DOCSLIB.ORG

Active Protective Systems: Impregnable Armor Or Simply Enhanced Survivability?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Active Protective Systems: Impregnable Armor Or Simply Enhanced Survivability? Elements of the Arena Active Protection System include ring of explosive panels at lower margin of turret ring and radar on turret roof. Active Protective Systems: Impregnable Armor or Simply Enhanced Survivability? by Captain Tom J. Meyer are employed by many armies world- ergy (KE) tank-fired munitions. A sys- wide. They currently do not pose a sig- tem that can defeat modern antitank nificant threat to our forces, but as these weapons increases survivability for tank- Why Develop Active Protective systems proliferate and technology im- on-tank duels. Systems (APS)? proves, this picture may change radi- • ATGM production, lethality and pro- cally. liferation has far outpaced armor protec- Your task force’s mission is to attack In the context of armored vehicles, ac- tion. This, coupled with advances in top- along Axis Mustang to seize OBJ Patton tive protection is a defensive system de- attack ATGMs and munitions launched and destroy elements of the 152nd MRR signed to intercept, destroy, or confuse by aerial platforms at ranges that far ex- in order to gain depth for the defense attacking enemy munitions. Active pro- ceed that of direct support (DS) air de- and prevent the enemy from attacking tection systems can be broken into two fense systems, have multiplied the threat into 2nd BCT’s northern flank. Your categories, “active” or “hard kill” sys- to the armor force. company team attacks with steady mo- tems and “countermeasure” or “soft kill” mentum and sets its support-by-fire posi- systems. An active or hard kill system • tions. You observe the enemy in his BPs engages and destroys enemy missiles or Latest-generation main battle tanks that your S2 had accurately templated, projectiles before they impact their in- (MBT) stand at around 60-70 tons, and and order your Bradleys to target their tended target. It is a close-in system of this figure (mostly driven by armor pro- TOWs on the enemy T-80s at a range of antimissile defense that creates an active tection) is perceived by many combat developers as the maximum tolerable 2.5 km. They engage, and impact with a fire zone of protection at a safe distance 2 cloud of fire and smoke, but to your around the vehicle.1 Countermeasure, or limit. The addition of explosive reactive amazement, they have no effect. The en- soft kill, systems confuse and divert the armor (ERA) packages would possibly emy BMP-3s and T-80s immediately en- inbound enemy missile with the use of exceed maximum tolerable suspension gage your positions with their laser- munitions (obscurants), jammers, de- limits, thus degrading performance. guided AT-10 and AT-11 missiles. Your coys, and signature reduction measures. Moreover, latest generation shaped- charged antiarmor weapons have been Bradleys and a few tanks are hit and Why develop APS when tank surviv- your team is being attritted at an alarm- purposely developed to overcome ERA, ing rate. How is this possible? Why were ability, lethality and mobility have in- through either tandem or triple war- the TOWs ineffective? creased dramatically over the last dec- heads, ballistic caps, or a change in the ade? Consider the following reasons: attack profile.3 • Current active protective systems • Awaiting a qualitative breakthrough Is this total fiction, or a real possibility (APS) are designed to counter antitank in armor or ERA is not an option for ar- in our not so distant future? Various guided missiles (ATGM), not high veloc- mored forces that are already outclassed types of active protection systems (APS) ity, high explosive (HE) or kinetic en- by modern weaponry. ARMOR — May-June 1998 7 • It is simply less expensive to increase survivability by adding an ERA and APS package than by buying or developing new tanks in sufficient quantity. This is more cost-effective to Middle Eastern and Eastern European countries because these packages are fitted to T-55s, T-62s, and T-72s during routine retrofits and are light enough not to degrade automotive performance. • Furthermore, the future antitank threat will, by definition, be omnidirec- tional, forcing tank designers out of their cozy frontal arc fixation and into trying to provide virtually the same level of protection all around their vehicles. 