What does the tank market look like after the Russian-Ukrainian war?

[Mighty_Zuk]

1 hour ago, lucklucky said:

They should develop am unmanned turreted Merkava with all ammunition in the turret.

That's in early stages of development but that won't be called a Merkava. IDF said they'll name their next MBT something different, starting a new family. They also specifically said no Merkava 5 in the future.

[Helmutkohl]

On 9/21/2023 at 3:38 AM, bojan said:

Also, I really don't get K2 hype. It has pathetic side armor (50mm plain steel on turret, ~40mm on hull), making it extremely vulnerable to just about anything hitting it from the side, including 25-30mm automatic cannons. It's front armor protection is full of weakened zones, front armor protection is smaller (at least in size, and that is somewhat indicative) than protection of Leo 2 and M1, ammo is not fully separated from crew etc, etc.

Type 10 is same, but it is at least it is ~10t lighter than K2, so it has at least some excuse for that.

I suspect one reason is because many are probably a bit tired of talking about the M1 and Leopard 2 variants for the last 3-4 decades. the K2 is something new/different to talk about.

The hope is that the Polish version of the K2, whenever that comes out, will strengthen the side armor.  Supposedly more of the ammo will be moved to the bustle as well.

 

[alejandro_]

On 9/28/2023 at 9:15 AM, Renegade334 said:

I mean, the Ukrainians themselves had a boatload of T64s in storage in Kharkiv before the onset of hostilities in 2022, but...there's a reason why they weren't pressed back in service...and the Russian invasion isn't entirely to blame for it.

Ukraine did activate quite a few tanks in 2014-2022. By 2018 500 T-64BV/72/80BV had been overhauled/upgraded and returned to service. I don't think the tanks condition was the limiting factor, money being the main limitation with finding spares.

http://alejandro-8.blogspot.com/2018/09/ucrania-mas-de-500-tanques.html

[Damian]

On 9/27/2023 at 7:20 AM, Helmutkohl said:

has the PL variant been fixed yet?

because it seems like every half year, Hyundai shows off a new model or mock up that looks totally different

Do not take too much attention to these models presented by Hyundai Rotem.

Besides right now there is widespread opinion in Poland, that MoD is simply creating a competition between GDLS and Hyundai Rotem to see who will give a better offer for MBT production. Because not only Hyundai Rotem offers K2PL variants for Poland, but also GDLS is offering production of M1A2's in Poland.

When I asked GDLS representatives if this means standard US Army M1A2SEPv3, they said that not neccessary, and that a Polish specific variant, let's name it M1A2PL is possible to be designed if Polish MoD will desire so.

This also means next generation MBT codenamed Wilk (Wolf) might be either of Korean origin (K3) or US origin (M1A3?).

[TTK Ciar]

Reading this article reminded me of this thread:

https://archive.ph/tr9Pa

According to that (to take with appropriate measure of salt), the growing trend is for Ukraine's supporters to pay the Czechs to refit old stocks of T-72 to a "T-72EA" configuration and send them to Ukraine.

According to https://wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72_operators_and_variants --

Quote

T-72EA (2022) – modernization of the T-72 (various versions) to 3rd-generation standard by Excalibur Army [cs] which includes:

New opto-electronic devices and an upgraded night vision block for all three crew members from company Optics trade, which significantly improve night vision capabilities and resolution. It uses a laser rangefinder to increase the probability of a first round hit, an improved thermal sight with ballistic computer, an upgraded commander's sight and an upgraded driver's sight. The night vision systems operate fully in passive mode without the use of infrared lights.

Increased ballistic protection with most vulnerable parts covered with reactive armour, significantly increasing the tank's protection against RPGs and HEAT ammunition. The reactive armour added to the tank is the equivalent of 400 millimetres of rolled armour when hit by a warhead. In total, the tank is equipped with 196 boxes of reactive armour.

Significantly improved mobility due to an upgraded power pack with increased engine power to 840 hp and increased acceleration dynamics.

Complete modernization of driver's position with a new digital dashboard. New internal and external communication systems, digital radio enabling encrypted communication. New fire protection system. Periscopic sights with anti-laser protection.

 

[On the way]

On 9/29/2023 at 1:37 AM, alejandro_ said:

Ukraine did activate quite a few tanks in 2014-2022. By 2018 500 T-64BV/72/80BV had been overhauled/upgraded and returned to service. I don't think the tanks condition was the limiting factor, money being the main limitation with finding spares.

http://alejandro-8.blogspot.com/2018/09/ucrania-mas-de-500-tanques.html

Why can't 3D printing be used to produce spares? The specs for the parts are all there, many of them already digitized, and the 3D printers these days can print anything.

