От Grizlik
К All
Дата 18.12.2008 17:58:12
Рубрики Современность; Локальные конфликты;

Новый британский броневик-MWMIK

Приветствую
http://www.mainpump.ru/news/specialty/1376.htm
Пока американцы обшивают Хаммеры доп. бронированием британцы берут на вооружение почти открытую боевую машину. Воюют они вроде в одних и тех-же краях, а вот выводы сделали совершенно противоположные.
А вообше прикольная тачка, так и просится в компьютерные игры, типа Battlefield 2.
С уважением.
От Exeter
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 21:54:12

Вот статья про эти "Шакалы"


Если вкратце - это рейдерские машины для сил специального назначения. Выработаны именно по опыту действий в Ираке (еще в кампанию 1991 г) и Афганистане, проект первоначально делался по требованиям SAS. Предназначены для действий вне традиционных маршрутов и основных дорог - следовательно, угроза фугасов или заранее заложенных мин минимальна. Зато вероятны быстротечные "полевые" столкновения с группами противника и с засадами - отсюда требования хорошего обзора и мощного вооружения. Высокая подвижность, проходимость по песку и мягким грунтам, приспособленность для движения по узким колеям грунтовых дорог. По массогабаритным характеристикам машины должны перебрасываться "Чинуками".

Дополнительные легкомонтируемые комплекты модульной брони также наличествуют, мероприятия по противоминной защите принимались. В то же время открытость машины сама по себе считается противоминным фактором (специально для любителей ездить на броне, видимо :-)))

За год использования этих агрегатов в Афганистане только 12 ноября в подрыве на мине погибло двое морпехов. До этого несколько машин благополучно пережили подрывы на минах без ущерба для людей.

В общем, не стоит впадать в "авиабазовщину" и считать себя умнее разработчиков, не разбираясь в деталях и не понимая, для чего сделано. Это специфические машины для специфических коммандосовских задач, которые к конвойным MRAP никакого отношения не имеют.


