Modern Main Battle Tanks ( MBT )

Indonesia displays Kaplan MT medium-weight tank

The Indonesian Army (Tentara Nasional Indonesia-Angkatan Darat – TNI-AD) officially displayed the Kaplan MT during a parade commemorating National Armed Forces Day 05 October in Cilegon, Banten Province.

The Kaplan MT was collaboratively developed by Indonesia’s PT Pindad and FNSS Savunma Sistemleri from Turkey under the TNI-AD’s Modern Medium Weight Tank (MMWT) program. Development began in 2014, with the design work completed in November 2016 and first prototype delivered in September 2017.

“This project is the proof that we can produce high technology defense vehicles with our own efforts without being dependent on other countries,”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Abraham Mose, Chairman of PT Pindad.

Based on FNSS’ Kaplan chassis, the Kaplan MT is equipped with a CMI Cockerill 3105 turret armed with a Cockerill 105 mm main gun, autoloader and digital fire-control system. It also has a 7.62 coaxial machine gun, battlefield management system and laser warning system.

With a power-to-weight ratio of 20 hp/ton, the Kaplan MT has a road range of 450 km and can travel at a maximum road speed of 70 km/h. It can operate in conditions as cold as -18°C and has hot as over +55°C.

The Kaplan MT is being marketed as a support solution suitable for attacking light armoured vehicles along with flanking and ambush roles. Competing solutions include, among others, the NORINCO VT5 light tank.

The Kaplan MT joins a spate of high-profile Turkish armoured vehicles exports. FNSS, a joint-venture of Nurol Holding (51%) and BAE Systems (49%) is

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

an order to Oman for its PARS III 8×8 wheeled armoured fighting vehicles (AFV). FNSS’ Turkish competitors Otokar and BMC are also supplying AFVs and light armoured vehicles, respectively, to markets in the Middle East, North Africa, Central and South Asia.

FNSS is also competing for the Turkish Army’s launch contract of 250 Altay main battle tanks (MBT). The Altay was designed and developed by Otokar, but the Turkish government opted not to issue Otokar the Altay’s production contract.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

A brigade’s of Abrams tanks in Europe will soon receive the Trophy Active Protection System. (Army photo)

Europe-bound: US Army to urgently field Abrams tanks with Trophy APS
By:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

  5 days ago


WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army has decided to equip a brigade’s worth of Abrams tanks with the Trophy Active Protection System and urgently field them to the European theater, Col. Glenn Dean, the program manager for Stryker, who also manages the service’s effort to install APS on combat vehicles, told Defense News.

The service made a decision to buy Trophy for Abrams on Sept. 29, Dean said, and now the Army is moving out to deploy the systems to Europe by 2020. The decision marks a major step in achieving a capability that has been continuously out of the service’s reach for many years.

A little over a year ago, the Army determined it needed to field an interim APS solution for the Abrams, Stryker combat vehicle and Bradley fighting vehicle and decided to rapidly assess off-the-shelf APS systems to fulfill an urgent operational need.



“Over the last 20 years, we’ve never fielded an APS system even though we invested a lot of money in a range of development projects trying to get to one,” Dean said. “We could never get to the desired level.”

So to rapidly find solutions for three very different combat vehicles, the Army tapped into a consortium of companies participating in a science and technology effort to develop the Modular Active Protection System, the Army’s future APS solution, for readily available systems.

Click to expand...

An Abrams tank equipped with the Trophy Active Protection System. (Army photo)

The Army got started with Trophy’s installation onto Abrams earlier because there was funding available within the program in 2016 to move forward. The other two vehicles didn’t receive funding until fiscal year 2017, Dean said, so Abrams is moving out ahead of Stryker and Bradley.

“Stryker is the next one in the chute,” Dean said. Artis has completed its work designing, installing and tuning the system to fit on the vehicle and the system has now entered government characterization efforts. Testing will continue into mid-December where a decision will be made whether to proceed with buying and fielding the system early next fiscal quarter, according to Dean.

Bradley is “a bit behind” Stryker because it is a much more challenging platform to integrate on because of the limitations of the vehicle in terms of space, weight and power. The Bradley could not support APS without an upcoming upgrade that helps restore power to the vehicle.

