CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

We are after solutions, not problems!

Just tell the crew to hold their breath, it will be finneeee...
Oh! I know. Make every TC a Sgt Major, then the amount of hot air they can bellow out when yelling abuse at the Russians means that it will create an over pressure.
Now to solve the tricky issue of what to do with the Brass while maintaining your over pressure.
 
Also, have you sat down and measured that out? And why a carossel one? Surely a normal in line one would be more space efficient, and effective?
He has been pimping this one, or a derivative of it, for a while. Compact autoloader | Meggitt Defense


The only public information that I can recall seeing which suggests this is possible in the existing turret is his posts on this forum. Posts where you questioned him about it and didn't get any convincing answers then either.
 
The only public information that I can recall seeing which suggests this is possible in the existing turret is his posts on this forum. Posts where you questioned him about it and didn't get any convincing answers then either.
The meggitt system is designed to go in the Abrams bustle and turret ring. I’ve never seen any suggestion that you could, or that anyone (of import) had considered, fit it in Challenger 2.

Given time and money, you probably could.
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
Back in the mists of time I recall being told that the average lifespan of a tank in contact was about 4 minutes, if it was lucky.
I'm not sure who told you that, but it sounds like tripe to me. Having done a fair amount of detailed simulation and livex with opfor etc. I'm pretty sure that most tanks lasted far longer. Which also accords with the experience of tank soldiers in the FTX from 1939 to 45, plus every other one since - even the Golan in 1973.
 
He has been pimping this one, or a derivative of it, for a while. Compact autoloader | Meggitt Defense


The only public information that I can recall seeing which suggests this is possible in the existing turret is his posts on this forum. Posts where you questioned him about it and didn't get any convincing answers then either.
I seem to remember a world renowned expert claiming the Army were dinosaurs for expecting 100% reliability from an autoloader and that they're just as reliable as a Coke machine.

Which I presume means that every so often you try and engage a T-90 but it just swallows your money and makes whirring noises while you kick it then phone the security office.
 
He has been pimping this one, or a derivative of it, for a while. Compact autoloader | Meggitt Defense


The only public information that I can recall seeing which suggests this is possible in the existing turret is his posts on this forum. Posts where you questioned him about it and didn't get any convincing answers then either.
I have many questions...

The principal problem is that AL hussien hybrid turret has a loading assist fitted in the bustle. It only has space for 20 standard NATO 120mm, plus machinery. This is at least twice the volume.

Second how is that a carousel loader?
 
I'm not sure who told you that, but it sounds like tripe to me. Having done a fair amount of detailed simulation and livex with opfor etc. I'm pretty sure that most tanks lasted far longer. Which also accords with the experience of tank soldiers in the FTX from 1939 to 45, plus every other one since - even the Golan in 1973.
If both sides can survive longer that isn’t a good thing

Especially if 1 side drastically outnumbers you
 
The meggitt system is designed to go in the Abrams bustle and turret ring. I’ve never seen any suggestion that you could, or that anyone (of import) had considered, fit it in Challenger 2.

Given time and money, you probably could.

It can be made to fit, its effectively a new turret with a bigger bustle.
All the NBC etc goes down in the hull that also gets a major redesign internally.
You get 36 rounds in the bustle and 6 in a bin in the hull.

It would be cheaper to buy new tanks. - See Land kicking the can until M1A3 heaves into sight.
 
I have many questions...

The principal problem is that AL hussien hybrid turret has a loading assist fitted in the bustle. It only has space for 20 standard NATO 120mm, plus machinery. This is at least twice the volume.

Second how is that a carousel loader?
To begin with, let's be clear that I'm not the one advocating it, I am not the one who originally proposed it here, and I am not suggesting that it is a good idea, so I don't claim to have all the answers, I have no information regarding how well it actually works, and I feel no need to either justify it or defend it.

However, there are two components in that drawing. One is the automatic magazine, and the other is the auto-loader. The magazine is available without the loader for use with manual loading guns.
https://www.meggittdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/120mmCompactMagazine.pdf
https://www.meggittdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/120mmCompactAutoLoader.pdf

The magazine apparently holds 34 rounds on a belt or chain that moves in a zig-zag pattern across and up and down. There seems to be 4 rows of 8 rounds in the example.