4 Although many countries have devel- oped soft kill or countermeasure sys- tems, only Russia has moved from the concept to production stage to create a Drozd defensive launchers are visible at the outer edges of the turret, below and outside the smoke grenade launchers. Activated by a radar system that detects incoming rounds, the sys- truly hard kill, or active system. Current tem’s short-range self-defense rockets use fragmentation warheads. (All story photos taken at Russian active protection and counter- Omsk, Russia demonstration by Ron Dritlein of TACOM) measure systems include: Drozd, Shtora- 1, and Arena. Drozd suffered from several shortcom- MBT. The first known application of the ings. Its radar was unable to determine system is the Russian T-90 MBT that en- Drozd threat elevation levels adequately, and tered service in the Russian Army in the self-defense rockets would almost 1993.10 The first operational APS, named certainly have caused unacceptably high The Shtora-1 system comprises four Drozd, was developed by the Soviet Un- levels of collateral damage — particu- ion between 1977 and 1982. This system larly to accompanying dismounted infan- key components, the electro-optical in- was installed on some 250 naval infantry 7 terface station, which includes a jammer, try. The system costs around $30,000 modulator, and control panel; a bank of T-55As (redesigned T-55ADs) in the and is reported to have been around 80 early 1980s, and was designed for pro- percent successful against rocket pro- forward-firing grenade dischargers tection from ATGMs and antitank gre- pelled grenades (RPGs) in Afghanistan.8 mounted on either side of the turret that nades.5 It used primitive millimeter-wave are capable of firing grenades dispensing radar sensors on each side of the turret Shtora-1 an aerosol screen; a laser warning sys- to detect incoming rounds. A filter in the tem with precision and coarse heads; and radar processor was intended to ensure Shtora-1 is an electro-optical jammer a control system comprising control that the system responded only to targets that jams the enemy’s semiautomatic panel, microprocessor, and manual flying at speeds typical of ATGMs. command to line of sight (SACLOS) an- screen-laying panel. This processes the titank guided missiles, laser rangefinders information from the sensors and acti- These are engaged by one or more short- 9 11 range rockets carrying fragmentation and target designators. Shtora-1 is actu- vates the aerosol screen-laying system. ally a soft kill, or countermeasures sys- warheads (similar to mortar rounds), Shtora-1 has a field of view of 360-de- fired from four-round launchers (one on tem. It is most effective when used in grees horizontally and -5 to +25-degrees each side of the turret).6 Drozd provides tandem with a hard kill system such as in elevation. It contains 12 aerosol maximum overlap and protection only to the Arena, which is discussed later. screen launchers and weighs 400kg. The the forward 60° portion of the turret, During the International Defense Expo- screening aerosol takes less than 3 sec- leaving the sides and rear vulnerable. sition (IDEX) held in Abu Dhabi in onds to form and lasts about 20 seconds. The tank crew can change the orienta- 1995, the system was shown fitted to a The screen laying range is between 50- tion of the system by rotating the turret. Russian T-80U and a Ukrainian T-84 70 meters. 12 8 ARMOR — May-June 1998 The system is activated when the laser warning system detects the threat laser system. The tank commander (TC) presses a button that automatically orients the tur- ret in the direction of the threat. It then triggers the grenade launch- ers. The aerosol screen is effective over a frequency band of 0.4-14 The Shtora system jammers are the two boxes at either side of the gun tube. Grenade dischargers are at Em. The composition of this the rear of the turret. cloud is claimed to screen the tank against laser rangefinders vehicles during retrofit. It is available for radar then operates in the target-tracking and designators and is also claimed to be sale on the open market. mode, locking onto the target at between sufficiently hot to seduce IR homing 7.8 and 10.06 meters from the tank, and weapons away from the MBT. The elec- enters target data into the computer. Af- tro-optical jammers, designated TShU1- Arena ter processing this data, the computer se- 7, introduce a spurious signal over the lects the countermunition (CM), one of 0.7-2.5 Em band, into the guidance cir- The Arena defense aid suite (DAS) was the rounds of protective ammunition that cuitry of the incoming ATGM through developed by Russia around 1993 and are housed in 20 silos around the turret, the use of a coded pulsed IR jamming currently has no counterpart. The Rus- and fires a small projectile (similar to a signal. The jammers provide coverage sians have demonstrated the system to Claymore mine) into the path of the ap- over 20 degrees in azimuth on each side the Germans and French, and it is re- proaching ATGM. At the determined of the main armament and through 4 de- ported to have performed as advertised. moment, the computer generates com- grees of elevation, and is effective within The French were involved in further de- mand signals via a converter unit to the 2 seconds of target identification.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mp-Avt-108-56
    UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED Active Defense Systems (ADS) Program – Formerly Integrated Army Active Protection System Program (IAAPS) Mr. Charles Acir USA TARDEC AMSTA-TR-R MS211 6501 East 11 Mile Road (Building 200) Warren, Michigan 48397-5000 586 574-6737 [email protected] Mr. Mark Middione United Defense, Advanced Development Center 328 West Brokaw Road, MS M51 Santa Clara, California 95052 408 289-2626 [email protected] SUMMARY United Defense’s Advanced Development Center was selected as the prime contractor for a program currently known as the Integrated Army Active Protection System in 1997. Along with our teammates, BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman Space Technology, United Defense performed a series of technology investigations, conducted simulation-supported concept development and down-selected to a best value integrated survivability suite (ISS) consisting of an optimal mix of armor, electronic warfare sensors, processors and soft kill countermeasure, and hard kill active protection in November of 1998. At that point the program transitioned to a development and demonstration phase in which the United Defense led team designed and fabricated the selected survivability suite (ISS), integrated the ISS onto a customer-selected EMD version BFVA3 test-bed and conducted live threat defeat testing. Static testing against a wide array of live threats successfully concluded in September of 2002. By December of 02, the IAAPS team was back at the range with the test-bed reconfigured for on-the-move (OTM) testing. Successful OTM defeats were conducted with the soft kill countermeasure in January of 2003, with hard kill defeats conducted in February through May of 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • AI, Robots, and Swarms: Issues, Questions, and Recommended Studies
    AI, Robots, and Swarms Issues, Questions, and Recommended Studies Andrew Ilachinski January 2017 Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. This document contains the best opinion of CNA at the time of issue. It does not necessarily represent the opinion of the sponsor. Distribution Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. Specific authority: N00014-11-D-0323. Copies of this document can be obtained through the Defense Technical Information Center at www.dtic.mil or contact CNA Document Control and Distribution Section at 703-824-2123. Photography Credits: http://www.darpa.mil/DDM_Gallery/Small_Gremlins_Web.jpg; http://4810-presscdn-0-38.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/ Robotics.jpg; http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-edia/image/upload/18kxb5jw3e01ujpg.jpg Approved by: January 2017 Dr. David A. Broyles Special Activities and Innovation Operations Evaluation Group Copyright © 2017 CNA Abstract The military is on the cusp of a major technological revolution, in which warfare is conducted by unmanned and increasingly autonomous weapon systems. However, unlike the last “sea change,” during the Cold War, when advanced technologies were developed primarily by the Department of Defense (DoD), the key technology enablers today are being developed mostly in the commercial world. This study looks at the state-of-the-art of AI, machine-learning, and robot technologies, and their potential future military implications for autonomous (and semi-autonomous) weapon systems. While no one can predict how AI will evolve or predict its impact on the development of military autonomous systems, it is possible to anticipate many of the conceptual, technical, and operational challenges that DoD will face as it increasingly turns to AI-based technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Denv S090015 Military Vehicle Protection.Qxd
    Defence TNO | Knowledge for business Military vehicle protection Finding the best armour solutions circuit armour. All these current and future armours require constant and rigorous testing under fully controlled conditions. The Laboratory for Ballistic Research is a state of the art research facility of TNO and able to provide these conditions. New threats In today's scenarios, the threat to a military vehicle may come from any direction, including above and below. The crew of a military vehicle not only has to deal with more or less 'standard' fire from the enemy in front, but - more often than not - also with asymmetric threats like rocket-propelled grenades, explosively formed projectiles, mines and improvised explosive devices. The RPG7, for instance, is able to cut through 250 mm of armour steel. Falling prey to any of these threats, also known as a 'cheap kill', Developments in vehicle armour never stop. It's not just the nature of the is something that has to be avoided at all threat that is continually changing, but we also have to deal with new times. TNO uses its highly advanced resources and decades of expertise in armour trends in warfare, like lightweight armoured vehicles. For survival, today's research to help governments and and tomorrow's military vehicles will not only have to rely on armour, but manufacturers achieve their aim: the optimal e.g. also on mobility and manoeuvrability. TNO supports its clients - protection of military vehicles against the governments and manufacturers - in finding the best armour solutions for widest possible range of ballistic threats.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing a Heavy-List Gambeson Tips and Techniques