IMI has begun the tuning phase of characterization, having completed design and installation activity, Dean said. If all goes according to plan, government characterization will begin in the November time frame and will last roughly four months. Bradley’s government characterization phase is expected to last longer than the other two vehicles because of the added challenges of the platform, he added.

Click to expand...

With both vehicles, the Army will assess how the systems perform and then service leadership will decide “is this good enough and, if so, what do you want to do, do you want to push that for rapid deployment, do you want us to go back to the drawing board, do you want us to evaluate a different system,” Dean said. “All those options are on the table until we come back with data.”

All of the systems have gone or will go through rigorous characterization testing. In the case of the Abrams, it had two-live fire phases. One phase was a performance characterization, which is to assess how the system itself performs, and the second phase is to test it in operationally realistic conditions in a cluttered battlefield with moving vehicles against live threats.

“Unique to this evaluation that we, the U.S., hasn’t done before and, frankly, most nations and contractors evaluating their APS systems, we are shooting live threats at real vehicles,” Dean said, “not next to the vehicle, not at a test rig, at the actual platform. We are taking a fair amount of risk that, hey, if the system doesn’t perform as indicated, we are going to hurt some very expensive pieces of hardware.”

Fortunately for the Trophy system, it “exceeded our expectations, it performed extremely well,” Dean said. “Really the only issues we had were those things that were associated with the tank, not so much with Trophy and we worked out how to address and mitigate those to the point the tank crews we had evaluate it were happy with them.”

For example, installation issues on the tank weren’t so much related to the weight of the system but more the balance of the Abram’s turret, which was affected because of where the system had to be mounted on the vehicle, according to Dean.

“There were some concerns that, hey, this may have an impact on the tanks’ ability to engage targets,” Dean said, that pushed the fielding decision back slightly, by just a few weeks.

But the Army quickly went out and tested the tank’s ability to engage targets with Trophy installed on it and “all the crews said, ‘We would take this to war tomorrow,’” following the exercise, Dean said.

“This was to give more confidence,” he said. “There was never a question about performance of Trophy itself. This was about, okay, Trophy works great, does the tank still do all the things it needs to do.”

Click to expand...

note the way it is mounted to the sides taking the place of side storage racks

Now that the Army is moving forward with fielding Trophy on Abrams, it will move into some more advanced testing and also begin production in parallel, Dean said.

The service has to procure more test hardware because it shot down a large amount of missiles and fired many countermeasures, “so we’ve got to replenish our test stock,” he said.

The second phase of testing Abrams and Trophy will enter is to prove the system is safe enough to deploy by running it through more complex conditions. One test, for example, will evaluate what happens when you have multiple tanks in close proximity on the battlefield all running an APS system at the same time, Dean said.

The Army will also buy the Trophy systems early during the second phase of simultaneous testing and production because there is nothing that is going to change in the design of the system, he noted.

Click to expand...

Dean said the Army remains interested in “at least one other commercially available system” -- a German system from Rheinmetall called the Advanced Defense System. “It was actually very close in the running for Bradley, but ultimately Iron Fist was selected because of the integration burdens of the platform,” he said. “If we had the budget to do a fourth system right now, we’d be doing a fourth system right now.”

Click to expand...

Now I am posting these because I want you to note the differences between the Abrams Trophy mounting which is external and the Merkava which is partially internal. The Merkava IV remember was the Tank Trophy was designed for and to a degree visa versa. The 4 was introduced at the turn of the Millennium.

This allows a much easier integration. Where the Abrams is an older tank that was not designed with Trophy in mind.

This said. It shows that even now 40 year old MBT's can still learn a trick or two. the Main reason for the integration of Trophy into the Abrams is worry about the weight before the Tusk program the Abrams was tipping over 70 tons of Raw Democracy.. With the Asymmetric warfare in Iraq the Abrams suddenly had to deal more with ATGM and RPG's. this meant Slat armor, ERA, Gun Shields for the loader and commander, RWS, and an Infantry phone. all of which quickly added more tonnage. add in a APU and you can see an issue the Abrams cannot take more up armoring. So with increased threats an alternative needed be found.

