About Western/NATO tanks in game.

[Damian90]

Ehm this is only prototype.

This is how M1A2SEP with T.U.S.K.-II look like.

M1A2SEP with T.U.S.K-I.

And M1A1SA with T.U.S.K.-I.

T.U.S.K.-I equipment:

XM32 (now designation should be M32) ARAT-I/ASRPO-R ERA/NERA tiles, from cut off's it seems that this is somekind of layered ERA? Same tiles are used on M2A2ODS/ODS-E's and M2A3's.

TIP or Tank-Infantry Phone.

PDB or Power Distribution Box.

TIS for TC CWS only fo M1A1SA.

TIS for Loader's M240.

LAGS/TAGS or Loader's/Transparent Armored Gun Shield's.

C-IED or Counter-IED kit, 200mm thick, probably layered hull belly addon armor.

CS/AMM or Counter Sniper/Anti Material Mount, mount for 12,7mm M2HB monted over gun mantled, contected to FCS, we can call it second Coax.

T.U.S.K.-II equipment:

New XM19 (now M19) ERA/NERA tiles connected to XM32 (M32) ERA/NERA tiles, so now we can call these tiles as multilayer ERA/NERA armor, it have good protection against tandem warhead RPG's and ATGM's I suppose and it enchance protection agains EFP's.

Upgraded C-IED, it adds special seat for driver.

Rear camera for driver.

T.U.S.K.-III equipment (still in development):

RWS for TC (only for M1A2SEP) and Loader.

Upgraded C-IED, special seats for all crew men.

Optional redesigned RPUSA (Rear Protection Unit Slat Armor) for rear protection against RPG's.

Also all tanks are equiped on mission with Warlock/Duke IED jammer's system.

Note: Some equipment as, TIS for TC in M1A1SA, PDB, TIP and in future rear camera for driver are now standard equipment for tanks added under modernisation program and repairs.

[Damian90]

FV4034 Challenger 2 with final Street Fighter Kit:

BTW, there's not much point in using TUSKs if you're fighting tanks, is there? I'm kind of fuzzy on what the TUSK is, but AFAIK it's mainly designed to help deal with RPGs and things like that.

Such kit's are not so heavy, these kit's in very small manner have impact

on mobility, and add's protection over rear and sides, so in tank vs. tank fight it can enchance protection against CE ammo like HEAT, MPAT, ATGM's.

[Damian90]

Well I really don't like PSO kit, especially no protection for engine are, even no Slat armor.

But maybe production version will have some slat or something else.

But right now, AMAP kit for Leo2A4 is better.

Note: Addon armor modules are anti CE ammo, it probably have little impact on KE penetrators.

[Smaragdadler]

Grog party at battlefront-forums. :]

In the manual (updated for v1.20): Another modification available is the TUSK (tank urban survival kit) with enhanced allround protection and armor upgrades.

So it seems in CMSF-terms TUSK means just that.

Some "intel" about PSO/UrbOps/

Leopard 2 PSO (= "Peace Support Operation"):

- demonstrator was shown in June 2006 during Eurosatory.

Production of demonstrator was conductet using KMW funds, and in no way did the vehicle represent any kind of standard or requirement of a particular user. Designation 'PSO' was chosen as reference to the kind of operations conducted in order to prevent a conflict from starting, to enforce peace or stabilise a fragile peace. It is most likely that peace enforcment operations would include conventional combat operations. KMW believed a requirement for such a vehicle already existed or would exist in the near future. It was also assumed that, to suit this requirement, no newly manufactured vehicles would be procured. therefore, the Leopard 2 PSO was based on modifications of existing components and the integration of new components. Possible users would have the choice between a range of modifications that could be selected according to the anticipated threat. All PSO modifications can be implemented on the Leopard 2A4, A5 or A6.

Protection: - against RPG-7 additional passive armour elements fitted to the hull and turret; heavy frontal protection from KE threats was kept; it's possible to fit ERA and active protections systems (this was not shown, but systems are available); mine protection kit can be fitted; camouflage pattern is similar to to the one used by British Berlin Brigade, the colour combination used on demonstrator was especially selected for operations in Kabul.

