Jump to content


Photo

Israeli Afvs


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#21 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,989 posts

Posted 17 April 2019 - 1314 PM

Thank you for the info, Zuk.


  • 0

#22 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 04 August 2019 - 1421 PM

New video showing the Carmel vehicles:
https://m.youtube.co...h?v=R2Gz7NnB83k

Just a little background before we dive in:
MoD has allocated a 100 million NIS budget (or currently 28 million USD) to each of the three contestants, to create a cockpit for the crew of the next generation AFV, with all the required sensors attached in a feasibility test setup.

The program was scheduled to end by the 2nd half of this year, and the release of this video shows that the program is indeed concluded. All vehicles are named Carmel, after the program.

The next phase in the broader Kaliyah program is a study by the army, of all demonstrations, and conclude which cockpit design suits them best.

All 3 contestants, IAI, Rafael, and Elbit, have installed their add-on kits on government-furnished M113 vehicles, and demonstrated to the IDF in a series of tests, the capabilities of each vehicle.

Each cockpit design is to house 2 basic crewmembers that are a vehicle commander and driver, albeit the naming is still problematic because manual driving is only optional. A third crewmember can enter the vehicle, but he is not essential to its operation. The 3rd crewmember is a framework commander (anything from platoon up to battalion or higher), and his input is mostly the commanding of his framework via the communications, BMS, and sensory network on board the vehicle.



Each contestant gets approximately 1 minute in the video, and we can see in the following order; IAI, Rafael, and Elbit.

Each company offered a unique concept at the core of the demonstration.

IAI offers a combination of a semi-panoramic widescreen setup and personal screens.

Rafael offers a similar combination of semi-panoramic setup plus personal screens, but the attention is given more to interaction with the panoramic setup and less to the personal screens, but one which is highly interactive

Elbit offers a helmet-mounted solution, with assistive personal screens that are higher in numbers but more purpose-made. Additionally each crewman gets a quasi-panoramic widescreen setup on top of a helmet mounted vision system.


Each company has a key advantage here, albeit some are more advantegous than others.

IAI has by far the most experience in the field of autonomous systems and robotics. Elbit is also making autonomous drones but is still behind IAI.

Rafael has the BNET secured network to power all its communications plus the FireWeaver next gen BMS.

And Elbit, well it has put the most time in its system. It has been developing the Iron Vision for a long time and it's slated to enter service in 2021 on the Merkavas, and 2020-2021 on the Eitan and Namer.
Elbit also has the advantage of past work on active camouflage.

Both Rafael and Elbit are already producing turrets, although these are unlikely to be real advantages in this competition.


All offers must include long and short range multi-spectral vision, a fully autonomous driving capability, at least semi-autonomous firing capability, and serious sensor fusion tech to permit the operation of the vehicle by 2 men, regardless of the vehicle's class. Even an MBT. All designs are heavily AI-assisted.

Additional aspects of the program that are not really part of the Carmel are a hybrid/electric drive, active camouflage, and AI-driven sensors.

Elbit - internal:

https://www.israelde...g?itok=0lPIySuw

Elbit - external:

https://www.israelde... מבחוץ.jpg

Rafael - internal:

https://www.israelde...

Rafael - external:

https://www.israelde... מבחוץ.jpg

IAI - internal:

https://www.israelde...

IAI - external:

https://www.israelde...

More reading material:
https://www.timesofi...-of-the-future/

https://www.ynetnews...5563588,00.html
  • 0

#23 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 06 August 2019 - 0731 AM

More on IAI's solution. They emphasize the vehicle's ability to operate with unprecedented autonomy, even fully unmanned.

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=C6f1821ZUF8

Edited by Mighty_Zuk, 06 August 2019 - 0750 AM.

  • 0

#24 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 06 August 2019 - 0811 AM

More on Rafael's solution. They emphasize ergonomics. They claim near-autonomy (versus IAI's optional full autonomy) albeit without explaining whether they mean a full one is optional, but explain that the crew's efficiency grows substantially because of their unique focus on ergonomics and UI on all platforms, plus unprecedented levels of sensor fusion.

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=OPn7hH7OpS4
  • 0

#25 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 06 August 2019 - 0820 AM

More on Elbit's solution. They emphasize a fully autonomous driving and a utilization of a helmet-based display over a screen-based one.
Unlike Rafael's concept of shared controls and interface, Elbit goes for independent controls and interface, both with helmets and with screens.

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=jC65XsVnDjM

Edited by Mighty_Zuk, 06 August 2019 - 0820 AM.

  • 0

#26 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,804 posts

Posted 10 August 2019 - 0809 AM

Nice to see someone, at least, has smartened up and realized the limiting factor for 1st world military operations is manpower, not hardware.  Good for the Israelis.  S/F....Ken M


  • 0

#27 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,989 posts

Posted 10 August 2019 - 0823 AM

Nice to see someone, at least, has smartened up and realized the limiting factor for 1st world military operations is manpower, not hardware.  Good for the Israelis.  S/F....Ken M

 

I thought the No. 1 limiting factor was the sissyfied RoE invented by liberals/communists/women etc. not allowing us to nuke/radiologically contaminate/gas/anthrax/all of the savages and replace them with civilised Westerners?  I hope you're not going soft on us Ken? :)


  • 0

#28 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,804 posts

Posted 10 August 2019 - 1251 PM

One is a tactical/operational issue, one is a strategic/civilizational issue, Chris.  I'm sure you're familiar with doing things you personally disagree with because it's your job, right?  And you understand the concept of scale?  Me personally thinking that our tactics are fucking stupid and an utter waste of time, treasure and blood has little to do with the fact I took the Man's salt and therefore should do the Man's work.  Ken personally going on a crusade to civilize the 3rd worlders with a Krag is worse than pointless; it's counter productive.  One lunatic blasting 20 Mexican civvies in some fucking walmart is an atrocity, and excuse to commit fuckery upon the people.  A thousand guys in a battalion combat team could genocide a nontrivial chunk of northern Mexico, and probably cause the government of Mexico to topple.  