First New Army M1A2 SEP v3 Abrams Tank Arrives
The Army is preparing to receive delivery of its first of six newly-upgraded MIA2 SEP v3 Abrams Main Battle Tank pilot tank vehicles -- specifically engineered to keep pace

• Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
  - 15 hours ago

By Kris Osborn

The first MIA2 SEP v3 tank, built by General Dynamics Land Systems, is slated to arrive as soon as this month – as part of a delivery of initial prototype vehicles, developers said.

“The Army's ultimate intent is to upgrade the entire fleet of M1A2 vehicles -- at this time, over 1,500 tanks,” Ashley Givens, spokeswoman for PEO GCS, told Scout Warrior.

The first v3 pilot vehicles will feature technological advancements in communications, reliability, sustainment and fuel efficiency and upgraded armor.

This current mobility and power upgrade, among other things, adds an auxiliary power unit for fuel efficiency and on-board electrical systems, improved armor materials, upgraded engines and transmission and a 28-volt upgraded drive system.

“The Abrams has been around since early 80s, and the original designers were forward thinking to build in the provisions for continual upgrade. Over the years, there have been significant improvements in sensor capabilities, power generation, mobility, lethality, survivability, armor and situational awareness,” Donald Kotchman, Vice President, Tracked Combat Vehicles, General Dynamics Land Systems, told Scout Warrior in an interview.




In addition to receiving a common high-resolution display for gunner and commander stations, some of the current electronics, called Line Replaceable Units, will be replaced with new Line Replaceable Modules including the commander’s display unit, driver’s control panel, gunner’s control panel, turret control unit and a common high-resolution display, developers from General Dynamics Land Systems say.

Facilitating continued upgrades, innovations and modernization efforts for the Abrams in years to come is the principle rationale upon which the Line Replacement Modules is based. It encompasses the much-discussed “open architecture” approach wherein computing standards, electronics, hardware and software systems can efficiency be integrated with new technologies as they emerge.

Kotchman added that moving to Line Replaceable Modules vastly improves computing capacity, power distribution and fire-control technology for the Abrams.

“The principle difference between the Line Replaceable Unit and Module is modularity. Currently to initiate a repair or an upgrade of a LRU, you must remove the entire unit from the tank, take it to a test bench and make the changes. Under the Line Replaceable Module concept, internal diagnostics isolates and determines failure at the card level. The card has been constructed such that you can remove it and replace it without damaging it,” Kotchman said. “Similarly, when new capability is introduced or increased computing power is required, changes can be made at the card level rather than redesigning the entire unit.”

This M1A2 SEP v3 effort also initiates the integration of upgraded ammunition data links and electronic warfare devices such as the Counter Remote Controlled Improvised Explosive Device – Electronic Warfare – CREW. An increased AMPs alternator is also part of this upgrade, along with Ethernet cables designed to better network vehicle sensors together.

The Abrams is also expected to get an advanced force-tracking system which uses GPS technology to rapidly update digital moving map displays with icons showing friendly and enemy force positions.

The system, called Joint Battle Command Platform, uses an extremely fast Blue Force Tracker 2 Satcom network able to reduce latency and massively shorten refresh time. Having rapid force-position updates in a fast-moving combat circumstance, quite naturally, could bring decisive advantages in both mechanized and counterinsurgency warfare.

The GDLS development deal also advances a commensurate effort to design and construct and even more advanced M1A2 SEP v4 Abrams tank variant for the 2020s and beyond. The v4 is designed to be more lethal, better protected, equipped with new sensors and armed with upgraded, more effective weapons, service officials said.

“The current M1A2 SEPv3 production will transition to the v4 configuration in 2023. The v4 upgrade is currently scheduled to begin production in 2023 with fielding in 2025,” Givens said.

The Army-GDLS deal is also the first contract is for SEPv4 upgrades, which include the Commander’s Primary Sight, an improved Gunner’s Primary Sight and enhancements to sensors, lethality and survivability.

