BAE Systems has revealed its Next generation 40mm anti-aircraft system, Tridon Mk2, a highly effective system, designed to defeat unmanned aerial systems (UAS), aircraft, missiles, and rockets. #tridonMK2
94 years since the first version of the 40 mm Bofors cannon was produced, 92 years since it first entered service. Quite a legacy to continue building on.
@@petergrandien1440 Turns out that the aliens energy shields can absorb an unlimted amount of plasma and lasers. However, a certain, archaic, ancient projectile launcher with pre-fragmented shells was not something their shields were designed to protect against...
@@KamiKaZantA Aliens: Shields are up! Aliens: All power to Shields! Aliens: Shields are un-affective! Aliens: They mastered an ancient tier 10 weapon! Declare peace!
A similar PASARS-16 system armed with a 40mm Bofors gun and short-range air defense missiles Mistral-3 and Strela-2M was produced in Serbia and has been in service with the Serbian Armed Forces for several years, with around 6 batteries with 6 combat vehicles each and Giraffe radar.
@@eld4r09 Of course, it's all about the ammunition and the radar, the PASARS-16 Serbian short-range gun and missile air defense system is on a 6x6 truck chassis with an armored cabin, armed with a Bofors L70 40mm cannon with programmed ammunition, two Mistral-3 missiles and four Strela-2M missiles, anti-drone system and Giraffe radar, one battery consists of 6 air defense vehicles, one Giraffe radar and other supporting vehicles. The system was designed as air defense troops and as part of ground army brigades.
Have you ever seen a M247 Sgt York Division Air Defense (DIVAD) System? It was developed in lates 70´s and was cancelled. Gepard 35 mm twin Oerlikon system was also retired, but having a new life in Ukraine against drones.
The SGT. York didn’t have advanced programmable ammunition and the fire control couldn’t lock on to certain airborne fast movers. These newer systems improve upon the 35 and 40mm systems, making them the most cost effective against today’s drone threats. Each round may cost $1000+, it’s still cheaper than a $100,000+ missile.
That system has barrel wear issues which wouldn't be great in an AA mount, ctc is for the limited spaces in an IFV's 😮 its an bigassed turret on a flatbed.
@@jackdbur fake news, there is no barrel wear issue on CTA40. in fact it is in service in France on BRF supply ship (Rapidfire) and Jaguar reco vehicle, as well as Ajax in UK. FYI when french DGA (which test weapons before green light to enter service) the CTA40 exceeded the program requirement of 10k shots.
Iirc, it was used by the Costal Artillery branch for a few years until the whole branch was disbanded and resuced to just a single Amphibious infantry regiment.
The importance of drone warfare is a new development, relatively speaking. 2 years and 4 months is a pretty quick development for a big system like that.
Why not make these systems into a Articulated Lorry. Put it on a trailer so a truck can just pull it, drop it off & pick it up. the Driver can leave the system and seek cover. Keep distance from the system which is bound to be attacked.
And what is exactly the genius idea? copying Rheinmetalls MANTIS / Skyranger System ( which is also based on a container chassis mounted on a MAN HX truck)🤔🤔
I think Bofors is great. But I am skeptic about cost efficiency when it comes to anti drone warfare. The drone plus makeshift armaments are really cheap. Probably more expensive than one 40mm frag. But I am guessing it will rattle off more than one frag against one target drone.
@@SonsOfLorgar except most part of the uke energy generation system has been destroyed. except uke males are hunted down by the draftsmen and afraid of going outside.
@@SonsOfLorgar The Serbian Pasars 16 is better than this one. Both the vehicle and the turret are armored. It is also very small. It shows a higher level of technology. It can be equipped with 4 types of air defense missiles and even 2 anti-tank missiles.
The Bofors gun in question isn't actually a naval gun. It is a Bofors L/70 40mm cannon. Developed in the 50s as the successor to the Bofors L/60 used during world war 2. They have however added a bunch of targeting assistance to it in order to facilitate the targeting of drones and similiar equipment.
Hier der Darcho J. Pegasus Galaktica 7 Cyborg / Gorilla Cyborg / Abraham Cyborg - 77 mesezi od deneska na Odmor na More ce odime to pishiva vo Quittung Code Muster od vcera i deneska
Actually almost every country used similar AA guns. In the late 80ties most forces went over to missiles. At that time no one expected that there could come such a thing like RC drones or programmed drones costing only say from 1000 Euro's to 30.000 Euro's that could do so much damage to armies and civvi objects.