 

None of which has anything to do with the fact that Israel is not stupid and realizes that maximizing their peak combat power is best done by designing their equipment so fewer dudes bring more firepower to the fight faster.  There's no reason not to have three, or even two man MBT's, if you consider them like fighter planes with dedicated service and support personnel, instead of this legacy issue of designing large and heavy MBT's so you can fit crew that just load ammo and pull guard shifts and break track. S/F....Ken M  


  • 0

#29 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,595 posts

Posted 10 August 2019 - 1526 PM

Excellent. The next big revolution IMO is improvements in situational awareness reducing the OODA loop and enhancing the crew's ability to fight.

Just like APS, we'll spend decades and billions trying to do half of that only to eventually buy their solution (if we're lucky) which we probably helped fund anyway.

Existential threats do wonders for efficiency.


  • 0

#30 Ben Dejo

Ben Dejo

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 195 posts

Posted 10 August 2019 - 1651 PM

There's no reason not to have three, or even two man MBT's, if you consider them like fighter planes with dedicated service and support personnel, instead of this legacy issue of designing large and heavy MBT's so you can fit crew that just load ammo and pull guard shifts and break track. S/F....Ken M

So more of a T-72 type solution as far as crewing/ employment.  My only concern is that the "talking autoloader" may serve more purposes that humping ammo ( especially a 2nd set of eyes if the AFV is suitability engineered).  My point is that this "solution" cannot be made in isolation and that the vehicle, crew and doctrine must all be engineered around this solution.


  • 0

#31 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,144 posts

Posted 10 August 2019 - 1931 PM

Dont fall in love with your idea. Adapt as needed or convenient. And one size doesnt fit all.
  • 0

#32 TTK Ciar

TTK Ciar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,026 posts

Posted 11 August 2019 - 1637 PM

This was posted to the TankNet group on MeWe last week, same subject as under discussion here:

https://www.ndtv.com...ligence-2080274
  • 0

#33 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 11 August 2019 - 1843 PM

There's no reason not to have three, or even two man MBT's, if you consider them like fighter planes with dedicated service and support personnel, instead of this legacy issue of designing large and heavy MBT's so you can fit crew that just load ammo and pull guard shifts and break track. S/F....Ken M

So more of a T-72 type solution as far as crewing/ employment.  My only concern is that the "talking autoloader" may serve more purposes that humping ammo ( especially a 2nd set of eyes if the AFV is suitability engineered).  My point is that this "solution" cannot be made in isolation and that the vehicle, crew and doctrine must all be engineered around this solution.

It's no longer relevant when a crew of 2 with current tech, has a situational picture 10 times clearer and faster, than a crew twice the size with in-service tech.

Any added bonus of extra pairs of eyes is already mitigated by the implementation of AI to analyze data from new sensors like high-res radars and cameras, which then alerts the crew anyway.
  • 0

#34 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,989 posts

Posted 11 August 2019 - 1921 PM

if the vehicle is datalinked you can have more than two pairs of eyes using the vehicle's sensors.


  • 0

#35 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,977 posts

Posted 11 August 2019 - 2141 PM

Keep in mind the maximum distance a Israel IFV is expected to operate in for the most part, is likley within 20km of the border.


  • 0

#36 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 12 August 2019 - 0625 AM

Keep in mind the maximum distance a Israel IFV is expected to operate in for the most part, is likley within 40km of the border.


Which is completely irrelevant for the vehicle's design, or the structure of its support chain.
  • 0

#37 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 488 posts

Posted 20 August 2019 - 0921 AM

Elbit won the tender for Eitan's APS, will supply Iron Fist LC APS for it.

https://www.israelde...l/en/node/39823

Additionally, the D9 bulldozers will also get the Iron Fist.

Edited by Mighty_Zuk, 20 August 2019 - 1016 AM.

  • 0

#38 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,604 posts

Posted 20 August 2019 - 1323 PM

Elbit won the tender for Eitan's APS, will supply Iron Fist LC APS for it.

https://www.israelde...l/en/node/39823

Additionally, the D9 bulldozers will also get the Iron Fist.

 

Wow that must be a first.  Has anyone ever deployed an APS system on combat engineering/earthmoving vehicles before?


  • 0

#39 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,483 posts

Posted 21 August 2019 - 0826 AM

https://www.strategy...s/20190821.aspx

Armor: Turning Tanks Into F-35s

 

"The best example of similar (to Carmel) existing tech is used in the F-35..."


Edited by shep854, 21 August 2019 - 0828 AM.

  • 0

#40 Mr King

Mr King

    Fat Body

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,418 posts

Posted 21 August 2019 - 0910 AM

The Singapore Hunter IFV reminds me a lot of the Carmel. I am under the impression Israel and Singapore have fairly close ties, and I wonder how much Israel tech may be in the Hunter, if any at all. 

 

9R66PUp.jpg


  • 0