See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265574677

WHAT IS A GOOD TANK FROM THE MOBILITY

POINT OF VIEW?

Article

CITATION READS

1 105

3 authors, including:

Nenad Bobanac
BOBLab d.o.o. Enterprise, Zagreb, Croatia
13 PUBLICATIONS 24 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nenad Bobanac on 28 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 WHAT IS A GOOD TANK FROM THE MOBILITY POINT OF VIEW?

Živko ILIJEVSKI1, Vjekoslav STOJKOVIĆ2, Nenad BOBANAC3

Abstract

The answer to the question: What is a good tank? is often a matter of paradigm created
by publicity. Mobility of tanks nowadays is something that is ultimately recognised as
the most important characteristic of this complex combat system. Mobility, agility and
manoeuvrability are synonyms for survivability. Thus, one should look for a paradigm
shift – from a paradigm created by publicity to the battlefield reality, i.e. to something
that is inevitably imposed – the natural law or physical phenomena. The publicity of the
70’s made us believe that a powerful engine and a transmission full of hydraulic units
would give a tank excellent mobility. Instead, the whole Western tank development
entered a vicious circle of “power - size & weight – power”. This paper reports on the
solutions that answer physical phenomena and have given excellent results concerning
tank mobility, agility and manoeuvrability.

Key words: tank mobility, transmission, TITR

1. Faking Tank Mobility

Since the beginning of the 70’s, mobility, as one of the main tank characteristics
resulting from the paradigm: firepower – protection - mobility, has been interpreted in
short as power-to-weight ratio. Thus, the whole Western tank development entered the
vicious circle of “more power - greater vehicle size and weight - more power” which
fundamentally affected the development results. The vehicles resulting from this
development paradigm were given the attribute of behemoths in 1985 [1] and nowadays
Western military officials are very concerned about it [2].

1
Former director of the Tank Development Project, Author of the TITR transmission,
Executive director of Brodarski Institute, Zagreb - Croatia, zivko@hrbi.hr
2
MoD RH – Institute for Defence Studies, R&D - Croatia, vjekoslav.stojkovic@morh.hr
3
Directir General of Brodarski Institute, Zagreb - Croatia, bob@hrbi.hr
Gross power-to-weight ratio has become a model of reference to measure tank mobility
at a glance. Still, the maximum engine power that rarely can be delivered from the
engine under load is taken into account. Even many tank specialists aware of this
inaccuracy have been eventually using up to date this parameter as granted. The gross
power-to-weight ratio is not a reliable parameter to make an assessment of the tank
mobility even at a glance.

1.1. Tank Mobility vs. Tank Forces Mobility

Some tank specialists looking for more accurate explanation of the mobility involve
many factors that could influence mobility, like human factors, command system, etc.
[3]. Such an approach is certainly useful concerning tank’s forces mobility, but it can
hardly help tank mobility assessment.

1.2. Characteristics vs. Technology assessment

On the other hand, a tank is a complex technical system consisting of many subsystems
that have more or less an influence on the tank mobility. Looking for solutions to
mobility problems, different technologies have been in use for some subsystems and
components. The engine, as the source of energy, has been treated for a long time as the
most critical component in tanks [4] and even blamed for bad results concerning tank
mobility [5]. In fact, post-war development of engines has marked remarkable results
[3,4,6,7]. The volume-to-power ratio and the weight-to-power ratio of the engines have
been rapidly decreasing and today some new engines are below 1 dm3/kW and 1kg/kW.
However, the engine takes an important part of the power train volume and is one of the
consumers of its own energy. But although it spends some amount of energy to establish
necessary working conditions (cooling), it cannot be blamed because there are other
systems and components which may literally devour energy, as the transmission and
possibly the cooling system.
A transmission for tracked vehicle is a complex system which may consist of different
power transmitting units as: different gearings, friction clutches, hydrodynamic
couplings and converters, hydrodynamic brakes, hydrostatic units, etc. Some of them are
the main components of tank transmissions.
Hydraulic technologies have become a model of reference for what a good mobility is,
even when the use of these technologies affects the tank mobility itself. For instance, in
an advertisement for a tank transmission, the producer asks and answers this question:
“Why are our transmissions for tracked vehicles successful? Because they are
impressive for their superior technologies…” These “superior technologies” have
participated in building a 7 m3 power train and have given only 157 kW/m3 power
density in a tank that has been given the attribute of behemoth [1]. The paradigm created
generally by promotion of some technologies has even degenerated the character of the
tank mobility. What about the facts?