    Constructing a Heavy-List Gambeson Tips and Techniques Lady Magdalena von Regensburg mka Marla Berry [email protected] July 16, 2005 An Historic Overview “Mail is tough but flexible; it resists a cutting sword-stroke but needs a padded or quilted undergarment as a shock absorber against a heavy blow.”1 Quilted garments were part of soldiers’ kits in varying forms and with varying names throughout most of the SCA timeline. As early as the late Roman/early Byzantine period there is documentation for quilted or padded coats called Zabai or Kabadia.2 Illuminations from Maciejowski Bible (circa 1250) show aketons or gambesons. “These terms seem to have been interchangeable but the weight of evidence From “Jonathan and his Armor- suggests that ‘aketon’ refers to garments worn under the mail while bearer Attack the Philistines,” gambesons were worn over or instead of it...The gambeson is often from the Maciejowski Bible, referred to in contemporary accounts as being worn by the common circa 1250. soldiery and, indeed, is part of the equipment required by the Assize of Arms of 1185 of Edward I of England.”3 Extant examples from the fourteenth century include the pourpoint of Charles de Blois (d. 1364) and the late fourteenth century jupon of Charles VI. Fifteenth century documents mention arming doublets and padded jacks. These garments were worn under maille, over maille, under plate, over plate, or on their own. Some were designed to encase maille or plate. “Infantry, as laid down in the Assize of Arms of 1182, often wore one of two types of gambeson.
    [Show full text]
  • Avoiding Another War Between Israel and Hezbollah
    COUNTING THE COST Avoiding Another War between Israel and Hezbollah By Nicholas Blanford and Assaf Orion “He who wishes to fight must first count the cost.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War ABOUT THE SCOWCROFT MIDDLE EAST SECURITY INITIATIVE The Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative honors the legacy of Brent Scowcroft and his tireless efforts to build a new security architecture for the region. Our work in this area addresses the full range of security threats and challenges including the danger of interstate warfare, the role of terrorist groups and other nonstate actors, and the underlying security threats facing countries in the region. Through all of the Council’s Middle East programming, we work with allies and partners in Europe and the wider Middle East to protect US interests, build peace and security, and unlock the human potential of the region. You can read more about our programs at www.atlanticcouncil.org/ programs/middle-east-programs/. May 2020 ISBN-13: 978-1-61977-099-7 This report is written and published in accordance with the Atlantic Council Policy on Intellectual Independence. The authors are solely responsible for its analysis and recommendations. The Atlantic Council and its donors do not determine, nor do they necessarily endorse or advocate for, any of this report’s conclusions. This report is made possible by general support to the Atlantic Council’s Middle East Programs. COUNTING THE COST Avoiding Another War between Israel and Hezbollah CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Quantifying the Effects of Chaff Screening on Hardkill and Softkill Coordination
    UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED Quantifying the Effects of Chaff Screening on Hardkill and Softkill Coordination Nekmohamed Manji, Murat Kocakanat, and Agis Kitsikis Defence R&D Canada – Ottawa Department of National Defence 3701 Carling Ave Ottawa, ON, K1A 0Z4 CANADA Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT For the Navy, Anti-ship Missile Defence (ASMD) is a priority due to the obvious mismatch between a missile threat’s speed and maneuverability compared to a warship. Chaff is an off-board, passive technique that can be combined with a ship maneuver to create an effective tactic for ASMD. The effectiveness of chaff tactics is fundamentally dependent on the chaff radar cross section (RCS) as well as environmental factors including multi-path, sea state and wind conditions; engagement geometry such as threat bearing and ship maneuvers; target and threat properties like ship RCS and sophistication of electronic counter countermeasure (ECCM) features of the threat missile. In the future, hardkill and softkill coordination of maritime platforms is viewed as a force multiplier that will also improve the survivability of the task group. Therefore, the deployment of chaff must be made with consideration to many variables and the resulting optimization problem of developing robust tactics is complex. In this work, we present an application of a chaff modelling tool that can be used to aid in the design and analysis of optimal chaff countermeasures for ASMD. In particular, the effects of chaff screening and interference on the detection and engagement of missile threats for different task group geometries (scenarios) is studied. Our chaff design tool can be used to study the frequency and angular dependence of chaff RCS as a function of time and range for spherical and ellipsoidal chaff clouds.