“General Dynamics Land Systems will deliver seven prototype M1A2 SEPv4 tanks to the Army. The contract has an initial value of $311 million,” a company statement said.

Advanced networking technology with next-generation sights, sensors, targeting systems and digital networking technology -- are all key elements of an ongoing upgrade to position the platform to successfully engage in combat against rapidly emerging threats, such as the prospect of confronting a Russian T-14 Armata or Chinese 3rd generation Type 99 tank.


The SEP v4 variant, slated to being testing in 2021, will include new laser rangefinder technology, color cameras, integrated on-board networks, new slip-rings, advanced meteorological sensors, ammunition data links, laser warning receivers and a far more lethal, multi-purpose 120mm tank round, Army developers told Scout Warrior.

While Army officials explain that many of the details of the next-gen systems for the future tanks are not available for security reasons, Army developers did explain that the lethality upgrade, referred to as an Engineering Change Proposal, or ECP, is centered around the integration of a higher-tech 3rd generation FLIR – Forward Looking Infrared imaging sensor.

The advanced FLIR uses higher resolution and digital imaging along with an increased ability to detect enemy signatures at farther ranges through various obscurants such as rain, dust or fog, Army official said.

Improved FLIR technologies help tank crews better recognize light and heat signatures emerging from targets such as enemy sensors, electronic signals or enemy vehicles. This enhancement provides an additional asset to a tank commander’s independent thermal viewer.

Rear view sensors and laser detection systems are part of these v4 upgrades as well. Also, newly configured meteorological sensors will better enable Abrams tanks to anticipate and adapt to changing weather or combat conditions more quickly, Army officials said.

“Meteorological sensors are being integrated into the fire control system. It provides information into fire control algorithms that help increase the accuracy and precision of your weapon system,” Givens added.

The emerging M1A2 SEP v4 will also be configured with a new slip-ring leading to the turret and on-board ethernet switch to reduce the number of needed “boxes” by networking sensors to one another in a single vehicle.

Advanced Multi-Purpose Round

The M1A2 SEP v4 will carry Advanced Multi-Purpose 120mm ammunition round able to combine a variety of different rounds into a single tank round.

The AMP round will replace four tank rounds now in use. The first two are the M830, High Explosive Anti-Tank, or HEAT, round and the M830A1, Multi-Purpose Anti -Tank, or MPAT, round.

The latter round was introduced in 1993 to engage and defeat enemy helicopters, specifically the Russian Hind helicopter, Army developers explained. The MPAT round has a two-position fuse, ground and air, that must be manually set, an Army statement said.


The M1028 Canister round is the third tank round being replaced. The Canister round was first introduced in 2005 by the Army to engage and defeat dismounted Infantry, specifically to defeat close-in human-wave assaults. Canister rounds disperse a wide-range of scattering small projectiles to increase anti-personnel lethality and, for example, destroy groups of individual enemy fighters.





The M908, Obstacle Reduction round, is the fourth that the AMP round will replace; it was designed to assist in destroying large obstacles positioned on roads by the enemy to block advancing mounted forces, Army statements report.

AMP also provides two additional capabilities: defeat of enemy dismounts, especially enemy anti-tank guided missile, or ATMG, teams at a distance, and breaching walls in support of dismounted Infantry operations

A new ammunition data link will help tank crews determine which round is best suited for a particular given attack.

Overall, these lethality and mobility upgrades represent the best effort by the Army to maximize effectiveness and lethality of its current Abrams tank platform. The idea is to leverage the best possible modernization upgrades able to integrate into the existing vehicle. Early conceptual discussion and planning is already underway to build models for a new future tank platform to emerge by the 2030s – stay with Scout Warrior for an upcoming report on this effort.

Active Protection Systems

As part of this broad effort to accelerate Abrams technological advancement into future decades, the Army is fast-tracking an emerging technology for Abrams tanks designed to give combat vehicles an opportunity to identify, track and destroy approaching enemy rocket-propelled grenades in a matter of milliseconds, service officials said.

“We are always looking for ways to enhance the protection provided on our combat vehicles and we recognize Active Protection Systems as one of our highest priorities towards this end,” Givens said.

