars are rotating thingys these days.

 

[suffolkowner]

Look on the turret, same level as the main gun, on either side of it, you have small flat panels that seems to be bolted on the turret. Can't see them but suspect at least one more, but probably two on the rear of the turret. Those are your radar antennae. Not all radars are rotating thingys these days.

https://www.twz.com/uploads/2024/06/13/leopard-2-a-rc-3-aps.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1920

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Good picture of them Suffolkowner.

 

[suffolkowner]

Good picture of them Suffolkowner.

im pretty proud of myself for mastering the technology lol

 

[KevinB]

So the gunner can only eliminate some of the vehicles that come close enough to be seen or heard. Lots of gunners with lots of bullets means fewer targets and safer gunners




Not looking for 100% efficiency. A lot of Mother Nature's processes, like photosynthesis, are less than 20% efficient, but are powerful enough to modify and sustain the environment.



Absolutely. Any bird is better than no bird. And that goes for new birds. Better to have a 20% efficient bird than no bird.




Don't think so.

How Electro-Optical/Infrared Provides Critical Warfighting Capabilities

New advancements in electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) capabilities by L3Harris Technologies help warfighters differentiate that speck, allowing them more time to react if needed.

www.l3harris.com

US Navy Awards L3Harris $205 Million Contract for New Passive EO/IR Capability to Protect Fleet

A team led by L3Harris Technologies has been selected to provide the Shipboard Panoramic Electro-Optic/Infrared (SPEIR) system to the U.S. Navy that will provide improved fleet protection.

www.l3harris.com

Defending our Airspace with EO/IR Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems

The need to defend sovereign airspace against Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) requires a rapid increase in innovative technologies that can identify, track and eliminate threats.

www.l3harris.com

British Army - Artillery - Air Defence Alerting Device (ADAD) - Armed Forces - a6a15

EARS Gunshot Localization Systems

The EARS® family of gunshot localization systems gives soldiers and military police the situational awareness necessary to respond instantly and accurately to hostile attacks to better protect themselves from snipers and other gunfire threats.

www.qinetiq.com

Things can be seen and heard, by day and night, and the soldier directed to the target.

I’m fairly familiar with them. But there is a different between getting a bearing to a shot and intercepting something mid flight.

As always. In combination. Covering each others' weaknesses.

But then you only have two large calibre guns per troop and the selling point of the "tank" is its large calibre gun, otherwise it is an IFV or Scout vehicle.

Meh.

On the other hand parking 4x Slew-to-Cue 30x 113mm RWS, with EO/IR and ADAD passive sensors, will reduce the risk to the tanks even if the individual systems are less than 50% efficient. Mount a low cost 70mm calibre SAM like the APKWS or Martlet or some such missile on the same RWS.

Where are you putting them? The Geopard type vehicle is an example of a Near Tank C-UAS, because it has the Armor to be in a tank fight.

Where does that STC system get its data? Oh yeah a Radar…

My point is like @Underway mentioned above you need tank like protection in multiple vehicles

You can put similar features on light armored systems that aren’t expected to get direct fire - but that doesn’t replace your heavy ground combat systems needing those interlocked capabilities.

Leave the Radars in the rear, or better yet roving, supplying umbrella coverage to the Brigade along with a suitable 50-100 km range missile.

That seems to be a very odd thought. It’s going to be a very expensive missile then and not available for intimate support.

 

[Underway]

Look on the turret, same level as the main gun, on either side of it, you have small flat panels that seems to be bolted on the turret. Can't see them but suspect at least one more, but probably two on the rear of the turret. Those are your radar antennae. Not all radars are rotating thingys these days.

Those are for the Trophy system (APS). They take ups space where normally you would have "cheek" armour (could have used some of that today during baseball).
I suspect that the counter UAS system is EO/IR only. Trophy is kinda like CWIS in that it looks only for things that match its threat parameters (closing on a steady bearing at X speed).

 

[FJAG]

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

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

I got the impression A4 hulls would do.

Those are for the Trophy system (APS). They take ups space where normally you would have "cheek" armour (could have used some of that today during baseball).

That's my understanding as well.

I suspect that the counter UAS system is EO/IR only. Trophy is kinda like CWIS in that it looks only for things that match its threat parameters (closing on a steady bearing at X speed).

Agreed. However, for me, the gold standard right now is a system along the Oerlikon Skynex/Skyranger 30 or 35 with AHEAD rounds. The right size gun is there but I'm not sure that the acquisition and control systems are in the tank.

I tend to think along the German lines that you need a specialty vehicle to deal with that threat and leave the tank crew to concentrate on the ground fight. Maybe an autonomous system(s) controlled by the troop or squadron.

Lots of room for thought but the upgrade path (if it works out) makes this an interesting option.

 

[Underway]

I got the impression A4 hulls would do.

That's my understanding as well.

Agreed. However, for me, the gold standard right now is a system along the Oerlikon Skynex/Skyranger 30 or 35 with AHEAD rounds. The right size gun is there but I'm not sure that the acquisition and control systems are in the tank.

I tend to think along the German lines that you need a specialty vehicle to deal with that threat and leave the tank crew to concentrate on the ground fight. Maybe an autonomous system(s) controlled by the troop or squadron.

Lots of room for thought but the upgrade path (if it works out) makes this an interesting option.

An EO/IR system to shoot drones isn't the worst idea. You can do a search parameter with a lot of EO and the tracking/targeting is fine generally if you can get a laser range on the target.

Given that its also an option as a secondary gun that can elevate very high. Probably excellent in built up areas to deal with infantry.

For dedicated air warfare then use a dedicated system.

 

[KevinB]

An EO/IR system to shoot drones isn't the worst idea. You can do a search parameter with a lot of EO and the tracking/targeting is fine generally if you can get a laser range on the target.