[shep854]

On 10/29/2023 at 10:24 PM, On the way said:

Why can't 3D printing be used to produce spares? The specs for the parts are all there, many of them already digitized, and the 3D printers these days can print anything.

A lot of critical tank parts can only be made from solid, high-quality steel.  I don't think 3D printed parts are anywhere near as hard or tough.

[sunday]

7 minutes ago, shep854 said:

A lot of critical tank parts can only be made from solid, high-quality steel.  I don't think 3D printed parts are anywhere near as hard or tough.

There are 3D printers that work with metals. See here, for instance. I am not sure about cost-effectiveness of printing large parts in armor steel. Then there is the heat treating.

[shep854]

8 minutes ago, sunday said:

There are 3D printers that work with metals. See here, for instance. I am not sure about cost-effectiveness of printing large parts in armor steel. Then there is the heat treating.

Thanks!  I have seen a fair amount about printing non-stressed metal parts, and I am sure that there is a lot of effort being put into developing high-stress printing; that would save tons of money over forging and machining.

Edited October 31, 2023 by shep854

[Stefan Kotsch]

This is probably where the abyss of tank construction begin. A component that is considered extremely reliable can suddenly fail completely in a tank. 

[On the way]

On 10/31/2023 at 5:23 AM, sunday said:

There are 3D printers that work with metals. See here, for instance. I am not sure about cost-effectiveness of printing large parts in armor steel. Then there is the heat treating.

Not really talking about large armored parts. More like spares for engines, transmissions, running gear. etc. things that get worn out the most but is no longer being made. I think there was mention of the poor condition of some of the Leo 1 send to Ukraine. Some parts can be cannibalized from other tanks. But in the end, you need to get the parts that are needed to re-activate them. 

[sunday]

1 hour ago, On the way said:

Not really talking about large armored parts. More like spares for engines, transmissions, running gear. etc. things that get worn out the most but is no longer being made. I think there was mention of the poor condition of some of the Leo 1 send to Ukraine. Some parts can be cannibalized from other tanks. But in the end, you need to get the parts that are needed to re-activate them. 

I guess engine pistons, connecting rods, and ball/roller bearings are not really suitable for 3D printing, same as gearwheels.

Belts, seals, and the like could be off-the-shelf items, or could be fabricated in a relatively easy way.

However, while some kind of engineer, I am not a mechanical one, so I could be wrong.

[Rick]

Out of curiosity, are the following countries the only ones producing tanks at this time:

France, Germany, Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the U.S.?

[sunday]

Spain has production capabilities. I guess Italy too. Israel, of course, too. I think Poland plans of doing some production under license.

Edited November 1, 2023 by sunday

[methos]

1 hour ago, Rick said:

France, Germany, Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the U.S.?

Minus France and Great Britian.

[Rick]

7 minutes ago, methos said:

Minus France and Great Britian.

Wow, did not even think those two are not even building replacement tanks.

[Stuart Galbraith]

We are building new turrets. The french are building sights.

[methos]

34 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

We are building new turrets. The french are building sights.

The French are at least building complete AFVs 😁

[lucklucky]

But not tanks. Germany, Israel, Japan, China, South Korea, Russia and the U.S. 

[bojan]

Pakistan and India. License production in both cases (Arjun does not count), but still production.

 

 

[TonyE]

Bestest Korea?

[bojan]

Ofc, including that Armams/Abrmata thing

Sudan did some production of tanks, through with Chinese supplied components.

Edited November 1, 2023 by bojan

[Ssnake]

There's at least limited production in Greece (for KNDS), Turkey, Spain (Leo 2 production ended, but SBS still produces Pizarros/Pizarro upgrades). Poland will produce, in the not too distant future.

[kokovi]

6 hours ago, sunday said:

I guess engine pistons, connecting rods, and ball/roller bearings are not really suitable for 3D printing, same as gearwheels.

Belts, seals, and the like could be off-the-shelf items, or could be fabricated in a relatively easy way.

However, while some kind of engineer, I am not a mechanical one, so I could be wrong.

I have not looked top deep into that field but it seems that parts with high and/or multidirectional and/or dynamic mechanical loads are not suited to 3D printing. It is very good for parts with complicated geometry which experience mostly thermal or chemical loads.

[KV7]

7 hours ago, methos said:

Minus France and Great Britian.

plus China Pakistan and India.