What's new

U.S armor core modernisation

DavidSling

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
4,826
Reaction score
0
Country
Israel
Location
Israel
Trophy APS For Everyone? A Streamlined Version For M2 Bradley
By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on July 05, 2018 at 4:00 AM
96 Comments
33SHARES

US Army soldiers train with an M2 Bradley IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle). Active Protection Systems that shoot down incoming anti-tank missiles must be carefully designed to avoid killing nearby friendly infantry.

Even as the US Army races to install Trophy Active Protection Systems on its M1 Abrams heavy tanks, Trophy’s manufacturers are testing slimmed-down versions they want to sell the US for lighter vehicles, especially the aging M2 Bradley troop carrier.


US Army M1 Abrams tank with Trophy Active Protection Systems (APS) and improved protection for machinegun operator.

While other technologies look promising, Trophy is still the only non-Russian system that’s combat-proven to shoot down incoming anti-tank rockets and missiles. What’s more, US Army testing of the rival IMI Iron Fist (also Israeli) on the Bradley has fallen behind schedule. Part of the delay was due to funding — money happened to be available to start Trophy testing earlier — but I keep hearing rumors that Iron Fist is having technical challenges as well.

So Israel-based Rafael and its US partner Leonardo DRS are increasingly emboldened to make a move on middle-weight armored vehicles like Bradley. Rafael is also developing an entirely different kind of APS for light armored vehicles, but this project is less far along.

Speed is crucial because the US Army is in a ferocious hurry to field Active Protection Systems in case Russia’s armored legions start rolling west. After a streamlined initial characterization effort — the Army very deliberately didn’t call it “testing” — proved Trophy could work on Abrams, the Army signed an “undefinitized” contract. Exact terms are still being worked out, which could take up to six months, but the Army is eager to accelerate and Leonardo promises fielding will begin early in calendar year 2019.

So great is the Army’s rush that it’s conducting in-depth testing at the same time as production. That’s not best practice — ideally, you want to work out all the bugs before you begin buying — but it’s become common on far more complex technologies than Trophy, most infamously the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.


Rafael graphic

While Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley wants APS in every brigade, current budget plans fund enough Trophy systems for every M1 tank in four armored brigades. (One is bought with 2018 money, the rest in 2019). That’s the same version of the system installed on Israeli Merkava tanks and Namer heavy troop carriers, now known as Trophy-HV, for Heavy Version: Rafael says this model weighs about 1,800 pounds, depending on details of the installation, while the Pentagon’s independent Director of Operational Test & Evaluation put the total installation at 5,000 lbs. That might seem like a marginal increase for a 70-ton tank, but that weight has to go on top of the tank, potentially affecting the balance and turn rate of the turret — a problem that arose (but was resolved) early in Trophy testing on the M1.

There’s also the issue of electrical power for the requisite radars and jammers. The US Army’s armored vehicles were designed in the 1970s when electronics were much less important. While they’ve been upgraded, M2 Bradleys in particular are reported to suffer brownouts when crews have to turn off one piece of equipment to power the others.

“There are those who have concerns with Trophy’s space, weight, and power (SWAP) requirements as it is currently fielded on Merkava, Namer, and soon Abrams,” said Michael O’Leary, director of business development for survivability and lethality systems at Leonardo DRS. “It’s not a new perception, and we’ve been working for a number of years now to reduce that SWAP to make it more amenable for lighter platforms.”


Israeli Namer IFV with Trophy Active Protection System

“We have already developed a smaller, lighter, but equally effective Trophy system that operates in the exact same manner, with no degradation in performance, exact same algorithms, exact same threats defeated,” O’Leary told me. Originally called Trophy-MV (Medium Version), it’s now being branded as Trophy-VPS (Vehicle Protection System). Rafael’s official weight figure for VPS is about 1,100 pounds, but O’Leary explained the slimmed-down version cuts size and weight by anywhere from 25 to 40 percent, depending on the details of how it’s installed on a particular vehicle.


Civilian personnel deliver the latest Bradley model, the M2A3, to Fort Riley, KS

“Power demand is about the same,” O’Leary admitted, but Trophy VPS will work on the current model of the Bradley, the M2A3, without having to turn other systems off. By contrast, the Army felt compelled to test Iron Fist on an upgraded Bradley that has some of the power enhancements of the future M2A4model. Leonardo DRS has lots of experience working on Bradleys, O’Leary told me — “we actually provide the power management subsystem,” he said — so they’re been able to figure out how to get Trophy-VPS to work on even the “worst case” configurations.

