Russia Testing Italian Centauro Tank

Discussion in 'Europe and Russia' started by Zebra, May 13, 2012.

  1. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    Russia Testing Italian Tank

    MOSCOW, May 12

    [​IMG]

    Russia is testing Italy's Centauro wheeled tank and considering building it under license, a representative of the Oto-Melara company which makes the tank said on Saturday.

    "The first two machines with 105-mm and 125-mm guns are on trial at a Moscow Region proving ground," he said.

    Two more Centauros with 120-mm and 30-mm guns will also join the trials in another six weeks. "The tanks will take part in laboratory, driving and firing trials," the Oto-Melara representative said.

    When the trials are complete at the end of this year, Russia will consider creating a joint venture for production of the tank with an enterprise from the Russian military-industrial complex, he said.

    Russian truck maker Kamaz in Naberezhny Chelny could be involved in the deal, according to a source in Russian arms sales holding Rosoboronexport.

    Commenting on the report that Russia is considering building Centauro tanks under license, Yury Borisov, first deputy head of the military-industrial commission, said Russia will only buy foreign weapon models on a one-off basis to study the manufacturing technology and then set up its own production.

    A number of military experts earlier said licensed production of those machines in Russia is unlikely.

    Russia signed a deal with Italy in December for the semi-knocked down assembly of 60 Lynx light multirole armored vehicles (LMV) from Iveco, Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Sukhorukov said in January.

    Oto-Melara, part of the Italian Finnmeccanica group, is part of the CIO joint venture with vehicle manufacturer Iveco to make military vehicles.

    Italy already has 400 Centauros in service. The 24 ton tank has a four-man crew, top speed of 100 km/h (60 mph) and range of 800 km (500 miles). It has a main gun and two 7.62 mm machineguns.

    Russia Testing Italian Tank | Defense | RIA Novosti

    :cool2:
     
  2.  
  3. Avenger

    Avenger Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    May 5, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    Likes Received:
    9
    It is not a tank!
    It is a wheeled tank destroyer.
     
  4. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    Yes , B1 Centauro is a tank destroyer .
    Just posted the article , as it is .
     
  5. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    Yes , B1 Centauro is a tank destroyer .
    Just posted the article , as it is .
     
  6. Zebra

    Zebra Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    2,251
    [​IMG]
    A Centauro in Iraq , (wiki)
     
  7. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Is it necessary for a vehicle to have tracked locomotion to be called a tank? What do the experts say?
     
  8. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    Tank is supposed to be tracked.
     
  9. kaustav2001

    kaustav2001 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    122
    Location:
    India
    Hey !!! isn't the IA also supposed to be testing the Centauro (wheeled tank destroyers) ? Does anyone have any more information on this ?
     
  10. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Looks like an APC with a big gun on top. Cool.
     
  11. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    A good question!

    I am equally interested in knowing.
     
  12. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Wheels cannot handle the mobility requirements like tracked vehicles. If a tank cannot have mobility like a tracked vehicle then it cannot be called a tank.

    What do we call this though!
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Russia is sooo pathetique! :rofl:
     
  14. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    Situation in Russia is actually preatty much complicated.

    On the one hand we have a strong lobby that want to import foreing weapon systems, and on the other hand second strong lobby for russian made weapon systems.

    We need to remember that currently Russia is running 4 R&D programs for combat platforms, "Armata" and "Kurganets" as tracked ones, and "Boomerang" and "Typhoon" as wheeled ones.

    Tracked platforms are more expensive and there is also a strong prestige connected to them, so the question is if Russia can handle 4 new platforms R&D from financial point of view, especially if all of them are running in the same time.

    So it is possible that to reduce costs and risks, some politicians decided to allow foreing weapon systems to be evaluated and if they meet land forces demands foreing platforms will be manufactured on licence in Russia.

    Tracked platforms are more prestige worthy so it is very unlikely that any foreing platform will participate here. However wheeled as less prestige worthy, might be seen as something acceptable to be designed outside Russian Federation.

    So in reality everything comes to prestige and money, not real designing capabilities, Russians can design good weapon systems if only they have money to do so.
     
  15. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    It is possible Russia is evaluating existing vehicles in order to take further their own programs. Quite like how Americans are evaluating BAE GCV while SAIC partners and General Dynamics partners are working on the American version.
     
  16. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Tracks Versus Wheels


    Subscribe to our free E-Newsletter, "RTW This Week" Sign up for our
    E-Newsletter
    Download 210K file ("tracks_vs_wheels.pdf")Download pdf - 210K


    Introduction

    With the production of the Challenger series of rubber belt farm tractors, Caterpillar Tractor introduced a new set of variables to farm machinery management. What those variables are and how they affect conventional thinking about farm tractor usage has been the focus of a series of tests at the Agricultural Technology Centre (Agtech).

