August 7th, 2018 
admin 
Cercetare de moda noua – Sursa: onr.navy.mil
USMCii ar vrea sa inlocuiasca LAV-urile 25 de la Cercetare cu ceva mai musculos si au deschis un concurs de idei, deocamdata sub forma de pdf-uri adica nu e garantat sa iasa nimic practic.
Totusi, interesanta viziunea lor asupra noului echilibru intre cercetare si lupta care daca se va realiza, va insemna mult mai mult decat un blindat nou.
Cele mai importante idei, cu cuvintele lor:
The Armored Reconnaissance Vehicle (ARV) is envisioned as a possible next generation replacement for the U.S. Marine Corps’ legacy Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) in support of the Light Armored Reconnaissance (LAR) battalions within the Marine Divisions.
Facing more modern threats, LAR Battalions will have to fight for information prior to being able to provide it and will have to shape an increasingly complex battlespace. LAR Battalions will operate in highly contested environments, countering threats that have greater reach and lethality. Next generation armored reconnaissance will require multiple and resilient means to sense and communicate, more capable lethality options to destroy heavily armored threats close- in and at range, and an associated enhanced protection posture to counter those threats.
In a Marine Corps mission profile, the ARV base variant will operate in an independent LAR formation at extended ranges to support reconnaissance and security missions or as part of a LAR formation supporting a task organized combat formation in offensive and defensive operations
The ARV crew and embarked scout team will be capable of sensing and identifying weapons and targets through obscurants, beyond threat range, and beyond line of sight with a vehicle-mounted system and organic small-unmanned air and ground systems capability.
The ARV base variant will be able to detect, recognize, identify, track, engage, and neutralize stationary and moving light armor and materiel targets at range with an automatic, rapid fire medium caliber cannon, capable of delivering accurate anti-materiel, anti-personnel, and anti-armor munitions in all light conditions, while on the move, and across the mission profile. The ARV will need to be able to defeat threats with organic heavy anti-armor capability from beyond the range of the enemy heavy armor. The ARV will need to effectively deliver precision guided munitions to defeat threats beyond the range of enemy direct fire and anti-tank guided munitions weapons.
ARV armor will protect the crew and embarked infantrymen against armor-piercing direct fire medium and large caliber threats up to heavy machine gun, indirect high explosive fragmentation, landmines, and IEDs.
The ARV will achieve standoff with active and passive protective systems to sense, orient, classify, track, and defeat incoming RPG, ATGM, and PGM threats with all- weather hard- and soft-kill capability; soft-kill capability will defeat or disrupt threat UAS in the counter-reconnaissance fight.Sursa: onr.navy.mil
Ideea unei familii de vehicule dedicate cercetarii pare desprinsa din manualul britanic. Cu explozii mult mai mari.
Acum inapoi la TABC-79.
Posted in
Se cam blureaza linia de demarcatie intre un APC, IFV, RECON Veficle si Air Defence Vehicle(ehh …aici nu prea, e mai bine spus, Aerial Threat Survivability?) Parca un pic neuzual pt US Army, care opereaza in general vehicule specializate si mai putin “Swiss Army Knife”. Mda..Adapt or Perish.
S-au cam dus vremurile astea:
https://books.google.ro/books?id=juewO8lNeu8C&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=gathering+information+equipment+for+RECON+vehicle&source=bl&ots=nlR6BBDkuM&sig=lOyrb1NzTcsBxEXMhPHF-wziSp0&hl=ro&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjgl7vpu9rcAhWFJ5oKHaXoDcYQ6AEwDXoECAAQAQ#v=onepage&q=gathering%20information%20equipment%20for%20RECON%20vehicle&f=false
Aici intr-adevar, coomparatia cu britanicii este foarte potrivita.
Puterea de foc a actualului LAV 25, pare suficienta ca baza de pornire(eventual dublata de ATGM instalate in turela, deci ar trebui umblat la protectie(hull armour rezistent la KPV-14.5mm si toata gama de APS), motorizare, capacitati Optronice.
https://www.safran-electronics-defense.com/media/safrans-paseo-new-generation-optronic-system-armored-combat-idex-2017-20170220
https://www.kmweg.com/home/wheeled-vehicles/dingo-family-part-1/dingo-2-recce/product-information.html
Nimic despre capacitati amfibii? Desi la tot ce se va monta pe el, va fi probabil la limita.
Sincer, dupa ce ma uit inca o data, mai sus, ma gandesc la asta:
https://www.army-technology.com/projects/scout-specialist-vehicle/
..adica e o limita pana la care poti mixa, tot ce am spus mai sus, m-am uitat pe net la cum arata LAV AD, si realizez ca pur si simplu, trebuie gasit un echilibru intre toate cerintele enuntate in pdf.