Next month, Rafael will test the streamlined Trophy-VPS on an Israeli-owned Bradley: While it’s not an actual US Army vehicle, it’s a representative test platform, O’Leary said. If the US Army is interested, of course, Rafael and Leonardo will gladly participate in official tests.

At the same time, Rafael is also working on Trophy-LV (Light Version), which despite the name is an entirely different system that kills incoming missiles a different way. Standard Trophy shoots down threats some distance from the protected vehicle, which requires a fairly powerful projectile. “Curtain” systems like the Artis Iron Curtain and Trophy-LV fire directly down (or up) at the incoming warhead just inches from the protected vehicle. That minimizes the risk of collateral damage to nearby civilians or friendly infantry, but increases the risk of shrapnel getting through.

For now, Rafael’s focusing on the heavier shoot-down-at-a-distance systems, which it considers more capable. It plans to keep upgrading Trophy-VPS as threats advance. It’s even looking at options to build the system in the United States, although for now the only production line’s in Israel. Because of requirements that Israel spend US-provided Foreign Military Financing on US subcontractors, however, about 60 percent of Trophy (by value) is already made in the US.

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/07/trophy-aps-for-everyone-a-streamlined-version-for-m2-bradley/


M1-Abrams-with-Trophy-APS-9ed777416ebc9fe34bed41b570f3b181.jpg







VHaQoCA.jpg


rSaLCQi.jpg


3LtMnxM.jpg



ImYuX2v.jpg
 
Last edited:
US Army to Decide on IMI's Iron Fist APS in mid-2018
The Army plans to equip its Abrams tanks with Rafael's Trophy system by 2020. Regarding the purchase of IMI Systems' Iron Fist APS for the Bradley AFVs, a decision will be made during the second quarter of fiscal year 2018

Ami Rojkes Dombe | 19/12/2017

Send to a friend
A+A-Size
Share on
Share on
640px-M2a3-bradley07.jpg

By Shane A. Cuomo, U.S. Air Force - http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/newsphoto.aspx?newsphotoid=5657, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2244980

According to Col. Kevin Vanyo, program manager for Emerging Capabilities at US Army Tank Automotive Research Development, and Engineering Center (TARDEC), the Army is pursuing three variants of Modular Active Protection System, or MAPS: Trophy APS, for use on the Abrams; Iron Curtain APS, for use on the Stryker; and Iron Fist APS, for use on the Bradley. Col. Vanyo spoke at the Future Ground Combat Vehicle Summit.

"Today, we need to adapt differently to threats, not just by adding more armor," Col. Vanyo said, speaking at the Future Ground Combat Vehicle Summit. He noted that the Abrams tank today is so heavy, transporting it is a problem and many bridges are not strong enough to support its weight.

The US Army hopes that the Trophy APS will be fielded by 2020. Regarding the other two variants, a decision will be made during the second quarter of fiscal year 2018.

http://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/32264


 
Abrams tanks get new round of Israeli-made ‘shields’ to fend off anti-tank weapons
By: Kyle Rempfer   16 hours ago
active protection system that uses sensors, radar and computer processing to lock on and knock down incoming rocket propelled grenades and anti-tank guided missiles.

Taking steps in that direction, the Army has awarded a $193 million contract to Leonardo DRS for the Trophy Active Protection System in support of the M1 Abrams main battle tank’s “immediate operational requirements,” according to a June 26 news release.

The Trophy system was developed by an Israeli firm — Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. — and their long-standing partner, Leonardo DRS. Rafael currently fields “some 1,000 systems to all major Israeli ground combat platforms,” according to the release.

Trophy is possibly the only combat-proven active protection system on the market. Variants of the system have been filmed intercepting shots fired on Israeli armored vehicles on the Gaza strip dating back to 2014.

Trophy’s active protection system works by using a radar to detect and classify incoming rounds. The system tracks the threat, computes parameters necessary to intercept it, and transmits the alert to the tank’s crew. If the incoming round poses a danger, the system launches countermeasures to intercept it before it strikes the tank.

The contract was first announced by the Pentagon on June 15, but lobbying for this type of active protection system began much earlier.

In a June 2017 hearing, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley told Congress there remains a “critical need” to develop systems that can defeat the various shaped-charge weapons increasingly fielded in conflicts around the world.