International Defence Review

The day of the Jackal: LRPVs uparmour for Afghanistan threats


Long-range patrol vehicles have traditionally sacrificed armour protection to emphasise their mobility, but evolving operational requirements and doctrine have revived efforts to bolster both. Nick Brown explores a new class of vehicle
Until relatively recently, long-range patrol vehicles (LRPVs) were the preserve of special forces operíations, essentially little changed from the concepts employed by the UK's Long Range Desert Group - the forerunner of the Special Air Service ( SAS) - making lightning raids on German airfields in Libya.
That is to say, the vehicles tended to be based on commercial offroad platforms that were stripped to the bone and refitted with relatively light weapons and stores, then used mainly to deliver small reconnaissance forces over long distances, exploiting the vehicles' mobility to avoid contact with the enemy. Indeed, according to one serving British officer recently returned from Afghanistan, "if the vehicles were compromised, it usually meant you'd done something wrong. You only really used the weapons to keep people's heads down so you could get out of there sharpish".
Clearly, LRPVs have also been used as fire platforms to strike fleeting targets or launch surprise attacks, but the fact remains that they were chiefly designed for covert operíííations and outfitted accordingly, with stripped-out Jeeps, Land Rovers and Toyota Land Cruisers the favoured chassis to work on.
However, recent operational experience, particularly in Afghanistan, has encouraged development of the LRPV concept into what could be considered a new class of vehicle. Three main issues have underpinned this development and driven requirements in Afghanistan.
First is the atrocious condition of Afghan roads and the need for offroad mobility across soft sand, hills, boulder fields and generally difficult terrain to counter lightweight enemy forces that are absolutely at home there. As the former Soviet forces discovered to their cost in the 1980s, so Western forces have realised today, that traditional armoured fighting vehicles struggle when off road but are vulnerable on it. There is a certain level of protection granted by travelling away from main supply routes, but it is also considered absolutely essential to take the fight to the enemy, for which task LRPVs are ideally suited.
Next, despite the fact that Afghanistan is relatively undeveloped and open, there are no real frontlines to 'hide' behind and the ever-present threat of ambush from any direction renders the covert defence of tradíitional, lightweight LRPVs less effective.
Finally, although the risk of ambush by improvised explosive device is greatly reduced away from main supply routes, the country is littered with Soviet-era mines and unexploded ordnance. As such, it has been decided that even LRPVs need a basic level of blast and ballistic protection to defend against 'unintended ambush' accidents.
Together, these requirements have seen a shift towards a wider 'democratisation' of special forces-type vehicles to more regular units, to enable them to patrol offensively and take the fight across Afghanistan's remote, ranging battlefields.
The UK is leading this move, supporting the development of the successful Supacat Jackal design, which was originally developed for SAS requirements but has since been deployed with the regular army. Supaícat, a UK-based small vehicle specialist, declined to name other Jackal customers, but the vehicle is known to have been ordíered for use by Australian, Danish and US forces. The Australian order replaces the elderly Land Rovers long used by Australian special forces.
The Jackal was designed by Supacat based on an HMT - now Lockheed Martin - chassis, featuring bespoke horizontal airbag suspension and an unusual mid-engined drivetrain layout.
Supacat has its own relatively small production capability, able to build around one Jackal per week, so when the orders rolled in - beginning with a major urgent operíational requirement (UOR) from the UK - it had to subcontract Babcock Land Systems to build the vehicles. Based within the old Devonport Management Ltd facility in Plymouth, Babcock has had up to 100 staff assíembling Jackals using relatively unskilled labour and detailed instruction manuals over the last year. At the time of writing, the company was completing Jackals at the rate of one per day with both Supacat and Lockheed Martin being paid royalties for every vehicle built.
Design roots
The Jackal design is rooted in a covert special forces vehicle programme from the late 1990s. Supacat's basic design brief was to build an offroad vehicle with a substantial payload, long range and superior cross-country mobility that would fit into a Chinook helicopter, with all of the limitations in height, width and weight that that implies.
Supacat's design approach took the unusual step of placing the driver and passenger right at the front of the vehicle, drawing on experience with the company's 6x6 Cat. This gave the driver excellent visibility over the terrain immediately ahead, which in turn drove the designers to break with the tradition of a front-engined 4x4 layout and settle on a mid-engined design, with a longitudinally mounted 5.9-litre Cummins diesel.This offered ideal weight distribution and balance between the axles (before loading it, naturally) but imposed some significant packaging challenges for the passengers and drivetrain.
Additionally, because the driver and passenger were originally seated over the front axle, essentially on the wheel arches, their headroom became a limiting factor for getting the vehicle into a Chinook, so the front crew were moved inboard of the wheels. Although this solved the height issue, placing the crew over the front axle later proved another challenge in how to provide adequate mine protection.
Having the bulk of the engine and gearbox in the middle of the vehicle also complicated the location of the main weapon mount position (usually used for .50-calibre machine guns and 40 mm automatic greníade launchers) as it made the vehicle too high to fit the Chinook's aperture. Early UK vehicles feature a fixed weapon ring aft of the engine, over the rear of the vehicle. This was not a problem for the original UK special forces operators, who were happy to reverse their vehicles towards an ambush or attack position so that they could escape quickly if compromised and continue returning fire during an exfiltration.
However, subsequent user requests and the operational realisation that in Afghanistan threats can come from any compass point have seen Supacat devise a new central weapon position that can fire all round the vehicle and be quickly lowered and latched into position to fit inside a Chinook.
