BAE Systems has unveiled its 360 Multifunction Vehicle Protection (MVP) Sensor.
The sensor forms part of the company’s integrated vehicle protection system (VPS) suite, which provides improved visibility, situational awareness, threat warning, and countermeasures to protect armoured vehicles and crews.
The firm say that their 360 MVP Sensor combines four high-definition, extended-view multifunction cameras that serve as the eyes of the VPS, providing crews with sharp images of the battlespace around them and quickly detecting and tracking threats – from ground troops and small arms fire to aerial systems, improvised explosive devices, and missiles.
The sensors are designed to provide 360-degree visibility and threat warning capabilities during the day, at night, in adverse weather, and in conditions including fog, dust, and smoke.
“Our approach is different. We’re using mature, integrated components to provide a modular and affordable system for protecting armored vehicles that’s tailorable to the platform, mission, and budget,” said Ryan Edwards, BAE Systems’ business development manager for Soldier and Vehicle Electronics.
“Our vehicle protection system lets crews see first and act first, helping them complete their missions.”
This system like others is changing the survivability of armoured vehicles and, theoretically up armouring each vehicle. With increasing anti-tank weapon development such close-in protection is vital, and should be applied to our tank fleets ASAP.
I wrote an essay on these sensors a while back, it’s all riveting stuff, a game changer for the modern battlefield.
BV
Where can we read it?
If I tell you that you will see my real name and find out I’m not actually a 15 year old Chinese kid.
I will post a segment below.
BV
Will it be in Mandarin?
I’d like to know what the differences, strengths and weaknesses of each different protection system are but I guess it’s classified.
There are a couple of Youtube clips showing the Israeli Trophy system working in action when doing stuff near the West Bank.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiaQAdGXtOQ
The above clip shows three live attacks on Merkavas, which were all defeated by the Trophy system. I haven’t seen any Ukranian/Russian footage using Afghanit etc so can’t comment on how well their systems work. After years of trials the US Army has finally chosen Trophy for their M1, Bardleys and Strykers. The recent Black Knight Chally demonstrator had the Iron Fist system fitted to the tank. This is different from the Trophy in that it uses any explosive blast grenade to defeat the threat rather than Trophy’s tungsten cube shotgun/claymore style. The Iron Fist has the secondary capability of firing a grenade at the threat launch position if its within range.
I wonder how the infantry will be trained to give mutual support to armour when that armour has anti ATGM claymores all over it?
Active protection systems are an absolute game changer when it comes to land warfare and has the potential to drastically change the modern battlefield.
So much emphasis has been placed on defeating armour over recent years that the tank has become incredibly vulnerable, tactics and armour technology have reacted to the threats but the advantage rests firmly with the anti-armour team.
Active protection systems have matured to a point where they have not only become more reliable but also crucially more affordable. This shift means the development cycles are getting quicker and companies that originally didn’t have the financial or technological capability can now get involved in the development creating a more diverse and innovative product.
As we can see with this article companies are finding novel ways to provide protection to vehicles that won’t be prohibitively expensive by using EO sensors rather than the usual millimetric wave radar we see on other systems. EO has come a long way in recent years driven largely by the mobile phone industry and the selfie generation, who would have thought the young chap sporting a top knot sat next to you in a restaurant taking pictures of his lunch can influence the defence industry.
The description in the article indicates that this is a passive system, informing the crew of a possible incoming attack but with a little tweaking it could be used to cue an APS, here are my thoughts;
Using multiple EO cameras pointing in the same direction, for example one camera mounted on the front hull facing to the 3 o’clock and another camera mounted at the extreme rear of the hull facing to the 3 o’clock and then linked with clever signal processing, it would be possible to detect the offset between the two images to create a basic 3d image, think along the lines of a 1950 bistatic rangefinder fitted to tanks. This could be used to create a basic firing solution for some sort of interceptor, all be it not as accurate as MMW radar.
What are peoples thoughts on this? I might pop into work and Sellotape some smartphones to the side of a tank to prove the concept.
BV
I may be wrong, but I always thought the difference between a “Passive” system and an “Active” system is akin to the difference between RADAR and FLIR. In this case, using EO sensors is a “Passive” system.
What you are describing sounds more like a AFV based CIWS system, which automatically detects and intercepts incoming hostile ordinance. Like the Trophy system, or Iron Fist…
You your correct, the active/passive labels in a sensor context is referring to whether it actively transmits but in a protection context its it also refers to a system that physically attacks the incoming weapon as opposed to just Jamms it with some sort of countermeasures. So the system I described is a sort of hybrid using passive sensors with an active hard kill system.
The article doesn’t refer to any sort of hard kill system, it just referred to a vehicle protection system indicating it only alerts the crew to incoming rather then stops a missile.
The active/passive idea does raise a point about counter counter measures, would it be possible to spoof an APS with flairs or chaf? Will the next generation of ATGMs include such a system?
BV