Welcome to Steelbeasts.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MikeKiloPapa

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/14/1980
  1. Hmm....i have just had a dig through my old technical documentation on our Leo's ....in the manual "TDv 2350/069-10 DK ......Beschreibung, KPz Leopard 2 A5 DK" , KMW simply calls the applique armor "zusatzpanzerung turm /wanne ( as in add-on armor turret and hull) ...more specifically the front wedge is listed as "adaptive panzerung" and the side armor " schwenkbare panzerung. (because it swings open i guess)
  2. Huh?.....where does that come from? ....In the decade or so i have frequented this site, i cant recall ever having come across anybody "hating" on the Abrams. Quite the contrary in fact, The M1 is often highlighted as the best modern tank design, and used as the gold standard against which all other tanks is measured.
  3. Thats a bit rich, coming from someone whose country surrendered in a matter of hours in WW2 and which hasn't actually won a war since 1612 ! Militarily speaking , we might well be called the Italy of Scandinavia , except of course that would be an insult to the Italians. Whereas their reputation for lack of military prowess is of largely recent (as in 20th century ) origin , WE have been consistently useless and incompetent for centuries. A Dane mocking the French for military cowardice is the ultimate example of hypocrisy.
  4. Well the Danish designation for T0W is M/87 suggesting a DOI of ca 1987 I seem to remember that our M113 TOW got their thermal capability before our Leopard 1s did with the A5 upgrade in 92-93. So around 1990 would be my guess...
  5. http://www.janes.com/article/67279/netherlands-outlines-afv-upgrades A small consolation price for losing the tanks....still better than nothing. Fingers crossed that the spike missile finds its way onto Danish CV9035s as well.
  6. No we didn't......after we lost a driver in an IED strike, the lowest row of ammo were replaced with concrete rounds, but the rest stayed. Later the hull ammo rack was replaced with a new 22 round armored version, as part of the full mine protection upgrade all our Leos in Helmand received.
  7. Absolutely......The performance of the latter concept in the real world (and in real combat) is very much still unknown. Just as the advantage of such a configuration is obvious on a linear, one-directional battlefield, so is the limitations and weaknesses when operating in an urban environment , or a 360 degree battlespace like in Syria.
  8. Exactly.....and as we are seeing in Syria, moden warfare is turning out to be a 360 degree business. In such an environment situational awareness becomes crucial, and it seems a step change in allround surveillance capability is just as needed as an active protection system is. Precisely the lack of SA seems to have been a weakness in the Turkish tank units, and have no doubt contributed to their losses.
  9. No....These 2 Leos and the armored car were captured intact by ISIS and subsequently destroyed by the Turkish Air Force weeks ago.
  10. I suppose it could have been a victim of a "friendly" air-strike......i believe the Turkish Air Force did bomb some of their vehicles after they were abandoned by the turkish crews.
  11. SB wiki says : A4/A5 standard front hull armor 600 mm http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=Leopard_2A5 A5DK/ 2E front hull armor ~700 mm http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=Leopardo_2E Notice that is says greater than 620mm How well these figures actually corresponds to the values modelled in SB 4.006 is anybody,s guess (well Deja or Volcano should know of course ;-)
  12. Some interesting news relating to the CV9035......looks like the CV is finally going to get an ATGM capability. And the next iteration of the CV90 is apparently in the pipeline : http://defencetechnologyreview.realviewdigital.com/#folio=24
  13. Thank you, much appreciated.
  14. Its a classic :-D .......The 40mm HE-T is very impressive but then again you would have achieved similar results with a burst of 35mm HEI. The APFSDS-T test is interesting.....it shows quite spectacular performance from what i assume is the Slpprj 90LK/97 round......it does seem to point to the penetration figures for 40mm APFSDS in SB being quite "conservative" As to the 3P demonstration i rather think it underscores my point....the effects against the plywood/ sheet metal helicopter mock-up isn't exactly convincing.....neither did the cardboard/ plastic barrel "infantry" constitute a realistic target set.
  15. Again i know, but access to those magazines is not the issue here .....assembling the 7 round ammo sections and pulling the belt through the gun feed is what takes time. My point being that the same should be the case for the CV9030 .? Unless i'm mistaken, the 30x173 rounds also comes in smaller sections that needs to be linked as part of the reloading process. So an 80 round belt would require the assembling of 8-10? ammo sections that then need to be fed into the gun chute . I have a really hard time seeing how that is even possible in just 2 minutes. Absolutely true, though in my experience you also tend to "waste" more rounds ( ie you miss more than with the 35mm) so you still need to reload regularly , albeit not nearly as frequently as with the CV9035 of course.