Armament: L/44 smoothbore tank gun insted longer L/55 (better for urban areas because of space); if Bundeswehr would field PSO variant it is beliefed it would get FLW 200 (remote controlled weapon station, can be fitted with 5,56mm to 12,7mm or 40mm AGL, has higher elevation range)

C&C: mounting a IFIS or another battlefield managment system is "seen as a must"; two hull mounted cameras 360° + rear view camera + front mounted camera for day/night/bad weather driving; air-conditioning system to reduce crew fatigue; tank-infantry telephone can be mounted

Mobility: The power-pack mounted in the Leopard 2 PSO features some growth potential and can therefore partly accommodate an increase in weight. But power-pack is not a must, depends which basic variant is used (A4, A5 or A6)

Miscellaneous: dozer blades resemble a snow plought. When preassure gets to high, parts of the plough can be raised. To mount dozer blade, parts of frontal armour must be removed; spotlight (made in israel).

The Bundeswehr - Leopard 2 UrpOps ( = "Urban Operations")

The designation was chosen, because vehicle is optimised for military operations in urban terrain. Based on an initiative of the General der Panzertruppen (General of the German Armoured Forces): all-round protection, capabillity of monitoring the close vicinity of the vehicle, remotely controlled weapon station (most likely FLW 200), dozer blade for obstacle clearing, mounting of non-lethal armament.

Under current concepts and plans, 50 Leopard 2A4 MBT turrets will be kept as a reserve and used for possible conversions. In case an operational requirement arises, these can then be mounted onto chassis taken from the serving fleet of 2A5/A6/A6M tanks.

Perspectives for the Future: It is believed that international interest in the vehicle in the future will lead to several further improved models of the Leopard 2. The Leopard 2 PSO Demonstrator will be the ancestor of all of these, similar to the way in which the Leopard 2A6EX is the ancestor of Spanish Leopard 2E and Greek Leopard 2HEL. The concept is going to be testet on further trial vehicles.

Source: Lobitz, Leopard 2 Main Battle Tank

some infos on Leclerc AZUR programme anyone?

[Clevinger]

some infos on Leclerc AZUR programme anyone?

I've found this page about the AZUR kit. There are some nice photos.

"AZUR Kit :

- ERA Kit against RPGs, plus a set of slat armor.

- Protection kit against incendiary projectiles and flaming liquids.

- wireless communication system with footsoldiers.

- reverse alarm, panoramic sighting device.

- remotely operated 7.62mm MG with day/night sight.

- supply trunks on the rear of the vehicle, instead of the disposable fuel tanks.

- electrical interface for civilian hardware."

Here is also a pic that shows the elements of the kit in blue :

[Damian90]

Leopard 2 PSO (= "Peace Support Operation"):

- demonstrator was shown in June 2006 during Eurosatory.

Production of demonstrator was conductet using KMW funds, and in no way did the vehicle represent any kind of standard or requirement of a particular user. Designation 'PSO' was chosen as reference to the kind of operations conducted in order to prevent a conflict from starting, to enforce peace or stabilise a fragile peace. It is most likely that peace enforcment operations would include conventional combat operations. KMW believed a requirement for such a vehicle already existed or would exist in the near future. It was also assumed that, to suit this requirement, no newly manufactured vehicles would be procured. therefore, the Leopard 2 PSO was based on modifications of existing components and the integration of new components. Possible users would have the choice between a range of modifications that could be selected according to the anticipated threat. All PSO modifications can be implemented on the Leopard 2A4, A5 or A6.

Protection: - against RPG-7 additional passive armour elements fitted to the hull and turret; heavy frontal protection from KE threats was kept; it's possible to fit ERA and active protections systems (this was not shown, but systems are available); mine protection kit can be fitted; camouflage pattern is similar to to the one used by British Berlin Brigade, the colour combination used on demonstrator was especially selected for operations in Kabul.

Armament: L/44 smoothbore tank gun insted longer L/55 (better for urban areas because of space); if Bundeswehr would field PSO variant it is beliefed it would get FLW 200 (remote controlled weapon station, can be fitted with 5,56mm to 12,7mm or 40mm AGL, has higher elevation range)

C&C: mounting a IFIS or another battlefield managment system is "seen as a must"; two hull mounted cameras 360° + rear view camera + front mounted camera for day/night/bad weather driving; air-conditioning system to reduce crew fatigue; tank-infantry telephone can be mounted

Mobility: The power-pack mounted in the Leopard 2 PSO features some growth potential and can therefore partly accommodate an increase in weight. But power-pack is not a must, depends which basic variant is used (A4, A5 or A6)

Miscellaneous: dozer blades resemble a snow plought. When preassure gets to high, parts of the plough can be raised. To mount dozer blade, parts of frontal armour must be removed; spotlight (made in israel).