    [Show full text]
  • Armoured Fighting Vehicle Team Performance Prediction Against
    AFV DEFENCE: JUNE 29, 2021 1 Armoured Fighting Vehicle Team Performance Prediction against Missile Attacks with Directed Energy Weapons Graham V. Weinberg and Mitchell M. Kracman [email protected] Abstract A recent study has introduced a procedure to quantify the survivability of a team of armoured fighting vehicles when it is subjected to a single missile attack. In particular this study investigated the concept of collaborative active protection systems, focusing on the case where vehicle defence is provided by high power radio frequency directed energy weapons. The purpose of the current paper is to demonstrate how this analysis can be extended to account for more than one missile threat. This is achieved by introducing a jump stochastic process whose states represent the number of missiles defeated at a given time instant. Analysis proceeds through consideration of the sojourn times of this stochastic process, and it is shown how consideration of these jump times can be related to transition probabilities of the auxiliary stochastic process. The latter probabilities are then related to the probabilities of detection and disruption of missile threats. The sum of these sojourn times can then be used to quantify the survivability of the team at any given time instant. Due to the fact that there is much interest in the application of high energy lasers in the context of this paper, the numerical examples will thus focus on such directed energy weapons for armoured fighting vehicle team defence. I. INTRODUCTION Performance prediction of collaborative active defence systems for a team of armoured fighting vehicles (AFV) is of significant importance to defence forces investing in modern technology.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Army Air Forces in WWII
    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE Air Force Historical Studies Office 28 June 2011 Errata Sheet for the Air Force History and Museum Program publication: With Courage: the United States Army Air Forces in WWII, 1994, by Bernard C. Nalty, John F. Shiner, and George M. Watson. Page 215 Correct: Second Lieutenant Lloyd D. Hughes To: Second Lieutenant Lloyd H. Hughes Page 218 Correct Lieutenant Hughes To: Second Lieutenant Lloyd H. Hughes Page 357 Correct Hughes, Lloyd D., 215, 218 To: Hughes, Lloyd H., 215, 218 Foreword In the last decade of the twentieth century, the United States Air Force commemorates two significant benchmarks in its heritage. The first is the occasion for the publication of this book, a tribute to the men and women who served in the U.S. Army Air Forces during World War 11. The four years between 1991 and 1995 mark the fiftieth anniversary cycle of events in which the nation raised and trained an air armada and com- mitted it to operations on a scale unknown to that time. With Courage: U.S.Army Air Forces in World War ZZ retells the story of sacrifice, valor, and achievements in air campaigns against tough, determined adversaries. It describes the development of a uniquely American doctrine for the application of air power against an opponent's key industries and centers of national life, a doctrine whose legacy today is the Global Reach - Global Power strategic planning framework of the modern U.S. Air Force. The narrative integrates aspects of strategic intelligence, logistics, technology, and leadership to offer a full yet concise account of the contributions of American air power to victory in that war.
    [Show full text]
  • Decoying Self-Protection System for Aircraft
    Operational requirement elips Aircraft are called to operate in a wide range of operation theatres where they are required to counter a great variety of threats, more often using decoying self-protection infrared guidance. system for aircraft The proliferation of very short range missiles may also threaten aircraft at any time during peace keeping missions or as a result of terrorist activities. The solution Aircraft are no longer sent into battle without self-protection. Chaff & Flare dispensers are the first essential step offering active protection for the best cost-to-efficiency factor. • Suitable for all types of aircraft Adaptable to all types of aircraft in different configurations, ELIPS is • High decoy capacity already in service on Cougar, Panther, Sokol, Caracal, Embraer 145, • Fully programmable C160, C130, Mirage 5 • In service MBDA Contacts Sales and Business Development 1 avenue Réaumur 92358 Le Plessis-Robinson cedex - France Tel. + 33 (0) 1 71 54 10 00 Fax + 33 (0) 1 71 54 00 01 [email protected] AIR www.mbda-systems.com ELIPS is a decoy dispenser delivering countermeasures against radar and missile threats by optimized ejection Name of chaff and/or flares. It comprises the following units: • ELIPS Cartridge Dispenser Modules (CDMs) The CDMs house the ammunition magazines and perform the interface with the MDU and the magazines. ELIPS can operate up to 12 CDMs. Management and Distribution Unit (MDU) The MDU provides the management of the chaff and flare dispenser and the interface with the aircraft and alarm detectors of the EW system when available. It stores the mission parameters and elaborates the ejection programmes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Armour Steel