The Germans started the war with the 3.7cm FLAK 37. It was recoil operated weapon with gas unlocking of the breech. Rate of fire was 160RPM. The 40mm Boffors was a recoil only operated weapon 140 RPM in the horizontal and 120 RPM in the vertical. The boffo rs had a longer, heavier higher velocity shell and so about 15% more range (25% when using high powered American rounds) -The closest Allied counterpart to the 3.7 cm Flak series was the 40 mm Bofors L/60, which was designated the "4 cm Flak 28" in German service. The Bofors fired a larger shell of 900 g (32 oz), as opposed to around 650 g (23 oz), at a slightly higher muzzle velocity of around 880 m/s (2,900 ft/s) as opposed to just under 800 m/s (2,600 ft/s). This gave the Bofors an effective ceiling of about 4,900 m (16,100 ft) compared to 4,200 m (13,800 ft) for the Flak series. Firing rates for the earlier models were similar, although the Flak 43's improved rates beat the Bofors by reaching 250RPM and using 8 round magazine clips instead of 5. -The most notable difference is the size and weight of the two weapons; the Bofors weighed just under 2,000 kg (4,400 lb) and required a two-axle trailer, while the earlier Flak models weighed 1,550 kg (3,420 lb) on a single-axle mount, and the Flak 43 reduced this even further to 1,250 kg (2,760 lb). -The FLAK 43 used the mechanism of the 30mm Mk 103 aerial canon. -The British 40mm pom pom 2 pounder was the only weapon with a programmable air burst fuse and you can see them filling the skys with puffs of smoke. -The 3.7cm caliber disappeared and was replaced with 35mm in German and Swiss service. -Boffors stayed with an improved recoil mechanism but Rhinemetall/Oerlkon moved to a rotating breech with much higher rates of fire 600 and no 1000 RPM. About 2.2 times that of the boffors.
The serbian has 3P airbrst ammo also MANPADS and anti dron system and Giraf radars. There are like 76 of them but also a prototype on a M84 tank chassi with a GS 40 (ground smarter new one) and a fire control radar two 40mm Bofors guns and 4 domestic IC missiles range 12 km range and 10km hight and yet not fully developed missile with passive guidance same range .
Serbia had the same idea just that they put AA rockets, electronic warfare equipment and even some anti tank rockets on it. Its already in use, there must be others who thought of the same thing, its simple but effective.
I love how the modern Bofors looks just like the old one, just mounted on modern carriage. What's up with their love affair with the flared musket end? There some advantage to that style barrel end?
*All other arms manufacturers in the world:* _"This is our newly designed combat vehicle and weapons system, with next gen capabilities and all kinds of fancy gadgets. "_ *BAE Systems:* _"We put gun on truck. We put cannon on dump-truck. We put radar on car."_
Well Britain is getting closer and closer to bankruptcy so we'll better get used to seeing Toyota Hy-lux with anti aircraft guns mounted on the back of the trucks. It's the way of the future. It's the way of allies of the United States apparently. Hell maybe we in Europe are going to see the return of the religious wars era, Evangelicals vs the non-believers. Who knows. Wouldn't be surprised, US policies have become some insane, a greater appeal will have to be made to our inner psyche to continue bolstering support. So it's the all seeing eye of god again after failing to do it with CCTV.
I think the point of the system is so they can park it up and it will do it all the CV-90 AA is not build and cost-effective to do that also the CV-90 AA is not automatic it’s manual.
@@jammiedodger7040 and does it even have radar integration? the CV-90 is supposed to be mobile, walking around with another vehicle carrying a radar is limiting the purposes of the CV-90 imo.
@@Maddog-xc2zv what are you smoking? The CV9040AAV has always had it's own tracking and fire control radar in a big ass washing machine-looking radar dome on the back of the Turret. The only real difference is that the CV9040AAV lacks SAM launchers and that the heavier armor of the more compact turret makes it a bit slower to traverse when tracking targets, but it still traverses the Turret faster than it can spin it's hull, and the all spectrum gun sights is 100% stabilised for firing on the move. The CV9040 ifv, doesn't have it's own radar, but, IIRC, can be slaved to the fire control system of the AAV variant to add more guns to the AA party (though the IFV also has less max elevation than the AAV)
@@SonsOfLorgar yeah, you're right. should have researched a bit better before opening my trap. Thanks for the heads ups. Cheers. I was not remembering the 16 platforms the CV90 do have
What is genius about that? Rheinmetall has indtroduced its 35mm FLAK gun in form of the stationary MANTIS system like 20 years ago and that thing does everything this does better thanks to the muzzle programming system and AHEAD ammunition.
