gibsonm Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 So does this mean I have to swap my toolbox for a tube of Airfix glue or a plastic welder and a range of Humbol paints? I presume the running gear would remain metalic to cope with the heat generated? anythings got to be better than the M113 butterboxes we use at present. ------------------ Regards, Mark:-{) Getting in line for a Mercury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Well you'll definately want to use Floquil paints with your airbrush. They micro-dry on the plastic surface, but it is really going to be difficult getting decals that big to fit into a soup bowl of water. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-30-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lakowski Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Originally posted by Gen. Sosaboski: I know DU penetrates M1 armor, but I'd just feel better in it anyway. Stealth technology doesn't have an impact when an A-10 or AH-64 rolls in on target, I don't think it's too much of an improvement. How do you use 'LongBow Apache' if the radar can't lockon? There was talk of the same radar on M-1 at one point and I gather russian helos use radar to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skott Karlsson Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 ::laughing:: Kinda makes me imagine these men getting out these glue guns and going to work on a broken down plastic tank during combat situations. Driver: Damn! We lost a wheel on the track! Tank Commander: Quick, get out the model glue! Seriously though.. The idea of making it less dectectable by using plastic isnt a far fetched idea I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. Sosaboski Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Paul, Good point, but you've still got the gun on the Apache. Maybe we're getting modern on one hand and old fashioned on the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Ironic that the military is going lighter and more mobile because it thinks we don't have to fight the big guys anymore, just LIC/MIC like Kosovo and such but at the same time was a super stealth tank. What is it? Are we going to be policing third world nations or high-tech enemies? I'd hate to be the poor smuck caught, in a plastic LAV, in the sites of some export T-72.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lakowski Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Composites are a smart choice for armor vehicle design due to there light weight and high strength [ as high as steel in some cases]. As far as armor goes the following generalities apply A range of composites tested against 12.7 AP shot showed a resistance of 17-20% of RHA regardless of if it was Sglass [ Fiberglas 2.6 g/cc] or Dyneema [ 0.9 g/cc] with even rubber offering 17% resistance. As you move to higher striking velocities the . Thickness effectiveness reaches 25-35% , while the HEAT resistance may well be 45-70%. Once you have a light weight structure , which BTW accounts for 1/4 the AFV weight, then you can add ceramics and steel plates or NERA appliqués etc. A resent test showed a Sglass- ceramic - poly type target offered about 1.5 times the resistance as the same mass of steel, so this stuff is not to be dismissed so lightly For the same level of protection these test beds have been shown to offer a 25-30% weight saving ,based on a heavier Sglass -aluminum - TiD frame/armor . If this was Dyneema with SiC based it might offer 40-50% saving. Heres some estimate figures I generated for Steel Beasts Upgrade modual , for the externally mounted gun thats on the LAV-III 105 mm which could just as easly be mounted on such a AFV as a plastic tank. The assualt gun version of the LAV-III features the Teledyne externally mounted 105mm gun in soft recoil mount turret carrying 30-45 rounds ROF 10-12 RPM ;firing M-900E2 round ?The front 'gun pod' armor cavity is 60cm thick and this does offer considerable potential The dimensions of the main gun mount are 0.5 x 0.6m and its length is about 3/4 of the LEO-1A3 turret [comparing silhouettes ]I make that about 0.75 m³ [volume], but theres also the 'trunk' that the 'gun pod' pivots on, thats about 0.5 x 1.5 x 0.6 = 0.46 m³ so combined thats about 1.2m³ [Volume] . The 1.2m³ turret volume compares to 4.2m³ for the LEO-1A3; means 0.287 of the volume or 1900kg /1.2m³ = 1583 Kg/m³ , compared to 2380kg/m³ for the LEO-1A3 or or 2/3 of the armor mass, thats.. <PRE> front side rear LEO-1A3 23.5cm 7cm 4cm Teledyne 15.6cm 4.7cm 2.7cm cavity 60cm 15cm 6cm density 2.04g/cm³ 2.46g/cm³ 3.55g/cm³ </PRE> Rear could be Aluminum and Alumina , but the rest looks like aluminum and some light weight material. A more likely possibility is that only the front and side of the actual 'gun pod' are armored heavily making the armor more like the following <PRE> Teledyne Front gun pod 23 cm steel in a 60cm cavity 3g/cm³ Front trunk 8.2 cm steel [ 3g/cm³ = 21cm cavity] Side gun pod 6.0 cm steel 15cm thickness = 3.14 g/cm³ Side trunk 3.4 cm steel [9cm thickness = 3 g/cm³] Rear gun pod 2.7cm steel [6cm thickness = 3.5g/cm³] Rear Trunk 2.7cm steel [6cm thickness = 3.5g/cm³] </PRE> So the armor looks like Aluminum Alumina combinations with Dyneema to boost the ceramic density .The armor could be 1 part Al-2024 [.5/0.8] + 1 part Dyneema [0.35/0.5] + 3 parts SiC [1.1/1.83]÷ 5 = 0.83 KE x 60cm= 50cm KE. The HEAT armor should be 0.8 + 0.5 + 3 x1.83 ÷5= 1.36 or 82cm HEAT. These figures might change as the free edge is hard to assess, It looks like there isn't any?? The layering of plates increases HEAT resistance 1.2 times bring this value up to ~100cm HEAT.Theres also the possibility of adding D-Tech type armor to the 'gun pod' and various vulnerable sections of the AGS turret as a whole. Going with this the Teledyne AGS armorcould look like .... "TURRET " [ 5cm Al-2024 45cm < Spectra & SiC > +7cm Al-2024] x 0.83/ 1.36 <PRE> FRONT SIDE REAR gun pod 50cmKE 98cm HEAT 12cm KE 24cm HEAT 5cm KE 10cm HEAT trunk 17cmKE 34cm HEAT 7cm KE 15cm HEAT 5cm KE 10cm HEAT </PRE> For a Assault gun version the front turret should be raised to 25mm @ 70° D-Tech armor and the whole armor reinforced with Kevlar or Dyneema /Spectra shield plus Ti bulging plates. 