    May 26, 2021 Clad in Steel: The Evolution of Armour Steel A little over a century ago, the armed forces of the British Empire received a new type of land-based military vehicle. The British Admiralty led the vehicle’s development in the utmost secrecy. To justify the connection with the Royal Navy, the invention was called a “landship” in official documents. As the Admiralty also managed oil production and processing, it decided to codename this vehicle the “tank” to mislead adversaries. This name is still used for self-propelled tracked armoured combat vehicles. Nowadays, armed forces around the world have hundreds of different types of tanks and other self-propelled vehicles. A key feature that they share is an armoured hull made of specialty grade steel . This protects the crew and critical parts from bullets, shells and other devastating effects. Over the past 100 years, one of the main challenges for designers has been to reduce the weight of armoured vehicles while increasing the level of protection that they provide. Aside from products for military use, civilian applications for armoured vehicles have also been developed. At the beginning of the 20th century, steel plates were used to reinforce the carriages of royalty and high-ranking officials. Today, armoured vehicles are used by heads of state, businesspeople, sport stars and entertainers. They are also used by government agencies and security services, as well as by banks for cash collection and transportation. Below, we discuss what armour is, how these steels evolved, as well as the role that Ukraine played in these developments.
    [Show full text]
  • RAF Wings Over Florida: Memories of World War II British Air Cadets
    Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Purdue University Press Books Purdue University Press Fall 9-15-2000 RAF Wings Over Florida: Memories of World War II British Air Cadets Willard Largent Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/purduepress_ebooks Part of the European History Commons, and the Military History Commons Recommended Citation Largent, Willard, "RAF Wings Over Florida: Memories of World War II British Air Cadets" (2000). Purdue University Press Books. 9. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/purduepress_ebooks/9 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. RAF Wings over Florida RAF Wings over Florida Memories of World War II British Air Cadets DE Will Largent Edited by Tod Roberts Purdue University Press West Lafayette, Indiana Copyright q 2000 by Purdue University. First printing in paperback, 2020. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Paperback ISBN: 978-1-55753-992-2 Epub ISBN: 978-1-55753-993-9 Epdf ISBN: 978-1-61249-138-7 The Library of Congress has cataloged the earlier hardcover edition as follows: Largent, Willard. RAF wings over Florida : memories of World War II British air cadets / Will Largent. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-55753-203-6 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Largent, Willard. 2. World War, 1939±1945ÐAerial operations, British. 3. World War, 1939±1945ÐAerial operations, American. 4. Riddle Field (Fla.) 5. Carlstrom Field (Fla.) 6. World War, 1939±1945ÐPersonal narratives, British. 7. Great Britain. Royal Air ForceÐBiography. I.
    [Show full text]
  • Korean Assault
    Korean Assault Republic of Korea (ROK) Data and information on vehicles obtained from army-technology.com This is the fighting vehicle preview for the Korean Assault K1 Sometimes referred to as the Korean M1 (it was developed for Korea by General Dynamics Land Systems Division), the K1 or Type 88 (official title) entered service in 1985/86. The K1 is armed with the Abrams 105mm gun and fires the same ammunition. The K1 is outfitted with thermal imaging system and the gun is stabilized. K1A1 The K1A1 is an upgraded version of the K1 MBT. Its firing range is enhanced by a 120mm M256 smoothbore gun, together with an improved gun and turret drive system. The M256 gun is also installed on the US M1A1/2 main battle tanks and fires the same ammunition as the M1A1. The fire control system includes the Korean Commander's Panoramic Sight (KCPS) which includes a thermal imager, KGPS gunner's sight with thermal imager, laser rangefinder and dual field of view day TV camera and KBCS ballistic fire control computer. 1 K2 Black Panther The main armament of the K2 Black Panther is a 120mm L/55 smoothbore gun with automatic loader. The autoloader ensures the loading of projectiles on the move even when the vehicle moves on uneven surfaces. The 120mm gun can fire about 10 rounds per minute. The K2 Black Panther is equipped with auto target detection and tracking system, and hunter killer function. The gunner's primary sight (GPS) and commander's panoramic sight (CPS) are stabilized, and include a thermal imager and laser rangefinder enabling day / night observation.
    [Show full text]