Hydrodynamic torque converters are used for many reasons, especially for heavy
vehicles. But due to the double transformation of energy they work at low efficiency.
Eventually they are used in combination with a friction clutch, Figure 1. The
consumption of energy and, as consequence, the production of heat of this component

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 2

depends on the time it is working
in the regime as torque converter. 100
Losses
The time at starting may be ω
ω

Efficiency [%]
considered as short but if it 1 2

Engine
interferes as torque converter in
cases of shortage of driving force,
especially in steering, the 0
ω /ω 1
production of heat may be 2 1

Figure 1: Efficiency characteristic of

enormous.
hydrodynamic converter with lockup clutch
Hydrostatic units are used for
steering in the transmissions of almost all Western tanks. It became a publicity argument
of the transmission and tank producers. But besides its ability to deliver continual output
(which is questionable in many cases), its characteristic of efficiency is terrible, even in
its best working regimes, Figure 2. Given that the regimes in the transmission change
from one extreme (high pressure, little fluid flow) to the other (low pressure, little fluid
flow etc.), this component has important direct and indirect impact on the efficiency of
the transmission and the power train as a whole. To remedy its insufficiency some
transmission producers added a hydrodynamic clutch (the transmission of Leo 2) which
is like giving a glass of
100
Losses
water to somebody who is
ω drowning. The remedy to
ω
Efficiency [%]

Engine
1

the insufficiency of the

hydrostatic turning system
in the tank LECLERC
0
ω /ω 1 transmission was an
oversize of the hydrostatic
2 1

Figure 2: Efficiency characteristic of a hydrostatic

unit up to its ability to
absorb all the engine power [5].
Beside these hydraulic components, some hydromechanical transmissions comprise
hydrodynamic brakes – the famous retarder which is an enormous heat producer. The
heat is input as great energy flow into the transmission oil tank. Unfortunately, the
evacuation of that energy does not go at the same speed as its creation.
All these hydraulic components are power consumers and heat producers in a direct
manner – working in a particular regime. On the other hand, they can be forced to work
at disadvantageous regimes by incompatibility of the
Accessible Part transmission with the vehicle needs [8]. For instance,
in straight-ahead motion starting and speed shifting
g
Steerin Zone Li
are performed quickly and there is no danger of
mi
Ki
tin
g rad
overheating by prolonged work of the torque
ne
ma
tic
ius
converter unless the arrangement of gears is not
rad
v
ius adequate. But the vehicle is more or less always in
steering conditions. A tracked vehicle needs much
c

C
more power in steering than in a straight-ahead
motion. The kinematic of the hydromechanical
transmission concept enables a large steering zone
Figure 3: Steering zone and
defined by the kinematic arrangement of the
available zone for steering

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 3

transmission and the full displacement of the hydrostatic steering unit. On the other
hand, the available engine power is not sufficient for use of the entire steering zone.
Thus, only one part of the steering zone is
60
18 [kW/t]; L/b=1.53; l 0 =0; hard ground accessible – available for steering, Figure 3.
50
AVAILABLE
There is a limiting radius in steering at any
Steering radius R/b/2

ZONE
speed, which can be reached at the limit of the

INACCESSIBLE ZONE
40 Limiting radius (20% of the SZ)

30
available engine power, Figure 4. Therefore, in
Lp
20
the most important driving conditions the worst
part of the efficiency characteristic of the
10 Kinematic radius (100% of the SZ)
hydrostatic unit is used [8], Figure 5. If the
0
vehicle reaches the limiting radius and wants to
5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50
Vehicle speed [km/h]
perform a sharper turn, which usually occurs in
Figure 4: Limiting radii in the cross-country conditions, the engine does not
steering zone respond to the needs, the speed of the vehicle is
quickly
reduced, the torque converter is being engaged and 1
0,9
everything is in hot conditions. Eventually, the 0,8