Active Protection Systems, or APS, is a technology which uses sensors and radar, computer processing, fire control technology and interceptors to find, target and knock down or intercept incoming enemy fire such as RPGs and Anti-Tank Guided Missiles, or ATGMs.

Systems of this kind have been in development for many years, however the rapid technological progress of enemy tank rounds, missiles and RPGs is leading the Army to more rapidly test and develop APS for its fleet of Abrams tanks.

The Army is looking at a range of domestically produced and allied international solutions from companies participating in the Army's Modular Active Protection Systems (MAPS) program, an Army official told Scout Warrior.

Leonardo M60A3 update video promo
L3 Destroyer
Raytheon SLEP

With the recent Taiwan news of them deciding to update there M60A3's and the Recent news of Leonardo's new M60A3 update package I figure we should touch on the M60. First Although it has lost a number of Users it's still a very widely used MBT. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bahrain, Iran, Brazil, Egypt, Greece, Jordan, Taiwan, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Portugal, the Saudis, Sudan, Spain. Yemen, Thailand, Tunesia And Turkey all are users.
I did not include the Sabra or Iranian Samsan M60s as in the case of the Sabra it's more or less a dead kit. The Sabra was developed from the Israeli Magach which was phased out of service for them, The Sabra was a bilateral with Turkey however Turkish Israeli relations soured the whole program pretty much ended in 09 with the birth of the Altay.
The Samsan was the Iranians facing a bit of reality that there military industry has some very tight limitations and trying to keep there M60A1 in service.
Also not going to cover the M60 2000 or 120S as both failed over a decade ago.

Jordan has a upgrade call the M60 Pheonix. It's a M60 Tank upgunned to the 120 mm RUAG Compact Tank Gun, A uprated General Dynamics AVDS power pack, composite armor appliques with RUAG SidePRO-CE ERA and the LEDS active hardkill protection system. However there is no indication of this going beyond prototypes.

The Raytheon SLEP
This starts with uprating the ADVS engine to 950 HP and upgrades to the suspension. updated turret electronics and turret motors based on electric rather than potentially flammable hydraulic
an M256 120mm L44 main gun with buffer system to reduce recoil.

L3 Destroyer
the Destroyer... L3 I love your marketing department. again starts at the power pack upgrading from the 750hp ADVS to a 1200 hp and suspension updates. with extensive vision updates and Fire control. Additionally the added a external power system. L3 added a 120mm gun apparently also the M256. they added armor Appliques and side Skirt with Slat armor and in an interesting move a Brashear Advanced Remote Weapon Station with 25mm autocannon.

Leonardo M60A3 upgrade
Engine and suspension again skimpy on the details but they say they uprated by a couple hundred horsepower. Extensive vision and electronics upgrades a remote weapons station. added on Composite and Slat armor removal the the commander's turret, The gun is 120mm 45 calibre from the Centauro II

little trivia. M60 was one of the last tanks with an escape hatch on the bottom of the hull. of course in the modern era hit an IED and that hatch will kill the Driver.
Not covered in these videos is the changes made to Ammo storage. Patton series Tanks predate the Abrams bustle magazine with blowout panels Ammo for the 90mm and Later 105mm was in the hull and turret up gunning to the 120mm means the tank's internal ammo storage would have to change.

PT-91 Twardy

TerraN_EmpirE
M-60T with Desert camo

Hendrik_2000 said:

Now this is interesting apparently US Army is interested in light tank but with new twist Big gun socalled RAVEN Here it is
The U.S. Army Wants to Put Big Guns on Small Tanks

Charlie Gao
,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

•November 4, 2017

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Pentagon hopes to get a new lightweight armored combat vehicle.
The U.S. Army Wants to Put Big Guns on Small Tanks

Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy[/a] as a way to bring large caliber cannon technology to lightweight vehicles. This technology is called RAVEN, which stands for Rarefaction Wave Gun.

Technology of Tanks, from Jane’s, is that a vehicle needs to weigh about one ton for every nine hundred newtons of force exerted on it. This means for the current 120-millimeter M256 cannon shooting a M829A3 Anti-Tank Shell,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. This is greater than the weight of America’s last canceled light tank, the M8 Buford. RAVEN technology cuts down on recoil significantly (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, in theory) with the way that it vents, allowing for cannons of the same power factor to be mounted on light vehicles.