“Right now, there are only two countries whose industries produce these complete systems ... one of them is friendly, and one of them is not so friendly,” Milley said, referencing Israel and Russia.

HPRWAYNVQZBUJCCJ4QVG3NJILM.JPG

The Trophy Active Protection System outfitted onto an Abrams tank. (Leonardo DRS)
Naturally, the Army wound up procuring an active protection system from Israel, rather than Russia.

Milley said in the June 2017 hearing that the Army was working with the “friendly country” to test the system and ensure it fits U.S. armored vehicle designs.

“We intend to field those to first responding units, and we will eventually field them throughout the force, for the entire Army: Guard, reserve and active,” Milley said. “We, the United States, are working very, very fast to have the industrial base produce some systems.”

In October, it was announced that the Trophy system would be urgently fielded to a brigade’s worth of Abrams tanks in the European theater.

By the time active protection systems are fielded to the total force, “we think the U.S. commercial solutions will be available, and we'll probably put it up at that point for competitive bid when we expand it to the entire Army,” Milley said last June.
7MYJZM6N6NBZTDTTILLTNWFHCI.JPG

Trophy Active Protection Systems come in two main configurations: Trophy Heavy Vehicle and Trophy Medium Vehicle. This chart provides a breakdown of specifications for each variation. (Leonardo DRS)
The Israeli-based firm echoed Milley’s intention to produce their active protection system in the United States.

“Rafael has provided protection solutions to U.S. service members for over two decades via lifesaving passive and reactive armor on vehicles such as Bradley, Stryker and AAV7. We are excited to continue to do so with [Trophy],” said Moshe Elazar, executive vice president and head of Rafael’s land and naval division.

“The majority of [Trophy] components are manufactured by the American defense industry, and we are excited by the opportunity to increase manufacturing in [the United States], including for Israeli systems,” Elazar added.

Under the terms of the contract, Leonardo DRS will provide the Army with the Trophy systems, countermeasures and maintenance kits.

Since the introduction of active protection systems, newer anti-tank weapons have also been fielded, such as the Russian-made RPG-30.

"The novelty of the Russian [RPG-30] is that two rockets are fired at the target at the same time,” a defense industry official told TASS, a Russian state-media agency. “One is a so-called ‘agent provocateur’ 42 mm in caliber, followed a bit later by a primary 105-mm tandem warhead rocket.”

In 2012, however, Israeli news outlet Arutz Sheva reported that Rafael was fielding a counter to the RPG-30, known as "Trench Coat," to supplement the existing Trophy system. Trench Coat reportedly consists of a 360-degree radar and launches 17 projectiles, one of which would ideally strike the tandem missile.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/2018...i-made-shields-to-fend-off-anti-tank-weapons/



_________________________________________________________________________





Cloudy future for Iron Curtain APS on US Army Strykers


The fate of Artis' Iron Curtain active protection system (APS) continues to hang in the balance while the US Army decides if it wants to move forward with equipping its Strykers with the capability.

Army leaders recently wrapped up testing the company's APS on Stryker vehicles under the Expedited Active Protection Systems (ExAPS) phase of the initiative. What happens next, though, is a big question mark.

'We are currently awaiting an army decision on the next phase of activity for Iron Curtain,' Ashley John, the director of public affairs for the service's Program Executive Office Ground Combat Systems, wrote in a email to Shephard.

Artis did not respond to comment.

The service has been testing three systems to shoot down incoming rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank guided weapons — Iron Curtain on its Strykers, IMI Systems’ Iron Fist system on the M2 Bradley and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems' Trophy on Abrams.

Service plans for the Iron Fist system are also not clear. As of 28 June, the system was still undergoing live fire characterisation under Phase I ExAPS, according to the service.

Contributing to the confusion is a push by lawmakers to evaluate additional APS systems. In the FY2018 omnibus spending bill, Congress allocated $25 million in additional APS funds.

The move could circumvent what's known as an earmark ban by not specifying a specific company, instead it forces the service to consider a range of options such as a solution from German company ADS, part of the Rheinmetall Group.

Adhering to lawmakers, in April the service posted a Request for Information (RFI) calling for new, non-developmental APS before holding an industry day on 17 May at the Army Tank Automotive Command (TACOM) in Warren, Michigan.

John said the 'process is ongoing' but 'specific vendors have not yet been selected'.