vehicle loses its driving performance. 0,7

LOSSES
Efficiency
0,6

Kinematic radius
Tank mobility should be defined by a set of INACCESSIBLE

Limiting radius
0,5
0,4 ZONE
parameters derived from its mission. Moreover, 0,3

mobility is closely connected to agility and 0,2

0,1
manoeuvrability, and with many other 0
0

20

40

60

80

100
characteristics they build the pyramid of tank Steering zone [%]
characteristics. On the top of that pyramid is its
Figure 5: Operating
main characteristic – fight-ability. However,
efficiency in steering of a
mobility, agility and manoeuvrability fundamentally
hydrostatic unit
depend on the same set of technical solutions and
features.

2. Key Issues of Tank Mobility, Agility and Manoeuvrability

A problem, any problem, cannot be solved without respecting the natural laws. To make
an object mobile, two principles must be taken into consideration: a movable object and
a certain amount of effective power to make it mobile. Applied on tanks that means: a
movable vehicle – minimise resistance to move, and effective power - minimise losses.

2.1. Movable vehicle – minimise resistance

Tracked vehicle’s resistance to move, as it is well known, depends on its weight and
size. Especially the size of the vehicle (b/L ratio, Figure 6) interferes with the important
impact on the turning resistance.
Apart from the external resistance (rolling resistance, turning resistance, inertia) the
running gear consumes a lot of power just to make the tracks run. Some researches [9,
10] have shown that its efficiency depends on the vehicle speed, Figure 7.
Thus, at 30 km/h the running gear consumes 24% of the power coming from the
sprockets and at 60 km/h its consumption increases up to 44%. Therefore, putting more
power on the sprockets does not mean that the driving performance (mobility, agility and

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 4

manoeuvrability) of the vehicle will increase adequately. The running gear makes the
great part of the resistance to move at first by
consuming energy and then by provoking more
rolling and turning resistance due to its foot size.
Thus increasing the size and weight of a vehicle
increases rapidly its appetite for power.
Unfortunately, trying to satisfy that appetite led
the Western tank development to enter the vicious
cycle: “more power - greater size and weight -

B
F
more power”.
2

ma+R
Figure 8 shows the available steering zone for two

b
vehicles of different sizes, as it is shown in Figure Ιω+Μ R

6. Both vehicles dispose of 18 kW/t power-to- F

weight ratio.
1

L
100
The vehicle EV-
90
Figure 6: Resistance to move of a
80 21 is an
70
experimental tracked vehicle
Efficiency [%]

60
50
vehicle made of the chassis of the tank M84 (similar to
40
30 T-72 tank) and a Dry&soft soil
70

20
new power train

1
10

EV-2
consisting of a 735
60
Minimum Steering Radijus [m]

kW engine and a
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
20 30 40 50

Vehicle speed [km/h]

new TITR VX
Figure 7: Running gear transmission [11].
efficiency The other vehicle
VX is hypothetical. It is 15% longer than the vehicle
EV-21, but concerning the power train, the losses
10

were estimated at the same level as the vehicle EV-

0

21. 0 10 20 30
Vehicle Speed [km/h]
40 5

The calculation of the available steering zone was Figure 8: Available steering
made for dry and soft soil [8,10]. The vehicle of the zone for the vehicles VX and
bigger size (VX) has much narrower steering ability EV-21at 18kW/t
than vehicle EV-21, Figure 8. It could perform
steering on 40-m radius at maximal speed of 27-28
km/h, and vehicle EV-21 under the same conditions
m0
R4

could perform this turn at the speed of 32-33 km/h.

Although both of the vehicles dispose of the same
power-to-weight ratio, the EV-21 has 18% better
steering ability. At the speed of 33 km/h, the vehicle
Figure 9: The experimental VX could not perform a turn in these conditions – it
vehicle EV-21 in steering could only drive straightforward.
The vehicle EV-21 has been subjected to field tests.
On dry and soft soil it performed steering on 40-m radius, Figure 9, at the average speed
of 32 km/h, Figure 10. Before entering the turn, the vehicle runs at 38-39 km/h. Entering
the turn it loses 6-7 km/h of the speed in the first quarter of the path. Concerning power,
the vehicle enters the turn at almost full engine power - 18 kW/t, but since the regime of