Disadvantages to RAVEN technology is the need for the gun to vent gas backwards. Similar to recoilless rifles, this limits the proximity in which infantry would be able to operate around an armored vehicle. It also would limit angles of elevation: a vehicle that allowed a RAVEN gun to elevate too high might suffer damage from the blast going onto its deck. The need for a new loading mechanism for RAVEN guns is another engineering challenge. The 105-millimeter RAVEN demonstrator had a swinging chamber that accepted rounds from a carousel autoloader, but this isn’t similar to any setup on existing American tanks. Vehicles would have to be designed for RAVEN from the ground up, or undergo a very lengthy retrofit process to implement this technology.

Overall, RAVEN guns present an interesting, high-caliber armament option that could provide America’s next generation of light vehicles the firepower they need to overmatch any current and future threat. While the technology is not yet mature, it is based squarely on concepts already understood and developed.

Charlie Gao studied political and computer science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national-security issues." Charlie Gao studied political and computer science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national-security issues.

Click to expand...

First incase anyone is Wondering, the Tank show in the Article is a M551 Sheridan NTC a light tank modified to resemble a Soviet T80 for Opfor.
RAREFACTION WAVE GUN

Basically It's A recoilless Tank gun fact is this is a problem.

It's a danger for operating in Close with infantry.
realistically I think this is not a option. And When the Army was moving ahead with FCS they moved to the XM360 and a 24 ton vehicle. Which is why I am posting her.

it's not the only game in Town though. Around the Same time the RAVEN was in development, other armored vehicles were reemerging in the form of the Tank Destroyer. The ability to mount a 120mm gun on a 20-30 ton Armored vehicle is a very modern concept with first prototypes emerging in the 1990's

The Advantages of the Raven however never justified it.Although the weight of the vehicle hosting it can be reduced it requires an open turret and is a risk to nearby infantry. Like all recoilless weapons Backblast is lethal, this also limits it's options in urban as well. As such practically for a vehicle of the type the conventional 105 mm was deemed more practical.
As such The US Army more or less ditched it for the program it was aimed for, The FCS program. instead they chose a more conventional option. the Low Recoil Main gun.


The Main gun of the Centauro is a 120mm 45 caliber high velocity high pressure Low recoil a perfect example of the type. Although the Vehicle is 30 tons it is a proverbial paper weight compared to a NATO MBT.
At the heart of it is a set of recoil mitigation technologies a hydraulic, recoil-counter-recoil system and Muzzle break. none of these are new technologies for Tank guns what is is that the designers upped power of the dampeners. Where Raven uses counter exhausting to achieve counter recoil These guns use a mechanical means It's a Mathematical formula. recoil impulse is at its harshest when the energy of travel for the gun reaches it's end of travel, however if you build a strong enough buffer system you can stop the gun from going though it's full range of Travel because the energy of recoil will 0. on a Small scale this can be seen in the Ultimax 100 LMG in the large scale these guns.
Among the First to use this was the Ruag Compact Tank gun. This was originally designed to Rearm Panzer 68 and older 105mm tanks.

This gun is used in the Jordanian M60 Phoenix, Falcon Turret and the CV90-120T
the CV90 120-t represents a 26 ton vehicle with a full tank gun.

rapidly The US followed suit with the XM360 program based on work from the XM291 This was a reduced weight Main gun with
The French Gait 120 L52 FER

The Germans not to be left behind have the Rheinmetall 120 mm L/47 LLR (light, low recoil) gun Followed by the Israeli RG120 variant of the MG253

The potential is not however just limited to the light tank class though The same technologies can be placed in MBT turrets to.
The 120mm low recoil is not perfect though the Breech mechanism is by necessity heavier. you might be able to get away with this though if you redesign the gun tube and use other materials
using materials like Titanium and modern composites the standard L44 like that on an Abrams weighs 9,933 pounds. The Xm360 E1 7,331 pounds a full ton less