Sunt curios sa aflu, cum vad altii problema.
Capacitati amfibii: “To maintain operational tempo and expand the maneuver space, ARV crews will be capable of rapidly transitioning to water operations under armor to negotiate water obstacles with a shore-to-shore water mobility capability. The ARV will have sufficient water mobility performance to enter and exit littoral surf zones and steep riverbanks to negotiate light surf, bays, inlets, estuaries, and rivers.”
Nimic prea extravagant.
Mea Culpa, abia acum m-am rasfoit materialul sursa.
Dat fiind ca AH si UH din dotarea USMC, au fost considerate eligibile pt. noi, banuiesc ca nu strica pt ai nostri, sa tina un ochi pe posibila evolutie a programului, macar pt. idei.
La inceputul anului, puscasii au mai initiat un concurs pt. designul vehiculelor militare.Ce s-a propus,cine,care au fost castigatorii,aici:
https://launchforth.io/launchforth/modular-logistics-vehicle-design-challenge/entries/
Interesant, daca ma uit la cerinte parca sint cam aceleasi ca pentru buggy-ul prezentata de romani, la scara. Parea un nou Hamster parasutabil dar in realitate era un vehicul logistic.
Eu n-am inteles prea bine de ce unele proiecte sunt din categoria nominalizata.Multe proiecte par vehicule tactice.Si cuantumul premiilor mi se pare cam modic.
ca place unora, ca nu place altora, aia e,
asta este trendu si cerinta tuturor armatelor moderne: protectie crescuta pt militari
si este normal atata timp cat mai toate tarile dezvoltate au spor negativ la populatie,
mai mult este vorba de viata unor oameni, multi cu familii,
este mai ieftin pt o tara sa creasca protectia la vehicul decat sa suporte intretinerea familiei militarului,
oamenii nu sunt creioane sau jucarii pe o tabla a unui strateg senil,
plus ca se vorbeste deja de materiale noi la stanag 6 pt APC
normal, la noi care avem strategii nostrii de prin razboiu de indepedenta, marele razboi si ww2, strategi care au ordonat atacu la baioneta cand s-au terminat gloantele, normal ca chestiile astea cu protectia dau cu o mare virgula si nu se justifica,
pt aceiasi strategi viata militarului este o cerinta de proiectare la care se poate renunta in favoarea mobilitatii pe apa, etc.
de aceea exista proiectu resuscitarii unor dinozauri ca t 55, proiect de modernizare al mli 84 (bmp 1) prin pastrarea sasiului depasit total dar daca pluteste ce mai conteaza si nu in ultimul rand proiecte de avioane militare plecand de la motoarele iar 93,
probabil conducerea armatei noastre nu si-a revenit inca dupa 1907 si astepta sa mai faca niste martiri
O solutie nici n-ar fi asa de trasa de par: Comisiile care hotarasc caietele tehnic, inzestrare, etc sa fie formate din ofiteri “combatanti” (adica unitati care in caz de pac-pac o sa lupte), sau care au fii in acele unitati.
Sa vezi cum brusc, nici STANAG 6 nu mai e destul.
solutia de schimbare, modernizare a strategiei, inclusiv la inzestrare nu poate venii decât din nauntru armatei,
ca asa spune istoria noastra
https://rnhs.info/modernizarea-marinei-si-atunci-ca-si-acum/
dar, din nefericire, sunt prea putine si palide luarile de pozitii fata de proasta inzestrare si se merge la infinit pe strategii depasite,
vom plati, ca de obicei tot noi,
ca am avut o istorie de conducatori cu nume de bulevarde dar care au facut atat de putin pt. tara si atat de multe smenuri, hotii, etc.
sau solutii proaste de inzestrare, combinate cu strategii eronate, care au facut prea multe victime in randul militarilor si a populatiei civile romane
iubesc tradarea dar urasc pe tradator
si toate echipamentele care executa toate cerintzele alea (standoff sensing, lovituri standoff cu guided munitions, doborat/zapacit drone, angajat blindate inamice, hard/soft kill protection, blindaj resistent la armor-piercing ammo, comunicatii/datalinkuri alea-alea) sa fie instalate pe un singur vehicul 🙂 ?
Lumea se personalizeaza.
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/anglo-engineering-concepts-back-systems-thinking/
De unde rezulta ca francezii ar avea o idee buna cu adoptarea EBRC Jaguar. Mai ramane ca cineva sa produca o versiune modernizata a CVR(T)-ului.