'We have opened the participation opportunities up to multiple vendors who will be asked to provide a preliminary demonstration of their system, after which one or more will be asked to conduct the full Phase I installation and characterisation that we have performed or are performing on the Rafael, Artis, and IMI solutions,' John wrote.

While question marks over Stryker and Bradley APS plans persist, the army strategy for its family of Abrams tanks is solidifying. Under a $193 million deal, Leonardo will begin integrating Trophy onto the platform.

When asked if the service was considering Trophy for either Stryker or Bradley vehicles, the service dodged a direct answer.

'At this time we are committed to Trophy for Abrams,' John wrote. 'Urgent solution options for Stryker or Bradley will be determined once army decisions are made on the current solutions under evaluation.'



Bradley gets stereo vision system

The US Army’s Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC), working with Honeywell Aerospace, has installed a prototype helmet‐mounted stereo vision system into a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the US Army announced on 2 July.

The prototype system was originally developed under DARPA’s Ground X Vehicle Technologies (GXV‐T) programme.

In its current configuration, the Bradley vehicle can only be driven closed‐hatched with the driver looking through mirrored sights with a limited field of view, in order to protect the crew.

TARDEC’s Mission Enabling Technologies‐Demonstrator team added the Honeywell Aerospace technology to the Bradley's existing suite of 360° situational awareness sensors. The system includes a wide range of forward facing stereo camera pairs whose imagery is projected into the left and right eye of the user through a pair of holographic optical elements. This allows the user to perceive depth while showing a wide field of regard without causing nausea or eye strain.

Additional standard and fish‐eye lens cameras provide complimentary views of the vehicle’s perimeter position and mid‐range detection.

The installation is intended to demonstrate a proof‐of‐concept for closed‐hatch driving using high resolution stereo vision combined with advanced head tracking technology integrated into a helmet mounted display.

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/t...-general-guns-gvins-and-gas-turbines/?page=34

@gambit @F-22Raptor
 
These half-measures will work well against the T-90MS, but not against the T-14.

It's time the Americans worked on a new tank.
 
Yeah, but that's not on the Abrams. Only on Bradleys.
Cause trophy suits the modern threats realisticly, that's unlikely you'll ever face another tank on the battlefield, and even if you do, air force will take care of it
 
Cause trophy suits the modern threats realisticly, that's unlikely you'll ever face another tank on the battlefield, and even if you do, air force will take care of it

Lol, then you don't need tanks at all.

Aircraft won't be able to kill the T-14. You forget that there's no real difference between an ATGM fired from infantry or aircraft against a capable APS.

You want to kill the T-14, you will have to invent new extremely high speed ATGMs or a tank that has similar mobility, protection and firepower. And the T-14 is equipped with the Afghanit, which can stop even DU based APFSDS.
 
Lol, then you don't need tanks at all.

Aircraft won't be able to kill the T-14. You forget that there's no real difference between an ATGM fired from infantry or aircraft against a capable APS.

You want to kill the T-14, you will have to invent new extremely high speed ATGMs or a tank that has similar mobility, protection and firepower. And the T-14 is equipped with the Afghanit, which can stop even DU based APFSDS.
T-14 Armata MBT is invincible now? Are you for real? Why doesn't Russia use it to conquer Syria? Don't make tall claims.

Aircraft pack lot of firepower and tanks are like sitting ducks to them.

M1A2 SEPv3 configuration feature state-of-the-art efficiency and protective measures, sensors, and optimized for firing a new generation of rounds on potential targets. This configuration is designed to defeat T-14 in the battlefield, and US is converting hundreds of units to this standard.

M1 Abrams chassis is huge and provides ample room for amendments and customization. US doesn't need to develop a new MBT each decade due to this factor.
 
Last edited:
Trophy system can be breaches with multiple tyoes of anti tank missile fired at same time
 
Trophy system can be breaches with multiple tyoes of anti tank missile fired at same time
American MBT are heavily armored on average with special depleted uranium coating, and will not operate in isolation, in a high-intensity battlefield scenario. Trophy system will make it even harder for potential enemy to defeat American armor. There is also the element of air cover.

Look at things from bigger perspective.
 
Trophy system can be breaches with multiple tyoes of anti tank missile fired at same time
Trophy reload time is around 1s, and you'll need to launch massive attack on the same direction in order to breach trophy.
Moreover, after you'll breach trophy, say you avoided all the other countermeasures, there's 65 ton of armor you'll need to pass thro
 
Back
Top Bottom