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.

lavictoireestlavie

Everything Leclerc

271 posts in this topic
32 minutes ago, Volcano said:

 

Even if it is found that it should have less protection? ;)

 

Ha ha , sure. Against KE rounds it is pretty much paper anyway. I do not really see how that setup will provide anything beyond 500 mm of KE resistance at best even with composite inserts. Either way, these composites could not be thicker than 360 - 380 mm at best to fit inside the hollow mantlet-trunion space. As mentioned earlier Froggy is convinced to have seen the mantlet composite insert(s). I wonder what GIAT(Nexter) was thinking when the came up with that mantlet-gun mount design. The mantlet is rather large and it somewhat negates the thick turret "cheek" armor. For a "hump" turret design I think they could have done a better job. The South Korean K2 also features a "hump" turret but its mantlet actually features a fairly thick composite mantlet. On the other hand the turret sides are just protected by a fairly thin composite layer (40 - 50 mm ?) coupled with spaced armor in the form of storage boxes and ERA.

BEMIL081_44464_0.jpg

fcbc8d2fbac90e2c342e3ba20c4c965c.jpg

WeLQl.jpg

1379871781_14.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Hedgehog said:

 

Look at Merkava Mk 3 & 4.....

The Swedes looked at design alternatives (image above)  during their tank trials and so has GIAT/Nexter. The French solution was the Leclerc XXI.  I wonder if the mantlet armor and front hull armor was also upgraded with the Leclerc XXI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lavictoireestlavie said:

 

Ha ha , sure. Against KE rounds it is pretty much paper anyway. I do not really see how that setup will provide anything beyond 500 mm of KE resistance at best even with composite inserts. Either way, these composites could not be thicker than 360 - 380 mm at best to fit inside the hollow mantlet-trunion space. As mentioned earlier Froggy is convinced to have seen the mantlet composite insert(s). I wonder what GIAT(Nexter) was thinking when the came up with that mantlet-gun mount design. The mantlet is rather large and it somewhat negates the thick turret "cheek" armor. For a "hump" turret design I think they could have done a better job. The South Korean K2 also features a "hump" turret but its mantlet actually features a fairly thick composite mantlet. On the other hand the turret sides are just protected by a fairly thin composite layer (40 - 50 mm ?) coupled with spaced armor in the form of storage boxes and ERA.

 

 

 

 

Maybe they think the only thing to hit directly behind the mantlet is the gun and its auto loader. (Think M1 TTB / T14 Armata - Mission kill but the crew have half a chance of getting out?)

If an oblique shot comes in through there, c'est la vie....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Hedgehog said:

 

Maybe they think the only thing to hit directly behind the mantlet is the gun and its auto loader. (Think M1 TTB / T14 Armata - Mission kill but the crew have half a chance of getting out?)

If an oblique shot comes in through there, c'est la vie....

 

I think there is a relatively high probability that a penetrating hit into the autoloader from the fighting compartment will most likely cause the ammunition contained in the autoloader to go up in flames totally destroying the fighting compartment and killing the crew in the process. Once a projectile or jet penetrates the mantlet and composite-trunion block there is not much in the way besides the breech block, gun mechanism and M2 HMG. Even if the autoloader does not get penetrated a penetration through the mantlet would still result in  the main gun getting wrecked and either the gunner or commander to be injured/incapacitated.

 

 

861059_10151411526728187_1944705148_o.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, lavictoireestlavie said:

I would appreciate any feedback and corrections on a possible Leclerc mantlet-gunmount setup:

Leclerc_mantlet_hypothetical.jpg

well, more likely the leclerc trunnion assembly looks more like this: 

 

trunnassembly1.jpg

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

one possibility for composites would be to fill up the area where the coax port is. 

it would reduce the area with only 270mm vs KE protection, and increase the area with 482mm vs KE protection. 

you'd still be able to penetrate it with most 120mm rounds though, especially since composites usually have less TE vs KE than steel, and more TE vs heat than steel. 

in fact the most sensible thing to do in such a thin space would be instead to fill it up with lots of relatively thin, hardened steel plates, or something dense and hard like DU or tungsten.

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

5 hours ago, dejawolf said:

one possibility for composites would be to fill up the area where the coax port is. 

it would reduce the area with only 270mm vs KE protection, and increase the area with 482mm vs KE protection. 

you'd still be able to penetrate it with most 120mm rounds though, especially since composites usually have less TE vs KE than steel, and more TE vs heat than steel. 

in fact the most sensible thing to do in such a thin space would be instead to fill it up with lots of relatively thin, hardened steel plates, or something dense and hard like DU or tungsten.