Given they are supposed to also deal with ATGM and RPG’s, I’m not sure that most APS inc Trophy can do that well.

Given that its also an option as a secondary gun that can elevate very high. Probably excellent in built up areas to deal with infantry.

Agreed.

For dedicated air warfare then use a dedicated system.

100% but I think that C-UAS and C-RAM requires a lot more than what Trophy can provide, and this is where I see the Gepard type of vehicle’s role in with the armor.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

I think that there is a bone fide requirement for some form of CUAS on each tank, but it should be limited to self-defence against what are being called kamikaze drones. Whether this would be EW (wouldn't work against all systems) or something more kinetic would be something to examine. In my mind, it would not be trying to knock down all UAS - the aim would be to protect the tank against those one-way NLOS attack munitions (the line between ATGM and those systems is blurry). Ideally, it would be automated.

I am skeptical of the claims of Active Protection Systems regarding their effectiveness against long-rod penetrators, but I think they definitely hold promise against one-way drones/NLOS missiles etc.

Neutralizing larger UAS should be reserved for dedicated systems crewed by operators specialized at that task.

 

[Underway]

I think that there is a bone fide requirement for some form of CUAS on each tank, but it should be limited to self-defence against what are being called kamikaze drones. Whether this would be EW (wouldn't work against all systems) or something more kinetic would be something to examine. In my mind, it would not be trying to knock down all UAS - the aim would be to protect the tank against those one-way NLOS attack munitions (the line between ATGM and those systems is blurry). Ideally, it would be automated.

Problem with FPV drones (or other image targeting technologies) and EW is that you need to jam them before they image lock you. Basically if the FPV operator finds an object that has half decent countershading (dark vehicular square on lighter ground background for example), they can image lock it. So in its final approach EW doesn't work in the sense of breaking the control of the operator, the drone aims for centre of mass of the image..

Image locks are not perfect, and if you manouver the image, change its aspect, dazzle it somehow or quite frankly pop smoke (or do all three) it's likely going to miss as it chases the wrong thing. But if its already to close...

I am skeptical of the claims of Active Protection Systems regarding their effectiveness against long-rod penetrators, but I think they definitely hold promise against one-way drones/NLOS missiles etc.

The way I understand the theory is that the APS somehow changes the angle the rod is moving so instead of it arrowing into you it hits more like this " \ " causing it to fragment instead of burrow, thus turning it into a projectile the armour can handle. I don't think that current APS are fast enough to do the detect to engage sequence in time as a long rod is faster and smaller than AT missiles.

But the tech is so new and all I got is open source info... I wonder how APS is doing in Gaza, probably the most data is coming from that location.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Again, I leave the determination of "how" to the experts. Like Oddball from Kelly's Heroes, I only ride'em, I don't know what makes'em work.

I don't think that Hamas if firing any long-rod penetrators. Pre-war, the Russians were claiming that their APS was doubling their effective RHA rating, but I find that hard to believe against APFSDS.

 

[Underway]

Again, I leave the determination of "how" to the experts. Like Oddball from Kelly's Heroes, I only ride'em, I don't know what makes'em work.

I don't think that Hamas if firing any long-rod penetrators. Pre-war, the Russians were claiming that their APS was doubling their effective RHA rating, but I find that hard to believe against APFSDS.

I defer to tech stuff because that's what I know best. I agree that Russian claims are probably garbage.

 

[OldSolduer]

I agree that Russian claims are probably garbage.

Most Russian claims are just that - garbage. In Russia you not tell lies!!! Lies Tell you!!!

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Also demostrator tanks often have a lot of stuff bolted to them that never makes it to production. Who is going load that 30mm? clear jams, etc. Not to mention overwhelm the crew with tasks. Getting rid of it will likley drop the weight below 60 tons

 

[PrairieFella]

I’m fairly familiar with them. But there is a different between getting a bearing to a shot and intercepting something mid flight.







Meh.

Where are you putting them? The Geopard type vehicle is an example of a Near Tank C-UAS, because it has the Armor to be in a tank fight.

Where does that STC system get its data? Oh yeah a Radar…

My point is like @Underway mentioned above you need tank like protection in multiple vehicles

You can put similar features on light armored systems that aren’t expected to get direct fire - but that doesn’t replace your heavy ground combat systems needing those interlocked capabilities.

That seems to be a very odd thought. It’s going to be a very expensive missile then and not available for intimate support.

Putting your Gepard in a tank fight is a good way to get your Gepard killed. The furthest forward I want that is ideally the A1 or A2 Ech. Put them in the F Ech and the first thing I shoot is the box with the big spinny thing...then unleash the drones. One bound to the rear would provide ample radar coverage for the FEBA.

That said, armoured regiments most certainly need internal EW and AD. A Gepard is good example of what should be attached to the SHQ.

Edit: Speak of the devil, Son of Gepard, equipped with the Skyranger 35 with AHEAD.

Rheinmetall unveils hybrid tank and air defense system

Rheinmetall, the German defense giant, has introduced a groundbreaking hybrid of the Pz.87 tank (a Swiss variant of the Leopard 2) and the Skyranger 35 air defense turret at Eurosatory 2024. This innovative system represents the next step in mobile air defense, following the success of the...

defence-blog.com

 

[KevinB]

Putting your Gepard in a tank fight is a good way to get your Gepard killed. The furthest forward I want that is ideally the A1 or A2 Ech. Put them in the F Ech and the first thing I shoot is the box with the big spinny thing...then unleash the drones. One bound to the rear would provide ample radar coverage for the FEBA.

That said, armoured regiments most certainly need internal EW and AD. A Gepard is good example of what should be attached to the SHQ.

I’m not suggesting a Gepard - but a more armored version