The Bundeswehr - Leopard 2 UrpOps ( = "Urban Operations")

The designation was chosen, because vehicle is optimised for military operations in urban terrain. Based on an initiative of the General der Panzertruppen (General of the German Armoured Forces): all-round protection, capabillity of monitoring the close vicinity of the vehicle, remotely controlled weapon station (most likely FLW 200), dozer blade for obstacle clearing, mounting of non-lethal armament.

Under current concepts and plans, 50 Leopard 2A4 MBT turrets will be kept as a reserve and used for possible conversions. In case an operational requirement arises, these can then be mounted onto chassis taken from the serving fleet of 2A5/A6/A6M tanks.

Perspectives for the Future: It is believed that international interest in the vehicle in the future will lead to several further improved models of the Leopard 2. The Leopard 2 PSO Demonstrator will be the ancestor of all of these, similar to the way in which the Leopard 2A6EX is the ancestor of Spanish Leopard 2E and Greek Leopard 2HEL. The concept is going to be testet on further trial vehicles.

Source: Lobitz, Leopard 2 Main Battle Tank

UrbOp Kit is very interesting, I suppose that if they mean all around protection these means that they add additional Slat Armorto the rear side and rear of the hull.

Well we need to wait until we see full operational vehilces in such variant.

- ERA Kit against RPGs, plus a set of slat armor.

The coolest thing with Leclerc is that that it's base armor is a... well mix of NERA, ERA, ceramics, perforated still blocks and it have good LOS thickness.

So I suppose that side addon armor for hull is mixed ERA and NERA.

AZUR is one of the best of urban protection kit for tanks in compare to T.U.S.K.-I/II/III, Street Fighter and PSO/UrbOp.

[Smaragdadler]

... I suppose that if they mean all around protection these means that they add additional Slat Armorto the rear side and rear of the hull.

Well we need to wait until we see full operational vehilces in such variant. ...

Some more info from Lobitz:

Other Possible Modifications

* Active Protection: soft kill/hard kill (for example, MUSS/AWISS/ADS) [!!!]

* Passive Protection: camouflage kits, bomblet protection for turret roof

* 360° all-round observation device

* Friend/Foe Identification system

* Tank-infantry phone

* Fire control system w/ automatic tracking of moving targets

* Warning sensors (in some cases these may be linked to countermeasure systems)

Most modifications interact and are linked to each other, for example, a remotely controlled weapon station and a 360° all-round observation device. A possible modification was demonstrated in the field of propulsion with the Leopard 2A6EX DEMO II that was fitted with the EURO power-pack, and in the area of armour with the Leopard 2 PSO and Leopard 2A4 Evolution. Listing all technically and hypothetically possible modifications in this work would far exeed the space available. Most of these will anyway never be fitted to a Leopard 2 in Bundeswehr service.

again from above:

...it's possible to fit ERA and active protections systems (this was not shown, but systems are available [!!!])...

Leopard 2 mit AMAP-ADS:

no further comment, make from it what you think...

[Damian90]

Well, such modified will be 150-200 tanks, so kit can have overall more equipment in one final version, in comparision US or UK need more T.U.S.K and Street Fighter kits so more equipment is added in newer versions of kits.

Also in my eyes Leo2 as lighter armored tank need more uparmoring, and this is good sign that German designers kept an eye on this issue.

[Joji]

Damian,

Thank you for your very good posts. They are very informative and your english is pretty good: it is a hard language.

I was interested when you said that an RPG29 had defeated the frontal armor of a CR2, wounding the driver.

The only combat injury to a CR2 driver that I have heard of was due to an under belly IED strike. What is your source for the RPG29 claim?

Keep up the good work!

[Damian90]

Thank you for your very good posts. They are very informative and your english is pretty good: it is a hard language.

Thanks! :-)

I was interested when you said that an RPG29 had defeated the frontal armor of a CR2, wounding the driver.

The only combat injury to a CR2 driver that I have heard of was due to an under belly IED strike. What is your source for the RPG29 claim?

Well, first British mass media, try to search and you find.

Second in our Tank Lovers community after info get up, we all were really interested what happened.

From what we get to know, RPG-29 hit Lower Front Hull of Challenger 2, probably over the center were driver seats, so conclusion, Lower Front Hull is not protected by Dorchester or Burlignton (Chobham is not correct but popular designation) armor, it is probably in worse scenario simple RHA plate, in best scenario two RHA plates with Air Gap or simple ceramic matrix beetwen them. Second, ROMOR-A ERA can't give significant protection boost so Lower Front Hull + ROMOR-A can't protect against tandem warheads, also British MoD said that these was RPG-29.