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 5

the engine dropped, the
vehicle performs the last
three quarters of the path
at 16 kW/t, Figures 10 and
9.
Obviously, the calculations
compare pretty well with
the experimental results,
concerning vehicle EV-21.
It would be very
interesting to see vehicle
VX on the same path.
However, the size of the
vehicle offers much more
resistance and it needs
more power on the Figure 10: The record taken on the vehicle EV-21 in
sprockets, regardless of the steering on a radius of 40 m, on dry and soft soil
power train. Regarding the
weight of the vehicle, there cannot be accelerations (neither agility nor manoeuvrability)
without a great reserve of power. Unfortunately, the big size of the vehicle consumes so
much energy in running along a natural cross-country path, full of different curves, that
it can hardly keep a moderate speed.
The size and the weight of a tracked vehicle definitely speak much more about mobility,
agility and manoeuvrability than the amount of power-to-weight ratio. The vehicle VX
in this example, 15% longer than vehicle EV-21 would need at least 2 kW/t more power
to provide the same driving performance as vehicle EV-21.

2.2. More effective power – minimise losses

Two vehicles of different sizes were compared by estimating the same level of power-to-
weight ratio on the sprockets, i.e. the same level of power losses in the power train
which means the same transmission as vehicle EV-21 – with no hydraulic units as power
transmitters at all. What would happen with the mobility of vehicle VX in case of
hydromechanical transmission and in case everything was in hot conditions – with
torque converter engaged, hydrostatic unit in turn with a hydrodynamic coupling added,
and a few seconds before a sharp braking being performed by hydrodynamic retarder. It
is not difficult to imagine – the vehicle would stop, exposed to the enemy, waiting to
cool down.
An ineffective component of the power train makes many damages: consumes energy,
must be oversized, produces heat, needs more room, etc. Apart from the engine, in fact,
there is no other component that devours energy except the transmission. The
transmission designers will be at last forced to reconsider some of their overestimated
solutions. The paradox in the Western tank development, in the first place is that looking
for more mobility resulted in making behemoths of the tanks.

On the other hand, Russian designers made a completely different concept of the power
train, Figure 11, of only 3.2 m3 with much more power density than Leopard 2, whose

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 6

power train takes 7 m3 - i.e. 180 against
157 kW/m3. The first and the most
important achievement was small size
of the vehicle. Apparently, it was a
result of the “U” arrangement of the
power train (disposition of the engine-

600
transmission) instead of “T”
arrangement, as some specialists
explained. In fact, this achievement 400

was a result of an exceptional Figure 11: Power train of the T-72 – a

integration of the power train with the concept kept for all the Croatian tank
vehicle. For instance, the transmission models
takes only 0.23 m3 of the vehicle
hull, which is many times less 100
than the hydromechanical Losses
transmission. In this way Russian ω ω

Efficiency [%]
1 2
Engine
designers have greatly respected
the first principle: making the
vehicle more movable minimising 0 1
its size, i.e. minimising the ω /ω 2 1

resistance to move. Figure 12: Efficiency characteristic of friction

clutch
The second principle: more
effective power on the sprockets – minimise losses, was applied by doing away with
hydraulics as power transmitter. Instead, they used wet friction clutches and brakes for
all the functions of the transmission: starting, speed shifting, steering and braking.
Apparently, the efficiency characteristics of these components, Figure 12, are worse than
those of the hydraulic ones, Figures 1 and 2. But in combination with a gearbox, Figure
13, the best part of the efficiency characteristics can be used and if the transmission
100
kinematic is compatible with
Losses the vehicle needs, a very high
ω /k GB level of the overall
ω
Efficiency [%]

Engine 1
ω
transmission efficiency can be
1:1 2
k:1
1/k
reached. Besides, a clutch has
low efficiency in transitory
0 1 regimes (in short time),
ω /ω 2 1

Figure 13. Efficiency characteristic of a clutch in eventually working at 100%

combination with a gear box efficiency.
In this way, respecting the
fundamental principles, Russian designers made of the T-72 tank a vehicle of respectable
mobility, agility and manoeuvrability, although its power-to-weight ratio is very much
below its competitor Leopard 2, i.e. 14 against 18 kW/t.