Beautiful model ! That would also explain Froggy's comment about the machine gun hole. For some reson i diD not take a closer look at the black and white mantlet  image. I was under the  somewhat foolish impression that the "composites" froggy mentioned would cover the entire face of the mantlet and not just the area around the M2 HMG.

 

Froggy: "Leclerc gun mantlet include in fact composite armor. I discovered it only recently. The only not covered part is the M2 barrel hole." 

 

The question that arises is whether or not this composite block is more anti-HE or if it actually contains relatively thin spaced tungsten and/or triple "high" hardened steel plates . I would assume it would the rest of the turret in terms of composition. Although I doubt it would be DU.

 

Here is a snippet from strategypage.com from another Leclerc enthusiast named Bluewings from 2004 that i found interesting:

 

"Few people on that thread are mistaking somehow . To start with ---> : When designing a new Tank you tend to think about 3 things : 1) Type of landscape where the tank is most likely to fight . 2) What is going to be the task of the Tank . 3) What kind of threat the tank is most likely to encounter . Then , you do your best to come up with a winning formula which includes available technology and cost . Then you think "Futurproof" for at least 10-15 years . So , what the Leclerc has been design for ? To put it simply : To Defeat all T-XX series. And to fight in a European landscape , from -25c to +35c . To this extent , it has been made light (56T combat ready for the T5 to T10 versions) , and fast . In fact , really fast ... So the 3 Men crew +autoloader and very high power to weight ratio . "Light" does NOT have to mean "less armored" . Because of the relatively small numbers of Leclerc in France (under 500) , the French were able to choose the most expensive steel as well as the latest Plastics/Ceramics available . The Leclerc is tough , real tough ... All western tanks boost more or less the same thickness of armor up front . The difference is how the armor react to KE and HEAT , and the quality of the materials employed . In that department , I believe the Leo 2A5/6 and the Leclerc leads the pack by a good margin . The Brit Challenger 2 with its Shobham being very close behind . Usually , Rolled Homogeneous Armor (RHA) appears in 3 forms : Armored steel(RHA) Value :270-300 BHN Semi Hardened steel (SHS):400-450 BHN High Hardeness steel (HHS):500-600 BHN The M1 steel is "High Yield Steel" (HYS):320-380 BHN . All western Shobham armored Tanks feature Semi Hardened Steel as a part of the layered structure . Shobham is assume to use ceramics 4 times harder than RHA and much lighter . High Hardened Steel (HHS) 500-600 BHN , offer 30-35% more resistance than RHA , but its twice the price , difficult to weld . The Leclerc and Leo feature this armor as a part or the layers . On the other hand , the M1 has "added" DU layer to "cope" better against hits due to the average steel quality of its armor . Without it (DU) , the latest ammo would probably go straight through with a laugh . Leo and Leclerc do NOT need it YET . Now , keep in mind the Leclerc armor , while being TRIPLE High Hardened Steel , include ceramics and a classified Plastic . The believed Armor values are the following : M1A1HC/M1A1HA+/M1A2 Turret: 880-900 KE Glacis:560-590 KE Lower front hull:580-650 KE Turret: 1310-1620 HEAT Glacis:510-1050 HEAT Lower front hull:800-970 HEAT M1A2 SEP Turret: 940-960 KE Glacis:560-590 KE Lower front hull:580-650 KE Turret: 1320-1620 HEAT Glacis:510-1050 HEAT Lower front hull:800-970 HEAT Leclerc Glacis 580-600 KE , 1040-1060 HEAT, Hull side: 90 KE, 420 HEAT, Turret Front 890-910 KE , 1220-1420 HEAT, Lower front hull : 780 KE , 850 HEAT We can see that the latest Abrams have a small advantage , but look at the weight of the Tanks !! Leclerc can archive almost the same protection level while weighting 15 tons less . I don 't want to turn my post into a book , so I 'll be brief now ... Leclerc ' FCS is without a doubt one of the best around . Added to the very fast autoloader and its extreme agility and speed , it makes the Tank a excellent Hunter/Killer platform , hard to kill and even harder to hit . But if there is a downside (and there is) it has to be the main gun and the ammo employed . During joined testing with the Brits , the 120mm French smoothbore (F1) caliber 52 was as accurate as the Brit riffled gun but less powerfull . The ammo currently employed is the Tungsten OFL 120 F1-A which is on the par with the German/US LKE-1 or DM44 or KWA-1 . A DU round is in service (OFL 120 F2) which ~performance wise~ is almost equal to the US M829A2 . That DU round is still fielded in very small numbers . I for one believe the Leclerc is an excellent fighting platform able to win any fight versus any T-xx Tank , even when outnumbered . And it is its main purpose . Now , to answer the usual bull question "who 's got the best Tank" , the answer is pretty simple in fact : As long as you have a very good Tank , the crew will make the difference . Cheers . :" - Bluewings