When replenishing the magazine you would program in which rounds are held where, and when you select the type of round you want it automatically moves that round into position to be grabbed by the man doing the loading. Because the selected rounds are always in the same position when in the loading position, there is no need for large sliding blast doors. Instead, only a small hatch is needed to access the magazine. This is supposedly safer and saves weight while taking up no more volume than a conventional magazine. If there is a failure in the powered magazine system, there is a backup hand crank to operated the magazine manually.

The automatic loader is a robotic arm which grabs the round from the automatic magazine, turns it around, and rams it into the breech. If there is a failure in the loader it can be turned off and the loading done manually. Supposedly it does not take up room occupied by the existing man doing the loading, so whether or not to eliminate the fourth crewman is a question not being addressed here.

The examples in the above literature were designed for the US M1 Abrams, but can supposedly be modified to be used in other tanks. If adapted for use in a CR2, it may have a different capacity depending upon the dimensions of the space it has to fit in. For a CR2, this could possibly involve cutting off the existing bustle and welding a new one on the rear of the turret. In this case there is no need to fit in an existing bustle so actual magazine capacity for a hypothetical CR2 version could be different from the proposed US M1 version. This means that discussion based on a 34 round magazine capacity may not have much relevance to an actual CR2 version which may be different.

How the new gun and new magazine would affect the balance of the turret is not something I can answer. It may need more weight added to the front of the turret to compensate. How that affects the turret, traverse mechanism, and other parts of the tank is not something I can answer, but all that must be part of the integration engineering.

Given how the system works, it is conceivable that the automatic magazine system could have some advantages (a small hatch instead of a set of sliding doors) even if the auto-loader option is not wanted.

The same company offering this has been awarded a contract for the Scout ammunition handling system for 40mm CTA.
Meggitt awarded SCOUT SV production contract | Meggitt Defense

The ammunition handling division is based in the US, but the company which owns it is based in the UK. The ammunition handling division makes ammunition systems for 20 and 30mm systems for helicopters (Apache, Cobra) and ships (Phalanx). The 120mm magazine system seems to be based on a scaled up version of those.

Everything that I know about the above comes from reading their literature and I have no direct experience to base any judgment on and claim no special knowledge. I have no idea if it has ever gone through any field trials in any tank.
 
Ah, this Autoloader?

The one that still wasn’t fully integrated in Abrams as of last year?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
It can be made to fit, its effectively a new turret with a bigger bustle.
All the NBC etc goes down in the hull that also gets a major redesign internally.
You get 36 rounds in the bustle and 6 in a bin in the hull.

It would be cheaper to buy new tanks. - See Land kicking the can until M1A3 heaves into sight.
You are so full of shit it’s impressive, MV22 for the FAA, F35a buy for the RAF, M1a3 buy for the army etc.
 
Possible if you keep shitting your defense industry.
We can afford all of those if we choose, but SOI, Meerkatz never provides any links to consolidate or support his statements.
 
To begin with, let's be clear that I'm not the one advocating it, I am not the one who originally proposed it here, and I am not suggesting that it is a good idea, so I don't claim to have all the answers, I have no information regarding how well it actually works, and I feel no need to either justify it or defend it.
[...]
The same company offering this has been awarded a contract for the Scout ammunition handling system for 40mm CTA.
Meggitt awarded SCOUT SV production contract | Meggitt Defense
I know its not you, it was more aimed at PhotEx. Also those links are useful, thanks.

Meggrit did the ammo handling system for Ajax? Would that be the ammo handling system that is rumoured to be non-functional when used on rough terrain and the vehicle is moving?
 
I know its not you, it was more aimed at PhotEx. Also those links are useful, thanks.

Meggrit did the ammo handling system for Ajax? Would that be the ammo handling system that is rumoured to be non-functional when used on rough terrain and the vehicle is moving?
You, ah, got any links to consolidate or support that one?
 
I know its not you, it was more aimed at PhotEx. Also those links are useful, thanks.

Meggrit did the ammo handling system for Ajax? Would that be the ammo handling system that is rumoured to be non-functional when used on rough terrain and the vehicle is moving?
Don’t be so cynical - haven’t you bought 30 cans of Coke from a vending machine in the back of a truck moving cross country when your life depended on it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Top