via Jankel
Armoring hasn't changed in over 100 years but Jankel is at the cutting edge of a revolution.American entrepreneurship meets German engineering to bring a technology that is not only game-changing but also brings added protection to the front-line. This technology replaces the jigsaw of hundreds of flat pieces of armor used in conventional armoring with 31 pieces of armor. Molding the plates while they are still hot preserves the strength of the steel and allows the armor to better contour the vehicle.Benefits of Hot Formed Armor:Could the future of armor protection - at least the immediate future - hot formed armor coupled with active defense systems?
- Reduced weight of armor system as 70% less welding, bolting and support armor required
- Increased blast and ballistic protection due to use of larger components
- Rapid delivery due to reduced labor content and reduced production times
- Increased protection from the over-matched threat
- Conformity of protection in production from OEM tolerance panels
- Reduction in purchase price
Trophy is ready and if Jankel is right we have the answer right in front of us. There is no excuse for not upgrading Marine and Army armor. Decide what is needed, determine a reasonable price...then toss it to industry to come up with a solution.
**Don't jack with contractors by starting competitions and then canceling them...
**Don't add requirements after the start of the program...
**Don't do what you've always done and expect different results.
Would this require a spall liner?
ReplyDeleteya know what. i don't know. i was talking to some of the guys at Jankel when they came out with their Special Ops Jeep, but didn't tune in to what the ramifications of this tech was when i first got introduced to it.
Deletei was so focused on the automotive part of the puzzle that i overlooked the armor portion. if i'm right then this tech could save money and increase protection.
we'll see.
i think i might have pissed those guys off but i'm gonna hit them up to see what info they can give on this hot formed stuff.
I could see hot formed armor revolutionizing light armored vehicle construction some day, there is a certain brilliance in the concept. But its not for everything. I wouldn't use it on anything heavier than the JLTV.
ReplyDeleteTo spall liner or not to spall liner, the thickness of the armor is the question. the thicker it gets the more important the spall liner becomes.
Something to also consider is the kind of damage it can sustain and what kind of effort is needed to refurbish a battle damaged vehicle.
There are a lot of ways to make a vehicle that can take a single blast, but if you cant fix it and get it back into service afterward its not a great vehicle.
The M1 Abrams is a fantastic example of a resilient platform. 90% of battle destroyed Abrams can be refurbished and brought up to the A2 SEP TUSK standard for about 1 million dollars which is about 10% of the retail price of the tank.
The reason is it takes damage in a cellular manner and the refurbishing process is efficient. Pretty much unless you drop a 2000 lb iron bomb directly on top of it most of the major components can be reused.
This is where I think hot formed armor falls short. Parts reduction can reduce cost and weight in light armor like a JLTV but the cellular nature of conventional construction is best for heavy, high intensity assets like tanks and IFVs.