Several other detail design changes have been made since the Jackal entered service - Supacat founder Nick Jones tells Jane's that no two customers have ordered the same vehicle, requiring different weapon mounts, accessories and left- or right-hand-drive options - but the basic 4x4 layout offíers seating for four. This typically comprises driver and passenger up front, gunner in the main ring and a single rear-facing seat at the very back, although Supacat is working on a utility/troop transport version with a covered rear passenger area. A number of weapon layouts are possible, including weapon mounts for front and rear passengers.
The vehicle comes with either normal tyres on Supacat-designed and -tooled 20-inch (51 cm) aluminium rims or, following what are believed to be US specifications, runflat tyres on bought-in split rims. Jones says that "starting from the beginning of the design, we wanted to put big wheels on [the Jackal] for the offroad capability. Then, looking at the tyres, we went for some super Michelins with quite a high profile".
Jones adds that the vehicle currently has no central tyre inflation system but that one could be fitted relatively easily as the Jackal already features a compressor for the air suspension. Current vehicles have a lead and pressure hose off the compressor to enable tyre pressures to be lowered - from circa 40-50 psi to 15 psi on standard tyres - to decrease ground pressure and then be reinflated.
The runflats are potentially more problematic because of their stiff sidewalls and inserts, which limit the benefits of dropping tyre pressures. Jones notes that they are also around twice as heavy as standard tyres, increasing the unsprung weight and requiring shock absorber rates to be rethought. Drive is provided to the wheels via reduction hubs and Supacat is looking to install locking diffíerentials to further improve the vehicle's mobility in very soft sand.
The equipment fit is variable, but standard 4x4 Jackals usually carry two spare wheels on side mounts, which can be folded out to provide more space in the vehicle and back in to shrink the width to fit that all-important Chinook.
The wheels are located via long-travel suspension to cope with high cross-country speeds. Interestingly, the suspension is in an identical layout at each corner - complete with hub brakes, springs and wishbones, thereby simplifying manufacture, reducing costs and easing repair in the field.
The suspension is double wishbone all-round, with air suspension to control the spring rate and ride height. As well as offíering a surprisingly comfortable ride, this enables the Jackal to be dropped onto its bump-stops to lower the vehicle height and crawl up the Chinook's rear ramp with roughly half an inch to spare. Conversely, it can be raised into a 'tip-toe' mode to maníoeuvre over boulders at very low speed or lift itself over an obstacle after beaching.
Following the enemy
A useful spinoff of the Chinook width criteria is that the Jackal has a relatively narrow track, certainly when compared with the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), which was designed to drive in tracks left by main battle tanks (MBTs). This has proved very useful when following Taliban technicals - usually Toyota Hilux trucks or similar - because the Jackal's tyres fit in the same tyre tracks.
The downside is that the vehicle is quite tall for its track. Despite Supacat's efforts to lower the Jackal's centre of gravity - the engine and gearbox are as low as possible and the sump could not be lower without compromising ground clearance and risking being ripped off - the combination of a narrow track with the weight of a weapon and ammunition mounted high up and other stores mounted on racks around the vehicle means that several Jackals have been rolled at high speed.
The vehicle's mobility is still impressive and it has remarkable slope-traverse capabilities - crossing side slopes of 30 degrees - but it has only so much control over physics and driver skill.
A serving SAS trooper tells Jane's that "pretty much my only issue with the [Jackal] is that it's been a bit tippy, but that's usually down to how we pack it and operator error rather than the vehicle. The good thing is that they're rugged beasts and it's fairly easy to pull them back upright and get back on the gas".
Part of the Jackal's ruggedness is down to the spaceframe chassis and aluminium cladding. This also eases repairs to vehicles damaged in the field - Supacat has a dedicated repair and rebuild facility in the southwest of England, where it fixes vehicles too seriously damaged to be repaired in-theatre - as the damaged section can be cut off and replaced, then built up again. Supacat's chief engineer, Sean Limbrick, tells Jane's that none of the chassis returned for rebuild have been damaged so badly they had to be condemned.
Drive is provided to all four wheels - or six in the new full-time 6x6 and Extenda versions - via an Allison automatic box. According to Jones, the company did not consider a manual box, believing that the automatic's incline hold-back and smooth, uninterrupted drive offer superior offroad capabilities.
In current trim the Jackal weighs roughly seven tons (7,112 kg) and offers a three-ton payload, but Supacat is working to increase the payload capacity with thicker suspension wishbones. It is also trialling an uprated 230 bhp version of the standard engine, although Jones and Limbrick are adamant that the existing 185 bhp is sufficient. Jones tells Jane's that the vehicle "already has enough torque to spin up all four wheels on dry tarmac".
Newbuild vehicles are nevertheless to receive a new engine, in the shape of Cummins' 6.7-litre version of the same block, although Jones says that power will be pegged back to the same 185 bhp.
The standard vehicle currently has two ride-height settings - low for onroad and high for offroad - governed by the design concept of keeping the driveshafts as straight as possible (5 degrees above or below horizontal respectively) to reduce wear on the universal joints. Jones believes that, in future, the variable heights may be standardised to just the offroad setting. The original concept was to provide more stability for high-speed onroad driving (Jackal can reach speeds of 90 mph [145 km/h] and the Australian version has a clip-on windscreen) but as the central air suspension bags have more pressure when holding the vehicle higher, it actually rolls less on the offroad setting.
There are two 6x6 Jackal options for customers wanting either a recovery version or an increased payload. The first is a full-time 6x6 option and the other - as believed selíected for the Australian Nary project - is the Extenda variant, which adds weight and cost but offers a greater range of flexibility.
In essence, Extenda is a modular upgrade to the standard 4x4 variant, consisting of a basket and axle, complete with interfaces to the propshaft of the standard vehicle. The transition between four- and six-wheel versions can be made in two hours, according to Limbrick. Extenda provides an additional two-ton payload capability and greater climbing ability up a straight slope, but has a larger turning circle than the standard vehicle.
Armour up
Although initial Mobility Weapon Mount Installation Kit (MWMIK - the name of the vehicle before it became Jackal) vehicles were originally largely unprotected in the traditional LRPV style, a UK UOR in late 2007 set out a requirement for a modular up-armouring and blast-protection package that could be fitted to existing vehicles and to newbuild UOR follow-ons. The contract was awarded to UK-based Jankel Armouring and was signed off in February 2008, the first 48 packages being delivered by April. Since then, Jackal vehicles are understood to have withstood several mine strikes with no fatalities thus far.
The package is an innovative mix of hard plate, spall liners and blast-attenuation measures and is believed to weigh in the order of 750 kg in total.
Jankel's managing director (MD), Andrew Jankel, tells Jane's: "Whereas for ballistic protection you can just go and build a vehicle out of armour, blast is a whole different ball game because you have to deal with a huge number of different forces and, unless you've done a lot of blast testing, it's very difficult to build a blast-protected vehicle."
Under subcontract to Babcock Land Systems, Jankel developed a protection package for Jackal consisting of ballistic panels around the vehicle, underfloor protection in two main sections - one each forward and rear - and new Jankel Blast Attenuation Seats (J-BAS). "The technical challenge of armouring a relatively light vehicle where the occupants are sitting over the front axle and protecting them against fairly large anti-vehicle mines - I can't go into specifics of how big - was a lot more complicated than we thought it would be," the MD tells Jane's.
The company originally planned to buy in blast-protection seats for the requirement and trialled "three or four" types, but none proved appropriate for a vehicle the size of Jackal. "They may have worked in an MRAP [mine-resistant ambush-protected]-type vehicle," Jankel states, "where it's a very heavy vehicle and you get quite small initial blast impact.
"With the size of blast that we were looking at, there was nothing out there that could deal with the G-forces involved in the acceleration and also the side forces that are experienced by a light vehicle as it gets blown away. Unlike an MRAP, which will pretty much get blown up and down, a light vehicle will roll and twist as well. So we had to build our own [seats] that could deal with blast attenuation but also offered structural rigidity."
Jankel continues: "We'd committed ourselves to providing a blast solution and that's how we find ourselves in the blast seat business. Where we thought 80 per cent of the work involved on Jackal would be in armíouring, stopping the shrapnel and deflecting the blast and pressure waves, in fact that turned out to be reasonably straightforward compared to dealing with the acceleration and deceleration forces."
This was complicated further by the Jackal's relatively low ride height compared to an MRAP, which precluded putting in a traditional v-shaped blast-deflecting hull.
According to Jankel, the seats had to pass the AEP 55 classification rating, which imposes very clear pass and fail ratings based on injuries sustained by a crash-test dummy on the seat - acceleration-caused neck compressions, whiplash, frequency movements of lower back and hips, chest-wall pressure and lower leg breaks - irrespective of the vehicle protection.
As an almost incidental factor, this encouraged a subtle design shift from seeking to protect the vehicle with armour in an MRAP style to protecting the individuals inside. Jankel says that unlike an MBT, which has to be able to take a hit and keep fighting, the imperative with Jackal was simply to enable the crew to survive that hit. As such, the protection starts with the individual and moves out, rather than starting outside the vehicle and moving in.
"The concept behind [J-BAS] is to isolate the individual from the acceleration," says Jankel. "The way it works is that there is a frame and space below the bucket seat and as the vehicle moves up, the frame crumples and moves through the seat. It's all about space and how you control it and enable the seat to deal with all of the other forces involved - rollover and lateral forces - as well as controlling the body in the seat."
For the latter, Jankel has developed a range of special seatbelts and harnesses built into the bucket. The MD contends that a lot of injuries suffered in HMMWVs, for example, are caused by crew coming out of their three-point harnesses when their vehicle hits the ground after an explosion.
Jackal's open design means that a blast's pressure wave must be deflected away and the vehicle's armoured solution includes plates to do this. Although regarded by many as a weakness, the open structure has been argued by some to be an advantage, since if blast finds its way into a closed vehicle, it usually has fatal results.
This is an incidental design advantage, however, as Jackal was always intended to be open to offer enhanced situational awareness and ease of access/egress in an emergency. Bearing in mind the vehicle's evolved patrol/peacekeeping-type role with regular army units, the unimpeded ability to interact with the local population has also been heralded.
Power trip
In terms of further development, Supacat is working on a sophisticated battery management system and extra power generíation to recharge and power the wide range of systems that have been added into the standard vehicle. In UK service, these systems include a range of electronic countermeasures, jammers and Bowman communications gear. Jones states that some vehicles now have as many as 11 batteries on board, all of which are currently being charged in an ad hoc manner.
Rather than going down the route of fitting an auxiliary power unit, Jones says that the engine's latent power will be tapped into with larger alternators. "We've done about half a dozen vehicles with power take-offs on the side, providing 14 kW at 240 V, but that can only really be used when static because the engine needs to run at a constant speed."
Supacat hopes to be given responsibility for integration of electrical systems as well, because the current industrial setup sees the UK's vehicles built by Supacat or Babcock, complete with wiring loom and fittings, before delivery to the UK Ministry of Defence at Ashchurch in Gloucestershire. This means that the vehicle has to be partially disassembled and new holes cut, with wiring spliced in and so forth, leading Jones to argue that it would be a simpler and more integrated process if Supacat was commissioned to build those parts into the vehicle as appropriate throughout the build. He suggests that Supacat would not have to do the integration work if, for example, General Dynamics was sensitive about the Bowman fit, but rather that the company could co-ordinate it earlier in the build cycle.
Future upgrade paths could see development of a hybrid or full electric-drive variant, fitted with motors in the wheel hubs. This would bring benefits in terms of immediate torque delivery and near-silent operation, but would further increase the unsprung weight. Limbrick tells Jane's developers may have suitable motors as soon as six months away, but that in general the technology is unlikely to be ready or required for several years.
CONVENTIONAL LRPVS
At lower levels of intensity and in other theatres, there continues to be a clear role for traditional LRPVs and several designs are still actively being sold to a wide range of customers, and a large number of Land Rover, Toyota and Mercedes G-Wagen variants remain in service around the world. However, in line with their evolving road car designs, the likes of Land Rover appear to have moved upmarket, with heavier, more luxuriously equipped models that are more suited to the world of armoured VIP transport. Similarly, the G-Wagen is more regularly seen with a full cab and winding windows, so it does not really fit the traditional mould of the stripped-back LRPV.
For its part, Toyota is constrained by Japanese laws prohibiting direct export sales of military equipment, but that has not stopped Toyota chassis from being some of the most widely used as the basis for LRPV-type vehicles. Indeed, Toyotas have an obvious popularity among the technicals used to transport insurgent and non-traditional military forces, as well as being the regular vehicle of choice for UN and non-governmental organisations. In war zones around the world, the Toyota ranges of Hilux pickup trucks and Land Cruiser offíroaders represent all things to all men.
Jankel's Fox/al-Thalab LRPV design is based on the Toyota 79 Land Cruiser pickup chassis, stripped back to its bare essentials and uprated with certain bespoke Jankel parts (including suspension dampers and springs, brake system, front differential, clutch and rear axle), although the basic payout, 4.2-litre six-cylinder diesel and five-speed manual gearbox (with low-ratio transfer box) are retained.
Jankel tells Jane's that Toyota's widespread support infrastructure and the vehicles' and drivetrains' well-proven reliability make them ideal vehicles for conversion. Indeed, the vehicles retain their Toyota warranty, underwritten by Jankel where standard parts have been replaced.
The basic Fox design can be tailored to individual requirements, but in standard trim features seating for driver and commander in the front and space for two crew in the rear. It typically also carries two main weapon mounts: a traversing weapon ring for a .50-calibre machine gun (MG) on top; and a 7.62 mm MG on a swing arm covering the front arc and controlled by the commander.
It is very much a traditional LRPV design and is deliberately fairly basic to both keep costs down and ensure reliability. "In essence, it takes off from where the old Land Rover was," Jankel tells Jane's, "because Land Rover has moved on from there and is quite an expensive product nowadays as a base vehicle."
The Land Cruiser chassis also offers a significant growth margin and is able to carry increased payloads (1,700 kg from a gross vehicle weight of 4,200 kg), including up-armouring with a Modular Armour Protection Installation Kit (MAPIK) and spalling protection. MAPIK was originally developed by Jankel for portable, discrete individual protection that could be used in any vehicle, but evolved into a semi-permanent armour fit for the UK's Weapons Mount Installation Kit Land Rovers and has been modified to fit the pared-back body panels of the Fox. Protection can range from B6 to STANAG 4569 Level 3 with composite panels and spall liners.
Jankel is also looking to pull experience through from its work on the Jackal to enhance protection of the Fox, including shaped, blast floors and lightweight armour panels to augment the MAPIK, matting and blast-attenuation material around the wheel arches and existing ballistic protection.
Typical Fox users will tend to utilise the vehicle in basic form, however, keeping out of trouble as a result of their mobility or, more often, because they are not used regularly by countries on a war footing but spend more of their time on long-range border patrols and low-level internal security missions.
Nevertheless, any developments will be modular to enable users to rapidly upgrade if they decide to deploy the vehicles into a combat zone or with peacekeeping operations, for example.
The Fox design has proven a success, sold in relatively large numbers to both Jordan (where it is in series production at the 35,000 m2 Jordan Light Vehicle Manufacturing facility that opened in 2002) and Mauritania, with several other countries currently trialling the type.
Jankel refused to name the latter but tells Jane's that several NATO members currently have Fox vehicles on trial. "You can imagine that these are countries who don't want or can't really go for [Jackal]," he says. "They may also be the type of countries that don't have the kind of logistic footprint to be able to support bigger, more complicated vehicles and so the Toyota network and the fact that they're field-serviceable in Toyota's rest-of-world specification with no electronic engine management - they're nice and simple old school - appeals to them."
Additionally, Jankel sees a market for LRPVs in the developing world. "There are a number of armies across the world that don't even have the logistic footprint to service fleets of vehicles in their own countries, and others who don't share NATO's operational philosophies. You have to remember there are a lot of other countries who aren't actually fighting in Afghanistan or Afghanistan-type conditions and don't need the protection of something like Jackal, but who are looking for patrol vehicles."
The company launched a new family of patrol vehicles based on the Jeep J8 militarised chassis in August, which it pitched below the Fox design.
Jankel told Jane's that the company has developed "a number of variants, working within the existing Chrysler payloads". The first to be launched is a three-seat light patrol vehicle, fitted with an external stores-mounting frame, weapon mounts for 7.62 mm and .50-calibre MGs, as well as rollover protection.
This lightweight, open version can be strengthened with MAPIK, while more protection can be provided in a five-seat, four-door, enclosed variant. A third, utility/troop version will follow, based on the three-seat vehicle but with the weapon mount removed and a canvas cover fitted over a rear troop compartment that features seating down each side.
The J8 chassis forms a low-cost, easily supported base for the vehicle as it is already an essentially militarised product, with all of the commercial sound-deadening stripped back to be as light as possible and a 24 V power supply, uprated suspension and enhanced cooling pack as standard. Jankel tells Jane's: "We do basically everything that isn't standard Jeep. We take the basic chassis, strip it and bolt on everything from the windscreen and frame to the armour package and weapon mounts."
Although Jankel has specified a number of modified parts and uprated mechanicals, the vehicles can be serviced and supported through Chrysler's global supply chain and standard parts can be substituted if necessary.
The first target customer for the vehicle is Poland, with a proposed industrial offset package that would see the vehicles assembled from chassis and kits delivered in-country.


С уважением, Exeter
От VVS
К Exeter (18.12.2008 21:54:12)
Дата 19.12.2008 10:14:42

Re: Вот статья...

>Если вкратце - это рейдерские машины для сил специального назначения.

Тогда концепция понятна - в рейде ни мин ни организованной засады не ожидается.

Непонятным становится другое - чем им вертолеты для этого не нравятся ?
От Llandaff
К Exeter (18.12.2008 21:54:12)
Дата 19.12.2008 09:52:38

Движение по мягким грунтам - с четырьмя тоннами веса? (-)
От Кирасир
К Llandaff (19.12.2008 09:52:38)
Дата 19.12.2008 10:01:01

То есть семь с половиной тонн "Водника" и шесть тонн "Тигра"

Приветствую всех!

у вас никаких вопросов не вызывают? Кстати, это все ошибки в переводе. 4 тонны - это полезная нагрузка "Шакала", а полная максимальная масса - 6650 кг.
http://voenavto.almanacwhf.ru WBR Андрей Судьбин aka Kirasir
От Llandaff
К Кирасир (19.12.2008 10:01:01)
Дата 19.12.2008 10:35:09

у Тигра хотя бы клиренс есть (-)
От vladvitkam
К Llandaff (19.12.2008 10:35:09)
Дата 19.12.2008 23:24:37

короче, паркетник +

хулиганов по городу гонять :)
От Кирасир
К Llandaff (19.12.2008 10:35:09)
Дата 19.12.2008 23:18:03

Кстати, и тут все совсем не плохо (+)

Приветствую всех!

посмотрел поподробнее - 280 мм это клиренс при подвеске в верхнем, "асфальтовом" положении. В оффроуде - 380 мм (что не сильно отличается от 400 мм "Тигра" и "Водника"). Минимальный клиренс (давление в колесах снижено до минимума, подвеска в верхнем положении) - 180 мм. 260 мм, о которых все пишут - рекомендованная конфигурация для "сухого бездорожья" (подвеска в верхнем положении, давление снижено до кких-то средних значений).
http://voenavto.almanacwhf.ru WBR Андрей Судьбин aka Kirasir
От Бульдог
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 21:26:06

может у него броня съемная?

а то непонятно - как они 4 тонны накрутили?
От СбитыйНадБалтикой
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 20:53:09

Очень важный вопрос:

.. что это за фетиш у англосаксов: недоброневики, какие-то боевые платформы с открытой посадкой экипажа? На хрена они нужны-то весь в броне а экипаж на свежем воздухе.... ча-ча какая-то, а ведь он для БД предназначен: вон - вооружён до зубов (думаю позднее и ещё добавят)...
С Уважением
От Дмитрий Адров
К СбитыйНадБалтикой (18.12.2008 20:53:09)
Дата 25.12.2008 03:02:09

Попытка ответа

Здравия желаю!
>.. что это за фетиш у англосаксов: недоброневики, какие-то боевые платформы с открытой посадкой экипажа? На хрена они нужны-то весь в броне а экипаж на свежем воздухе.... ча-ча какая-то, а ведь он для БД предназначен: вон - вооружён до зубов (думаю позднее и ещё добавят)...

Это современное изложение опыта т.н. "дальней разведки", времен Африканской кампании в годы Второй мировой. Легкая воруженная машина. Это не танк, это не машина патруля, это машина диверсантов.

>С Уважением
Дмитрий Адров
От (v.)Krebs
К СбитыйНадБалтикой (18.12.2008 20:53:09)
Дата 19.12.2008 17:58:32

Re: Очень важный...

Si vis pacem, para bellum

фрицев вспомним - на Цундапах с пулеметом за бронещитком рассекали по первому году войны, и не мяукали. Наши - на последнем году войны на мотоциклах, тоже ничего.

маневренные БД, похоже
От Зуекщ
К СбитыйНадБалтикой (18.12.2008 20:53:09)
Дата 19.12.2008 01:24:44

Я бы с удовольствием

посмотрел бы на "зимний" вариант этого чуда )
От Роман Алымов
К Зуекщ (19.12.2008 01:24:44)
Дата 19.12.2008 12:18:02

А в чём проблема? (+)

Доброе время суток!
Надеть на седоков жилеты и тапочки с подогревом (такие ещё в советской армии были), запитать от бортовой сети - и всё в шоколаде.
С уважением, Роман
От Antenna
К Роман Алымов (19.12.2008 12:18:02)
Дата 19.12.2008 12:26:17

Re: А в...

>Доброе время суток!
> Надеть на седоков жилеты и тапочки с подогревом (такие ещё в советской армии были), запитать от бортовой сети - и всё в шоколаде.
>С уважением, Роман

Человек к локальному теплу, холоду относится плохо. Некомфортно ему, ему надо +21 в ногах и +19 у головы. А так давно бы кровеносную к теплообменнику подключили и всего делов.
От Роман Алымов
К Antenna (19.12.2008 12:26:17)
Дата 19.12.2008 13:25:22

Re: А в...

Доброе время суток!

> Человек к локальному теплу, холоду относится плохо. Некомфортно ему, ему надо +21 в ногах и +19 у головы. А так давно бы кровеносную к теплообменнику подключили и всего делов.
***** Тем не менее лётчики в таком летали с незапамятных времён - и ничего. Может и не курортные условия, но лучше чем просто мёрзнуть.

С уважением, Роман
От Bronevik
К Роман Алымов (19.12.2008 13:25:22)
Дата 19.12.2008 13:48:35

Re: А в...

Доброго здравия!
>Доброе время суток!

>> Человек к локальному теплу, холоду относится плохо. Некомфортно ему, ему надо +21 в ногах и +19 у головы. А так давно бы кровеносную к теплообменнику подключили и всего делов.
>***** Тем не менее лётчики в таком летали с незапамятных времён - и ничего. Может и не курортные условия, но лучше чем просто мёрзнуть.
У американцев были комбинезоны и обувь с подогревом для экипажей тяжелых бомбардировщиков. Самой трудной задачай было не обоссаться обмочиться в момент атаки немецких сил ПВО.
>С уважением, Роман
Cacatum non est pictum--оставим эту латынь без перевода...
От Роман Алымов
К Bronevik (19.12.2008 13:48:35)
Дата 19.12.2008 14:00:58

У наших тоже были (-)
От Bronevik
К Роман Алымов (19.12.2008 14:00:58)
Дата 19.12.2008 14:53:41

Кстати, такие же комбинезоны были у пилотов дальних высотных истребителей и разв (-)
От Bronevik
К Роман Алымов (19.12.2008 14:00:58)
Дата 19.12.2008 14:46:12

По большей части ленд-лизовские. (-)
От Роман Алымов
К СбитыйНадБалтикой (18.12.2008 20:53:09)
Дата 18.12.2008 22:26:35