Effect, driver lost foot, rest crew minor injuries from spall, MoD gives funds to made new uparmor packadge for Lower Front Hull, now it is Burlignton or more probably Dorchester bolt on module, so now we can assumpt that driver is safe against tandem warhead RPG's and some not to big ATGM's.

Of course we don't know details, and this is best what get's up to my mind and beelive me, I think about this incident very long time, getting all possible scenarios and etc.

So this is I think very close to what really happens, damn, that crew was very lucky, if shaped charge jet ignite propelant charges or HESH rounds there were 4 dead tankers and probably next FV4034 lost his turret if ammo and propelant charges goes cook-off.

Keep up the good work!

I'm trying my best to write about modern tanks as close reality is and as many infos simple civilian can get.

If all of you mate's are interested about tanks and armored vehicles go to TankNet forum, there are plenty of Info's and also many interesting pics. :-)

[Damian90]

Hey, some new infos abou FV4034 Challenger 2 performance in Iraq.

1 Challenger 2 after F-F, turret lost, tank written off and scraped. 7 Challenger 2's in different stage of damage after RPG's and SPG-9's hits, 1 Challenger 2 after RPG-29, perforated lower front hull covered by ROMOR-A ERA, 1 Challenger 2 after EFP, hull belly breached.

So 10 tanks are.were in different stages of damage.

But it is likely to be that there are more than 10 tanks, this indicates specially to new up-armor kits arrival to Iraq.

I suppose that there were even side turret perforations, but still no proof.

I will try to get more info's but there is just black hole in information policy of British MoD, so this will be difficult, especially that British soldiers don't want to talk about such things like equipment casualties.

[MikeyD]

From what we get to know, RPG-29 hit Lower Front Hull of Challenger 2

Have there been any American reports of RPG-29 captured from insurgents in Iraq? I've seen picts of all flavor of RPG-7, including Chinese bouncing airbust rounds. I haven't heard anything about wire-guided ATGMs either.

[Damian90]

Yes, there are even films with RPG-29 fired onto M1A1SA and M1A2SEP with T.U.S.K.-I (hit was occured on Lower Front Hull, no armor perforation, no reports also).

Most RPG-29's were used in Sadr City and in Basra.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

You guys may be interested to know… if not already mentioned… that the Israelis have now fielded one of their APS/hard kill systems with operational units.

http://defense-update.com/products/t/trophy_merkava.htm

All sides and everyone has them close to go/ in development for years.. but I think this is the first with a “western” style combat unit.

Hard Kill APS are the big change coming now… over the next couple of years in all armies due to the push they received as a result of the analysis of the ’06 Lebanon War.

All interesting stuff..

Keep the great posts from guys going… interesting stuff…

All the best,

Kip.

PS. Moon the above is not a commercial link… it is free… …

[Damian90]

Yeah, fieldieng a ASPRO-A or Trophy is a great thing in tanks world. :-P

Now we can just wait when other system will be fielded, like Quick Kill (US), Iron Fist (Israel), LEDS-150 (Sweden), AMAP-ADS (Germany) etc.

BTW, some people suspect that ASPRO-A/Trophy and Iron Fist in final development stage become as one APS system.

[Chops]

I just put together a Blue Motor Pool (Brits, Marines, Army) map with all of the various Blue vehicles on it, just to compare and contrast. I noticed that the Marine Tanks - M1A1HC FEP and the M1A1HC appear to be identical other than their names in the game. They both have the same ammo, defenses, and equipment as far as I can tell.

Shouldn't there be some differences in the game? I searched through the forum but have not found any clarification on this.

[Dietrich]

I'm already reconciled to the assumption that someone will come along and tell me I'm either incorrect or am oversimplifying, but here goes:

USMC M1A1 FEP is basically an M1A1HC with under-the-hood upgrades which give it greater "fightability". That's why they are appear identical.

[dan/california]

The subtle differences between them are modeled in the engine, even if they are not well reflected in the interface. But the weapon vs armor overmatch tends to be so overwhelming one way or the other its hard to tell from just playing.

[Damian90]

We also can assumpt with great probability, that M1A1FEP upgrades are similiar to M1A1SA, that means same armor inserts (new ones) like in M1A2SEP, M1A1FEP have new FCS etc.

Interesting thing is, U.S.M.C. use and mount inside of M1's FBCB2?

Probably yes, not FBCB2-BFT like in M1A1SA but FBCB2-EPLRS like in M1A2SEP.

But, M1A1FEP is equal to M1A1SA. :-)