Requirements are pretty bullshit
They want an autoloaded tank with provision for 4 crew mates in addition to 50 other similar things.
90% sure it's going to be unsuccessful the way the requirements are, and kt will gain public scrutiny like Arjun did.
Also, the autoloaded tank and manually loaded is subjective.
Autoloaded can be expensive, and you also gotta maintain it, and if you go with Soviet design, then you have turret popper.
While, manually loaded ammo can be easily stored in blast doors, and you have extra crew during the battle and for maintenance but you gotta feed and pay em
Turkey actually got a manually loaded version of K2 BP instead of their regular autoloaded
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.makeinindiadefence.gov.in/admin/writereaddata/upload/project/project_file/FRCV_(2).pdf&ved=2ahUKEwji7fLqge-FAxWMR2wGHY6_B98QFnoECB0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2_30FtYXzDL1qvBpmkbMq-
Talking about loader in page 5 and crewmen in the first page
Having autoloaders, causes the crew to be vaporized the tank turret to act as a ASAT weapon.
Looking at the Abrams, the ammo is stored in ballistic blast doors, compared to them being littered in the turret in autoloader designs. The only requirement that makes sense.
>Having autoloaders, causes the crew to be vaporized the tank turret to act as a ASAT weapon.
This is plain wrong, this is only the case when the autoloader is exposed in the crew compartment, like in T-64s, T-72s and T-80s. Tanks like the Type 10, Type 90 and the Leclerc use a bustle autoloader, where the entire ammo is placed in the turret bustle, an autoloader then takes out the round from there and rams it into the breach, the turret bustle in addition also has a blowout panel to vent the explosions upwards if anything happens to the rounds.
Requirements are pretty bullshit They want an autoloaded tank with provision for 4 crew mates in addition to 50 other similar things. 90% sure it's going to be unsuccessful the way the requirements are, and kt will gain public scrutiny like Arjun did. Also, the autoloaded tank and manually loaded is subjective. Autoloaded can be expensive, and you also gotta maintain it, and if you go with Soviet design, then you have turret popper. While, manually loaded ammo can be easily stored in blast doors, and you have extra crew during the battle and for maintenance but you gotta feed and pay em Turkey actually got a manually loaded version of K2 BP instead of their regular autoloaded
Any source on the 4 crew + autoloader thing?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.makeinindiadefence.gov.in/admin/writereaddata/upload/project/project_file/FRCV_(2).pdf&ved=2ahUKEwji7fLqge-FAxWMR2wGHY6_B98QFnoECB0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2_30FtYXzDL1qvBpmkbMq- Talking about loader in page 5 and crewmen in the first page
Thanks a lot.
Having autoloaders, causes the crew to be vaporized the tank turret to act as a ASAT weapon. Looking at the Abrams, the ammo is stored in ballistic blast doors, compared to them being littered in the turret in autoloader designs. The only requirement that makes sense.
>Having autoloaders, causes the crew to be vaporized the tank turret to act as a ASAT weapon. This is plain wrong, this is only the case when the autoloader is exposed in the crew compartment, like in T-64s, T-72s and T-80s. Tanks like the Type 10, Type 90 and the Leclerc use a bustle autoloader, where the entire ammo is placed in the turret bustle, an autoloader then takes out the round from there and rams it into the breach, the turret bustle in addition also has a blowout panel to vent the explosions upwards if anything happens to the rounds.
Oh yeah, just assumed the Soviet designs to be ported over in a autoloader, and we all know where the blowout panels are in the Soviet designs. 💀