    Engineers at the Centre evaluated the various Challenger models and compared the tractive performance of the rubber belts to different conventional four wheel drive (4WD) tractors. Comparisons were made to tractors equipped with single, dual and triple tires. All the tractors were instrumented to measure engine power, drawbar power, speed, slip and ride quality. The measurement of power delivery efficiency, the ability of the traction system to deliver available engine power to the ground as useful working power, was the main emphasis of the test. Tests were conducted in various soil conditions throughout Alberta and Montana during 1991 and 1992.

    Results show definite differences between rubber belt tracks and rubber tires. On the plus side for the tracks were pull and the ease of optimizing the traction system performance. The tracks also showed a slight plus in power delivery efficiency. On the plus side for tires were steering control and overall cost. A neutral issue for both systems was ride quality. The issue of soil compaction was not resolved by the tests.

    Pull

    A plus for tracks
    In straight pulling, the rubber belts can develop substantially more force than rubber tires for the same tractor weight.

    Pull/weight ratio is the ratio of the pull a tractor produces, divided by the tractor weight. Normally, heavier tractors produce more pull, whatever their power delivery system. Slip is the ratio of a vehicle’s actual forward speed to the track or tire speed. Normally, slip increases as pull increases. Figure 1 shows pull/weight ratio for various slips for a 270 hp Challenger 65 and a 270 hp 4WD tractor equipped with eight radial tires. Both tractors weigh 32,000 lb. The rubber belt curve rises steeply at low slip levels while the rubber tire curve increases gradually over a larger slip range. The rubber tire curve does not reach as high a pull/weight value.


    Figure 1. Pull to weight ratio versus per cent slip

    While a rubber belt can develop more pull than a rubber tire, this is only part of the story for a farm tractor. In most farm operations, drawbar horsepower, the product of pull times speed, is what counts. Agtech engineers found both rubber track and rubber tire systems have ample pull and traction to deliver 200 drawbar horsepower at field speeds of five miles per hour and higher. While the additional pull capability of the rubber belt track can deliver 200 drawbar horsepower at speeds as low as three miles per hour, this may not be a big advantage since most farm operations are done at higher speeds.

    Optimization

    A plus for tracks
    Optimization is the selection of the proper tractor weight and tire set-up for a particular speed, pull and ground condition. Using a tractor at its optimum gives the highest performance and the lowest operating cost.

    Optimizing a rubber tire tractor for a given speed, pull and ground condition can require changes in ballast and tire inflation pressure. Since this takes planning, measurement and the slinging around of heavy weights, it is often only done once for a tractor. Because of this, a rubber tire tractor may not always be at an optimum set-up for its current working condition.

    With rubber belt tracks, there are no pressures or weights to change, yet the tracks usually perform at their optimum. Figure 2 shows the rubber belts develop maximum drawbar power over a wider range of speeds than rubber tires. In day-to-day usage, the tracks should average out to deliver more power to the ground because they remain at about the same efficiency regardless of changes in the operating conditions. This can be a significant advantage.

    Rubber tires can have another problem that rubber tracks do not. In some conditions rubber tire tractors have the tendency to "power hop" under load. Power hop is a bouncing or "porpoising" of a tractor in a fore/aft up/down motion while it is pulling.

    Adjusting a tractor to reduce this problem may move it away from its optimum setup.


    Figure 2. Drawbar power versus ground speed

    Power Delivery Efficiency

    A slight plus for tracks
    Power delivery efficiency is a measure of the ability of a traction system to deliver available engine power into useful work on the ground. Tests showed little difference between rubber belt tracks and correctly set-up rubber tires. Figure 3 shows power delivery efficiency at various levels of slip for a rubber belt and a rubber tire system. Although the two curves are different in shape, both power delivery systems reach similar maximum efficiencies, about 80 per cent. In some tests rubber belt tracks showed a slight (1 to 3%) increase in efficiency over rubber tires.


    Figure 3. Power delivery efficiency versus per cent slip

    Rubber belt tracks maintain their efficiency over a wide range of pull and ground conditions. Figure 4 shows power delivery efficiency versus pull/weight for the two tractors. The rubber belt tracks have a wider range of effective operating area.


    Figure 4. Power delivery efficiency versus pull to weight ratio

    A given engine power level will produce the same drawbar power on a correctly set-up rubber tire tractor as it will on a rubber belt tractor. On an average rubber tire tractor, it will probably produce less drawbar horsepower than it will on a rubber belt tractor. The amount of difference will vary depending on the operating conditions and on how close to optimum the wheel tractor is operating, but the average day-to-day power delivery efficiency should be higher for the rubber belt tracks. Improved average power delivery efficency can mean either more field work done in a day or less fuel usage for the same amount of field work.