47mm KE & 200mm HEAT x angle or 70° 'front gun pod' and 60° 'side gune pod' with 45° 'front trunk', and the rest verical plates. This should add atleast 500 kg to the turret weight. "TURRET " <PRE> FRONT SIDE REAR gun pod 64cmKE 160cm HEAT 21cm KE 64cm HEAT 10cm KE 30cm HEAT trunk 23cmKE 62cm HEAT 11cm KE 35cm HEAT 10cm KE 30cm HEAT </PRE> [This message has been edited by Paul Lakowski (edited 01-30-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gashford Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Earlier it was said that our teeth was the main reason that we are good at making armour, although I seriously doubt that to be the case (mind you my teeth aren't as good as they used to be), I should imagine that should the tests be successful on the new plastic tank that it will go the way of most of our inventions. Great ideas, past the tests and then the money dries up so it gets shipped to America for massed production at half the cost we could manage to make it. =) *sighs* ah well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Crow Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Originally posted by Gen. Sosaboski: I know DU penetrates M1 armor, but I'd just feel better in it anyway. Stealth technology doesn't have an impact when an A-10 or AH-64 rolls in on target, I don't think it's too much of an improvement. I know I've been out of the U.S. for a while, maybe I missed some undeclared skirmish between the Yanks and the Brits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Interesting thread. Thanks for great detailed tables on composite materials. I am struggling to understand them all. BTW, modern attack helo like EuroTiger and Longbow employ microwave radars to search and id targets. Russian Mi-28M and Ka-52 are rumoured to have radar implemented. Conventional helo users electro-optical means. I am not sure about A-10 for I don't the information with me by now. For magnesium (Mg), wouldn't they just burn very brillantly with oxygen under high temperature? They make good flashlight for photography. Does M2A2 really use magnesium? I wonder how this "plastic" tank goes when a HEAT round comes in. Hey, military modellers rejoice! The UK Royal Army need you in maintaining and painting their brand new Armored Calvary! When will our CM Modders get included? BTW, I saw an episode of "Extreme Machines" in the "Discovery Channel" some time ago of which US is experimenting with future tank designs which are more automated with very low profile (neo-Hezter?). Any info on that? Griffin. ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" [This message has been edited by GriffinCheng+ (edited 01-31-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triggerhappy Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 I wonder if those plastic tanks lead to the development of new ammo if they become common in the world's armies. ------------------ Rührt euch! CMPFCICM2 - Combat Mission Players for Campaigns in Combat Mission 2 - Join us! ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 Why am I reminded of that computer game "Army Men" when discussing these types of AFV's. Does this mean that all you'll need is a very fast firing MG to keep chipping away at the plastic armour untill all thats left is a pile of plastic chips? Flamethrowers could make a big comeback as well with the only evidence left of a destroyed AFV being a moolten pool of plastic... Regards Jim R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Peace Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 I own stock in this company. http://www.ceradyne.com/apdef.htm They make Armor out of strange composite ceramic materials like Silicon Carbide. Extremely light weight with excellent protective qualities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae Posted January 31, 2001 Share Posted January 31, 2001 I imagine that the counter to this is the revival of fire based weapons. If say a traditional 120mm or 105mm round was filled with napalm, and not designed to jet forward like a HEAT charge, just split open, could make fore some very inetresting results, especially if a sabot round or burst of light cannon fire came after.... Of course all of this is probably a mute point since modern sabot rounds punch through most anything (in ym uninformed opinion) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. Sosaboski Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Ah, yes, Kannonier Reichmann, Army Men! Heh heh...perhaps the top brass played it so much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JunoReactor Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 The AH64D Longbow still retains the TADS (the optical target acquisition system) and FLIR, in addition to its radar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lakowski Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by JunoReactor: The AH64D Longbow still retains the TADS (the optical target acquisition system) and FLIR, in addition to its radar. Yes but are the missiles Radar guided or multi mode guidance? I always heard they were fire and forget MMW radar. If the radar can't lock on it can't be used , right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Yep, you can tell it's plastic...I found sprue lines when I looked at the photo closeup...Mattel strikes again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 I can only answer from what I got from the games Jane's Longbow 1 & 2. Answer: Yes and no. (N.B. Technical data edited based on info from here: http://www.periscopeone.com/demo/weapons/missrock/antitank/w0003226.html ) 1. AH-64D can carry 2 versions of Hellfire, One is essentially laser guided from the TADS mentioned. And the other is MWR-guided version. I am not sure if they can be mixed since Apache can carry max 16 Hellfire missiles 2. Radar guided Hellfire can be fired in a mode called "Lock On After Launch" LOAL mode where the launching platform can release missiles when staying hidden behind obstacles, like a hill, between the intended target area. However, it is required to paint a specific target for the missile as terminal guidance. In the case of Longbow Apache, only the radar mast, mounted on the top of the blades, is needed to be exposed. The advantage is, it is very difficult for opfor the notice the small radar mast. Hope it helps. Griffin. Originally posted by Paul Lakowski: Yes but are the missiles Radar guided or multi mode guidance? I always heard they were fire and forget MMW radar. If the radar can't lock on it can't be used , right? ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" [This message has been edited by GriffinCheng+ (edited 02-01-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts