New Romanian AFV?

ADATS? If i remember, is a launcher on a big arm. Capable to launch against low altitude aerial targets and agaisnt armored ground targets. Good one!

Iama

This is one more article that tell me that romanian press is 100% stupid and unprofessional.

So what if the have left 76 turrets and guns? didn't they hear about spare parts?
Or possible usage of the turrets to upgrade a different vehicle?

I think MAPN need those 175 initial numbers. Well abou the costs ..this is always a situation for military aquisition. Just see F22 costs:). AFter all they intended to buy 700 of them .

Really exist the possibility to use that sys. on ZIMBRU TABs? If yes, i think is a good ideea to up-grade some of the ZIMBRU. At least those for missions like in Irak or Afganistan.

Iama

Iama check the first page

I'm so old... Day by day...

Iama

Tomcat, I think we should worry, cause what you say wasnt a silly journalist speaking, but the minister of defense, if you can imagine!!!

Now I know that our m.o.d. is completely parallel with the domain he was supposed to lead. Incompetence, incompetence, thy face is on all romanian newspaper pages...

This post has been edited by Imperialist on May 18, 2005 02:24 pm

I'm scared now. We all vote with hope and they are just a bunch of incompetents.
The minister of Defense , he was supposelly the Vice-Manager of Weapon Factory from Cugir.
Perhaps once a international contract is signed they can't backdown it.
About the MLI84 M i know they where testing it for now 2-3 years.

This post has been edited by tomcat1974 on May 18, 2005 03:01 pm

Indeed, this dual function is what we need.
I saw that we also have some Gepards, but I dont know the exact number. ADATS and Gepards could be quite interesting + 100 MLI-84...

This post has been edited by Imperialist on May 20, 2005 08:41 am

I don't like Gepard. Is old, and we not have too many.

Iama

we received 48 Gepard's . The version we received is not that old 85-87. Not older than our tanks.
But in that role we didn't had anything .

ADATS is just a faile project. US Senate axed it , only canada received some 30 vehicles.

48. They are all operational? Because i read at that time about some of them to be used as spare parts.

Iama

i think the number is 62-63 with ones for spare parts. Who knows.
I've seen the Gepard from close distance. At least it looked more modern than the rest of the weapons displayed then.

Iama, I was wondering if you are still with us on the forum ...

As I remember that over 50 vechicles were delivered, with 48 to become operational and the rest to be use for spare parts (or some 40 in total and 32 in use - I have to check this out). Also they were reconditioned by the German industry before being delivered to the Romanian army. The source is an older "Top Gun" magazine. They are in use with the FRR (Forta de Reactie Rapida - Quick Response Force) armoured units.

Initially there were speculations that the Germans will deliver not only reconditioned but also modernized vehicles, with the add-on of a close range twin AA rocket launcher, a modernize (digital) fire control system (the current being analogical) and a system for measuring projectiles' speed integrated in the gun muzzle. But in the end they only delivered vehicles in the "classical" configuration.

This post has been edited by Agarici on May 20, 2005 03:26 pm

I'm here, yet. But i had to work at my job and sometimes i don't have enough time. SOmetime just make log-in and go in building im my crusade against computer users... Bad ones!

What type of rockets are planed?

Iama

Funny you should use that word for such a small cannon. If you wanna talk about potency, check this one out. It's got much more penetration power.



Seriously now, this is a regular TAB with an Israeli turret on top. The main gun is 25mm which is bigger than the 14.5mm gun of the old turret; however I don't think it has the special anti-aircraft mode the old turret has. It comes with two anti-tank missiles which even tough increase vehicle lethality add considerably to the height of the turret making the vehicle more visible. This 'new' TAB comes part of a package presented to the Romanian government by the defense industry in a bid to convince that it is still capable of delivering modern equipment to the army. I sure hope this TAB wasn't 'la piece de rezistance’ because this kind of outdated recycled technology is a sure sign that our defense industry is dead and gone.

By the way check out the RN-94 a Romanian/Turkish APC that should be given serious consideration when replacing the current equipment.




http://www.nurolmakina.com.tr/nurolenglishsa/rn-94.htm
http://www.d-2-128.org/armorid/rn-94.html

From the same source (“Top Gun” magazine) the Rafael weapon-system, used for the modernized MLI (MLI 84 M1) comprises a Oerlikon multi-purpose 25 mm gun (with target stabilization system included - very useful for firing when moving with high speed/on rough terrain) and a coaxial 7,62 mm machine gun; also a twin antitank rocket launcher which could used both modernized Maliutka and Western model anti-tank rockets.

The weapon system for the modernized MLI included, separate from the turret, another machine-gun for AA role.

So I think there’s an evident advantage over the weapon configuration of the former TABs, and also over the AIFV Turkish turret proposed for the RN-94, even for the AA role. As for the chassis, I think the Rafael system could be easily adapted for the RN-94’s.

The main two advantages (and novelties) for the Rafael turret are:
- the turret itself is unmanned, being actually remote operated by the crew from inside the chassis. This means an unprecedented degree of protection for the crew members and the side-advantage of not having the fire exhaustion gas released inside the vehicle
- the wide angle of fire of the weapons around the vehicle, leaving actually few/no dead spots around it. This become self-evident when you compare the TAB with the Rafael turret with the silhouette of RN-94 (limited field of fire). This is a direct result of the turret height and given the vehicle’s role (infantry support and not antitank) the ability of covering with fire every side of the APC was considered mode important that keeping a low (“hull down”) profile. Also with an unmanned turret, the danger of a high profile is less important.

This post has been edited by Agarici on May 20, 2005 03:05 pm