 

from Le Systeme Leclerc page 74:

 

"The great originality of the Leclerc however lies in the modular nature of the protection. Schematically, the tank chassis , usually in plain armor, is responsible for receiving the boxes containing the single, double or triple hardness  ceramic steel plates..."

 

This lets me believe that the Leclerc does include triple-hardness steel plates. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand what was said on page 1 of the thread about smoke grenades, and salvos. I asked a question but I guess it was lost in all the pages and pages of shooting/killing Leclerc images. ;)

 

So explain to me the smoke grenade situation that you said was currently incorrect. This is easy to fix, but I need more information that what you provided.

 

There are 5x forward facing tubes on each side of the turret, with 2x rear facing tubes on each side of the turret, for a total of 14 tubes. How many of these are HE? How many are smoke? What do the rear facing tubes fire? Are they on a salvo of their own? How many grenades fire across the whole turret per salvo?

 

Assuming none of them are HE, the sensible thing to do would be to have 4x forward facing tubes on both sides fire, along with 1x on each rear side of turret for a nice near 360 degree coverage.  Or is it one salvo that puts a screen on one side? So a left-front screen, a right-front screen, and a rear screen?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was just I had not time to explain.

On each side, there is 4 tubes for fum (the 4 facing 0 to 80°) and 3 tube for HE (facing 100 to 180°).

The 8 fum are lauch as a unique salvo (one push in the button, and the 8 tubes fire simultaneously).

The 3 right HE fire simultaneously pushing the HE selector on the right.

The 3 left HE fire simultaneously,  pushing the HE selector on the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Froggy said:

It was just I had not time to explain.

On each side, there is 4 tubes for fum (the 4 facing 0 to 80°) and 3 tube for HE (facing 100 to 180°).

The 8 fum are lauch as a unique salvo (one push in the button, and the 8 tubes fire simultaneously).

The 3 right HE fire simultaneously pushing the HE selector on the right.

The 3 left HE fire simultaneously,  pushing the HE selector on the left.

Ugh, i was creating a diagram for that when i saw your post just now xD

Leclerc_Galix_Salvo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have detailled diagram on my PC, but at home, not in my phone (I am in army reserve up to mid afternoon.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, lavictoireestlavie said:

The HL-70 panoramic sight of the commander:

 

 

HL-70_Leclerc.jpg

Nope its the one for Challenger 2 (Sagem VS580).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13.8.2016 at 1:59 AM, Volcano said:

Re: the commander poking his head out of the hatch (in minimum height) is a standard behavior thing, so it cannot be changed, at least not at the moment.

Well we could just force him into the hatch at all times..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

Nope its the one for Challenger 2 (Sagem VS580).

Thank you for clearing things up. It was actually cited incorrectly as the HL-70 xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lavictoireestlavie said:

Here is something that might clear up the Leclerc mantlet situation a bit, a view into the M2 HMG mount:

HMG_mantlet_slot_Leclerc.jpg

 

yeah that does not look promising at all for any composite armour, what with that large white holding device for the coax and that electrical doohickey. 

no wonder most of those upgrade proposals have half a meter of addon armour added to the front.

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

12 minutes ago, lavictoireestlavie said:

The actual thickness of the front hull armor can be seen here:

hull_construction_Leclerc.jpg

Are photo's like this not a breach of opsec of some sort? Or is the information public available? I can remember a photo some guy posted at tanknet of a Leclerc which showed the turret plates and that was not appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, munckmb said:

Are photo's like this not a breach of opsec of some sort? Or is the information public available? I can remember a photo some guy posted at tanknet of a Leclerc which showed the turret plates and that was not appreciated. 

 many of the pictures are in public domain, taken from various documentaries and books on the leclerc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now