Это их наследие с WW2 (-)
От СбитыйНадБалтикой
К Роман Алымов (18.12.2008 22:26:35)
Дата 18.12.2008 23:25:11

... лучше бы это было наследие здравого смысла.... (-)
От Роман Алымов
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 18:43:26

А на лебёдке - полимерный трос никак? Модники (-)
От DenisK
К Роман Алымов (18.12.2008 18:43:26)
Дата 18.12.2008 20:51:47

Традиционная вифовская реакция:)

Интересно, во сколько жизней подобные подходы уже встали ранее... помнится тов. Мехлис излагал: "Пистолет-пулемёт - полицейское оружие."
От Виктор Крестинин
К Роман Алымов (18.12.2008 18:43:26)
Дата 18.12.2008 18:49:02

неметаллические буксирные тросы встречаются и на Варриорах в Ираке. (-)
От DenisK
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 18:39:48

Наши на броне с Афгана ездят...

Надо отдать должное англичанам, соображают.
Медленно правда.
От объект 925
К DenisK (18.12.2008 18:39:48)
Дата 18.12.2008 19:03:36

Ре: Кто и чего соображает? Кошкин прав. На етой недел была статья в Сюддой

че Зеитунг. Солдаты которые на усиленных Вольфах жалуются. Типа мы вешаем броники на двери чтобы была хоть какая-нибудь защита.
И кстати про ети машины на прошлой неделе проскакивали на форуме негативные отзывы из английской прессы. емнип.
Алеxей
От DenisK
К объект 925 (18.12.2008 19:03:36)
Дата 18.12.2008 20:45:02

Насколько понял - концепция открытого транспортёра.

Мины сейчас наиболее тяжёлый случай.
Стрелковый огонь меньше роли играет, тем более персоональные средства есть.
От FED-2
К DenisK (18.12.2008 20:45:02)
Дата 18.12.2008 21:37:18

Re: Насколько понял...

>Мины сейчас наиболее тяжёлый случай.
>Стрелковый огонь меньше роли играет, тем более персоональные средства есть.

Они уже с апреля 2008 г. гоняются по Гельманду под названием патрульная машина Джекэл 4x4. В октябре в Афганистане погиб 121. английский солдат, когда его Джекэл подорвался на фугасе.

По английски:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MWMIK .
От Сергей
К FED-2 (18.12.2008 21:37:18)
Дата 19.12.2008 21:58:55

Re: Насколько понял...


>Они уже с апреля 2008 г. гоняются по Гельманду под названием патрульная машина Джекэл 4x4. В октябре в Афганистане погиб 121. английский солдат, когда его Джекэл подорвался на фугасе.

Уже вроде бы есть дальнейшее развитие - Supacat Extenda. ЕМНИП - основное отличие - дополнительное бронирование.
От И. Кошкин
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 18:27:07

То-то английские воины порадуются (-)
От Llandaff
К Grizlik (18.12.2008 17:58:12)
Дата 18.12.2008 18:15:39

безумное четырехтонное багги

с весом 4 тонны, без брони вообще, с небольшим дорожным просветом и всего на 4 человека.

Зачем это?
От Кирасир
К Llandaff (18.12.2008 18:15:39)
Дата 19.12.2008 09:55:36

Re: безумное четырехтонное...

Приветствую всех!
>с весом 4 тонны, без брони вообще, с небольшим дорожным просветом и всего на 4 человека.
не с весом, а с полезной нагрузкой. Максимальная масса этой штуки - 6650 кг, из которых 4000 - полезная нагрузка. А таковая, помимо большого запаса горючего, экипажа и вооружения, может включать комплект навесной брони, на которую и придется основная масса. При 185-сильном 5.9 литровом дизеле (кстати, том же самом, что ставился на первые "Тигры"), подвижность у машины будет весьма пристойная. Что действительно не фонтан - так это дорожный просвет 260 мм. Просто у фирмы Supacat не нашлось готовых мостов с колесными редукторами, а городить огород ради малосерийной машины не стали.

>Зачем это?
 http://voenavto.almanacwhf.ru WBR Андрей Судьбин aka Kirasir
От Llandaff
К Кирасир (19.12.2008 09:55:36)
Дата 19.12.2008 10:35:58

Спасибо за уточнение


>не с весом, а с полезной нагрузкой. Максимальная масса этой штуки - 6650 кг, из которых 4000 - полезная нагрузка.

Ну тогда все гораздо разумнее. А то я не мог понять, как в открытом багги 4 тонны веса. Вот 2.5 тонны пустого багги - это я вижу и понимаю.