    Some promotional information suggests rubber belts are better because they operate at a lower slip than rubber tires. They do operate at lower slip, but this is not necessarily an advantage. Slip is simply a factor of operation of the track or the tire in delivering power. As Figure 3 shows, the differences in slip had little effect on the overall power delivery performance of the systems.

    Ride

    Equal for either system
    There was little difference in average ride quality between the rubber belt tracks and the rubber tires. The long flat area of track smoothed out closely spaced ground contour variations such as cultivator sweep spaced ridges. The short wheelbase of the track amplified more widely spaced variations such as implement width spaced ridges. Thus, in some ground conditions the rubber belt tracks rode better than rubber tires and in others they did not ride as well. Average ride vibration levels were similar for both systems.

    Steering

    A plus for tires
    Rubber tire tractors generally steered better than the rubber belt tractors. When a rubber tire tractor is steered, the tires turn and point in the direction of the turn. When a rubber belt tractor is steered, the track on the outside of the turn speeds up and the track on the inside of the turn slows down. Under moderate to heavy draft loads, a rubber tire tractor may slide sideways as it turns, but it still turns. Under similar draft loads, a rubber belt tractor may not turn at all. This is a nuisance and can present a serious problem if an operator doesn’t expect it. With rubber belt tracks the draft load must be reduced before significant steering can occur.

    As a rubber belt tractor turns, the tracks slip sideways, pushing soil and producing ridges and depressions. A tire rolls through a turn and produces little soil disturbance.

    Steering a rubber belt system requires more power than steering a rubber tire. The extra power is needed to overcome the sideways slipping and to speed up the outside track. This can cause overload or stalling problems when the tractor is steered while operating near full engine load.

    Costs

    A plus for tires
    Caterpillar rubber belt tractors cost about 15 per cent more than equivalent drawbar horsepower rubber tire tractors if comparing dealer retail prices in Alberta in the fall of 1992. If comparing actual prices paid by farmers in Alberta during the same time, the difference was even greater, with rubber belt tractors being about 30 per cent more than equivalent rubber tire tractors.

    Tractor costs are situation and location dependent, and can change quickly. The dealer retail prices used for comparison were the December 1992 retail prices in Alberta, in Canadian dollars. They included freight, ballast and delivery to a farm in Alberta. Taxes were not included. The actual prices paid by customers were determined from interviews with customers who dealt on tractors in Alberta during the November to December 1992 period, in Canadian dollars, again including freight and ballast, but not taxes.

    Soil Compaction

    Unresolved
    Rubber belt tracks may reduce soil compaction, although this was not determinable in the Agtech tests. Rubber tracks have a low average ground pressure and good flotation, and showed less tendency to dig down and get stuck than any of the rubber tire set-ups. For a rubber tire tractor to have similar average ground pressures required triple tires. Triples are expensive and can be a nuisance because of their width. Agtech tests also showed triples to have a power delivery performance penalty ranging from 4 to 7 per cent compared to duals or singles.

    Conclusion

    Rubber belt tracks are an option in farm machinery selection. So are four wheel drive tractors with single, dual or triple tires. Each system has strengths and weaknesses and provides certain features and performance characteristics. Potential owner/operators need to balance these pluses and minuses against their operating needs to decide what will work best for them.

    https://www.google.co.in/search?q=C...or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=357008c06016d30d
     
  17. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The Wheel Versus Track Dilemma

    With the development of any new Army combat vehicle, the question, “Which is better: a wheeled vehicle or a tracked vehicle?” surfaces again and again.

    In order to answer this question, the U.S. Army has tested and studied the merits and shortfalls of wheeled and tracked combat platforms for the past 30 years. Results indicate that no single criterion can be applied that will answer the wheeled-versus-track issue for all situations and missions.

    http://ciar.org/ttk/mbt/armor/armor-magazine/armor-mag.1998.ma/2wheels98.pdf
     
  18. Bhadra

    Bhadra Defence Professionals Defence Professionals Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,687
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    What is a Tank ?
     
  19. Bhadra

    Bhadra Defence Professionals Defence Professionals Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,687
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    The single most criterian is one's battle miliue. Where is one expected to fight. For USA, it is the globe which is their battle field. For Indians they have to find out what is better for Ladakhs, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh, Mladives, Andaman etc.
    Indian tracked vehicle numbers are sufficient to drown Pakistan.
     
  20. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    What is a tank?

    Tank - Encyclopedia Article and More from Merriam-Webster
     
  21. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,163
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Au contraire, the Germans did not give much importance to this 'definition.'

    For them, PanzerKampfWagen was nothing but a fighting vehicle that has a coat (of armour); or an armoured fighting vehicle. Going by that definition, even a BTR-80 is a tank.

    Panzer = coat
    Kampf = fight or battle
    Wagen = wagon or vehicle
     

Share This Page