South Korea develops indigenous active protection system for armored vehicles

Discussion in 'Land Forces' started by Singh, Feb 29, 2012.

  1. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    S. Korea Develops Active Protection System for Armor



    SEOUL — South Korea developed an indigenous active protection system for defending armored fighting vehicles from anti-tank weapons, the country’s arms procurement agency announced Feb. 28.

    The Korean Active Protection System (KAPC), developed by the state-funded Agency for Defense Development (ADD), uses a three-dimensional detection/tracking radar and a thermal imager to detect incoming warheads, such as anti-tank guided missiles, according to the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA).

    The system can detect incoming warheads at a range of 150 meters, a DAPA spokesman said, and upon detection, a defensive rocket is fired that explodes 10 to 15 meters from the inbound threat.

    “This system demonstrates a new concept of active protection system that can neutralize incoming missiles and rockets,” the spokesman said. He added the system will be installed on the K2 Black Panther main battle tank, now in test runs.

    Unveiled in 2007, the K2, jointly developed by the ADD and Hyundai Rotem, carries a three-person crew supported by an auto-loading system and a locally developed 120mm/55-caliber stabilized smoothbore gun. Hundreds of K2s are to be produced over the next few years.

    The technology of the KAPC is scheduled to be used in developing other active systems to protect warships, helicopters and government facilities, he noted.

    KAPC’s per-unit price is around 670 million won ($600,000), according to the spokesman.

    S. Korea Develops Active Protection System for Armor | Defense News | defensenews.com
     
  2.  
  3. militarysta

    militarysta Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    784
    Location:
    Poland
    Nothing new...this Korean APS have some serious gaps - if finall version will be the same of course - becouse ex: APS have only 2x2 shots. It's to little.

    But If we will try to make APS classification and ranking that two the better are:

    1) AMAP-ADS
    2) Quick Kill in VLS version

    after that long long nothing and:

    3) Trophy (ASPOR-A)
    4) Iron Fist/this korean APS/LEDS-150
    5) Arena
    6) Ukrainian Zaslon
    7) Drozd
     
  4. blueblood

    blueblood Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    1,427
    Can you provide reasons for your above mentioned ranking. AFAIK, neither German nor American systems are operational but Israeli and Russian systems are.
     
  5. militarysta

    militarysta Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    784
    Location:
    Poland
    yes, of course.

    We can distinguish four features which really good APS shoud have:

    1. multi kill capabilities (protection before attacks based on phenomenon of saturation - like in RPG-32, new Kornet-E, HOT-3 etc when one place in tank is attacked by one-two precursors and after that main warhead (HOT-3 RPG-30), or when 2-4 ATGMS aim and fly to the same point whit minimum the time interval (newest Kornet-E)

    2. capabilities to pretection against very fast targets: APFSDS and EFP

    3. large supply of the actuators (countermeasures) as big as it's possible

    4. hard to destroy Fire Contol System and target detectors
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Only AMAP-ADS and propably(number 2 is questionable) Quick Kill have all of this features. Rest of APS have some "gaps" becouse there was designed to protect against RPG's and ATGM's but not EFP and APFSDS... Or haven't other features...


    BTW: I wrote about APS Here: Aktywne Systemy Ochrony (APS) « Gdzie zaczyna siÄ™ wojsko… in polish of course, but photos may be usefull...
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2012
    blueblood and indian_sukhoi like this.
  6. Shaitan

    Shaitan Zandu balm all day Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,400
    Likes Received:
    3,406
    Location:
    Judica


    Check out this video..
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    Armand2REP likes this.
  7. indian_sukhoi

    indian_sukhoi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    224
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    The only problem with Active Protection System is they cost almost half the price of T-90.


    Btw, The Trophy was the only APS to be tested in War right?. Were they reliable?
     
  8. militarysta

    militarysta Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    784
    Location:
    Poland
    Yes, but when we realize how "expensive" is tank crew life (training, skills) and tank as a machine then all thia APS are not so expensive. And if tank survival on the battelfield is "5" then tank +APS is more then 10.

    Yes, it was in 1 march 2011 near Izraeli kibuc "Nir Oz" (near Beer Shewa). In that day tanks for 401 Tk.Bde from Chal (Merkava mk.IV with Trophy) patrol the border near the Gaza Strip. Suddenly RPG-7VR or even RPG-29 was fired from hight bulding in Gaza -the target was Merkava-IV roof, or main ammo store. The crew even haven't time to react - ASPRO-A detect and destroy enemy RPG grenade. After that on Trophy control Panel (on TK seat) system shown from which place RPG was fired, and Merkavas Crew was able to shoot M339 Kalanit 120mm round and kill this stupid palestinian bastards :D

    Next case of using ASPRO-A was in 20 march 2011 near that place -when 9K111 (Fagot) was fired against Merkava Mk.IV -in that case Trophy Fire Control System detect ATGM and shown that it can't hit the tank - it was the operator error - this idiots even can't guide properly 9K111... And again - place from ATGM was wired was shown by Trophy and after that fired by "Kalanit" rounds.
     
  9. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    Raytheon Quick Kill test, note the debris:



    I think the infantries nearby at the time of APS engagement will be toast...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  10. militarysta

    militarysta Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    784
    Location:
    Poland
    Well it's one of the bigest probem about APS. All of them have some "danger zone" for infanty.
    In Arena it's cone-shaped zone of radius 20-30m, in case of Drozd (Soviet Union) it was circle whit radius almoust 25m.
    Ukrainian Zaslon have this zone in shape like # whit tank inside and all of this line have more then 20-30m from the module for the reson of debris.
    AMAP-ADS have the smalest "kill zone"for infanty 3-5m.
    How about this Korean APS, Quick Kill, LEDS-150, Trophy? Well - the zone is depend of intercept distance and warhead in countermeasures.
    For Trophy ist MEFP (multi EFP formed from one plate) - it haven't big blast but this all EFP can fly in quite big distance - although they are very precise. For LEDS, Korean APS, Quicki Kill, Iron Fist it rather precise blast of the explosion - whithout bigger debris. And of course danger zone for infanty is again about 20m.
     
  11. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    Quick Kill APS have two types of projectiles. Small unguided ones for close range defense, and bigger guided ones for medium to long range defence. The guided ones are designed to destroy ATGM's, tank HEAT ammunition, HE ammunition and APFSDS ammunition, unguided are designed to protect against RPG's or ATGM's and HEAT rounds fired from closer range.

    Quick Kill use several interesting tricks. First the VLS launchers, each launcher is independant from another, each launcher due to fact that it is launching projectile veritcally can protect vehicle against hits from all sides, for example if launcher on the right side of vehicle are empty or damaged, launchers from the other side of vehicle can still provide ot with full protection.

    Quick Kill use two types of detecting, identify and guide it's projectiles towards threats. It use radar and electrooptical sensors. More Quick Kill can actually protect vehicle against several simultaneous hits, because it can fire several of it's own projectiles towards threats.

    Also from what I know, because it was initially designed for rather lightly protected MGV's, it also can show crew from where threat was fired, just like ASPRO-A/Trophy.

    However it is not capable to protect vehicle from EFP's, so if this is lightly armored vehicle, then it needs anti EFP passive protection.

    Quick Kill also should be very light, because MGV vehicles combat weight should not exceed 20 tons, so whole system was designed to be as light as possible.

    As far as I know, Quick Kill fielding is delayed due to some issues with guided projectiles.
     

Share This Page