The TriDon concept was prototyped and tested im the 1980ies, it wasn't adopted as the LvKv9040 got adopted instead and the TriDon system was put on a Shelf and saved for later.
Rhine metal has two versions of Skyranger. One with 35mm and the other with 30mm. The 30mm version has a superb 5 antenna phased array radar to track swarming micro drones. Because of the smaller gun there is room for MANPADS size SAM.
The requirements of weapons and use cases was very different back then and until recently the SHORAD part of Air-Defense was either considered obsolete or not cost-effective. Drones and short range munitions have revitalized this key area of defense and so now older concepts are returning filling the necessary niche.
@@2whostruckjohnMissiles were the flavour of the time giving great results against helos & jets. They are unfortunately not good against drones especially smaller ones and they are very expensive to use against a $1000 drone, when 1 or 2 rounds of 40mm will get the job done. 😊 same with C-Ram spitting thousands of dollars in seconds.
@@ab-te8kv budget cuts by the Carl Bildt government that disbanded 2/3 of the Swedish armed forces and 100% of the civil defense forces happened, and then subsequent governments until 2014 insisted on further defense and public sector budget cuts every other year...
This is a copy of the idea of the Serbian Pasars 16 system. The same Bofors 40mm L70 cannon mounted on a 6x6 truck. And of course the idea is excellent, because it is a relatively cheap conversion of an old system into a modern one. When this system was being developed in Serbia, many people laughed. And in the end, it turned out to be an excellent system, for relatively little money. This system is already in use in the Serbian Army.
Hier der Darcho J. Pegasus Galaktica 7 Cyborg / Gorilla Cyborg / Abraham Cyborg - 77 mesezi od deneska na Odmor na More ce odime to pishiva vo Quittung Code Muster od vcera i deneska
Somewhat questionable for the following reasons: 1) No radar solution on the vehicle. 2) What is the # of ammunition in reserve and how quick is it to reload? IMO the entire point of one of these "gun on civilian truck" systems ought to be the ability to operate independently for long periods of time. Food and water for the crew in the cab, maybe a sleeping cot behind the seats. 3) What is the protection in the cab? Can the system be fully operated from inside the cab? 4) Where is the APS? Low flying drones can still be a threat to this thing, a 40mm cannot tackle tiny suicide drones flying close to the ground.
Hier der Darcho J. Pegasus Galaktica 7 Cyborg / Gorilla Cyborg / Abraham Cyborg - 77 mesezi od deneska na Odmor na More ce odime to pishiva vo Quittung Code Muster od vcera i deneska
The CTA international cannon is the best new auto Cannon in the world right now the ammo is great reduced by almost half the size of current 40mm case ammo! And i hope that the Italian ideas of developing a HVC 60mm cannon with IMI, actually is already developed but they will never enter mass prodution and is superior to the majority of cannons now a days even the Mark 110 57mm the 60mm HVC cannon is capable of defeating almost any body armour at 1500meters and can reach easily 8km max range, but NATO needs is a lighter 76mm light towed howitzer that weights a ton or with wheels and carriage, and start to produce the DRACO armoured IFV version with a 76mm/L62 cannon in a fast IFV with all the types of ammo around the globe would be a great weapon for troop support worked fine in the WW 1 in the French and allied armies and others and will worked fine right now, and NATO needs a 127mm/L58 light towed howitzer with a great range of ammo already in mass prodution and capable of hiting targets at more than 30km to rival the russians 122mm and 130 D-30 cannon that is one of the best worldwide period, why NATO dont start to develop new improve solutions and a more heavier mortar of 166mm and a 40 to 50 kilo rounds that can create true devastation, things have to evolve in WW 2 was develop more weapons that in the latest 85 years its ridicolous, military industrial complex is always great for any economy the Americans now it and the Russians now it to, Europe is the ones who failed to understand and they praticly invented war