2.3. Innovative Solutions for Raising Tank Mobility, Agility and Manoeuvrability
Taking the Russian concept in consideration and respecting the two principles and
physical phenomena in tracked vehicle dynamics, in the two-phase Croatian tank
development the power density of the power train was raised from 180 to 260 kW/m3,

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 7

Figure 14, with no impact on the size and
300
weight of the vehicle. That was the result

Power Density [kW/m3]

250
of an uncompromising respect of the first
200
principle in getting more mobility, agility
150
and manoeuvrability – do not increase the
100
resistance to move. 50

The respect of the second principle – 0

getting more effective power on the LEO 2 T-72 M 84A DEGMAN

sprockets, i.e. minimise the losses in the Figure 14: The increase of the power
power train has asked for an incredible density in upgrading the basic concept
work and thorough analysis of vehicle of the T-72 tank
dynamics in looking for more transmission
compatibility with the vehicle needs.
An analysis of the steering kinematics
v of the vehicle shows that the steering
v-v 1
zone, defined as difference in the track
v v speed [11], Figure 15, is very narrow
2
c
v 1
for greater steering radii. For instance,
C C C O
2 1

R
a turn of a radius of 50 m, at the speed
of 40 km/h, is performed by the
vehicle with difference in track speed

1,80
b
1,70
Figure 15: Steering kinematics of the vehicle 1,60
of only 2 km/h. Translation of the steering zone into a
Steering ratio

1,50
steering ratio, i.e. outer–inner track speed ratio, 1,40
Figure 16, shows that its value is below 1.10 for 1,30
steering radii greater than 30 m. This means that the
1,20
vehicle needs very little decrease of the inner track
speed to perform greater radii in steering. At lower 1,10

speed the vehicle 1,00

15

25

35

45

55
5

100 usually performs

90 Steering radius [m]
80 small radii and it
Minimun Efficiency [%]

70
60
very quickly gets Figure 16: Steering ratio of
50 the kinematic radii a tracked vehicle
where steering is
40
30
20
10
performed at 100% efficiency. But at higher speeds
0 the vehicle performs steering on greater radii and if
1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,2
1

Gear Ratio (k)

the efficiency were low, many problems would
appear. Looking for the solution led towards the
Figure 17: Efficiency of a combination of the clutches and more adequate
clutch in combination with a gearbox ratios, Figure 12.
gearbox at the beginning of
the slip
Figure 17 shows that the efficiency of a clutch
combined with a gearbox at the beginning of its slip depends on the gearbox ratio.

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 8

Provided that a gearbox of the transmission controls the track speed, Figure 11, it is easy
to understand that the
steering ratio, Figure 16, and 100
90,9
the gear ratio, Figure 17, are
the same parameters. This ω /k GB
ω

Efficiency [%]
2

means that a combination of Engine1

1:1
1.11:1
ω 2

a clutch with a 1.11 gearbox

ratio would give a kinematic
0 1
steering radius of 25 m and ω /ω 2 1

that the efficiency at the Figure 18: The basis of the TITR transmission
beginning of the clutch slip concept
would be greater than 90%,
Figures 16, 17 and 18.
This analysis shows the way towards full compatibility of the transmission with the
vehicle needs.
Once the problem of transmission
compatibility and the vehicle needs
T-72 TANK TRANSMISSION

Bad steering has been identified, it is obvious that

Figure 19: Arrangement of the kinematic
turning radii of the TITR transmission
adequate kinematic arrangement of the gearboxes, which eventually gives an excellent
arrangement of the kinematic steering radii,
Figure 18.
The TITR transmission system is the most
compatible one with the vehicle needs. Such an
the solution lies in rearrangement of
the transmission kinematics, which
issue has been a new kinematic
solution named Transmission with
Independent Turning Radii (TITR).
The basis of this new transmission
concept (patent granted) is the use of
the best part of the friction clutches
efficiency, Figure 18, by making an
100
LOSSES
90
80
Efficiency [%]

70
arrangement of kinematic radii has been looked 60

for since the first tracked vehicle was made. 50

First of all, for better control of the vehicle, then 40

30
for better use of the available power. The TITR 20
transmission concept provides efficiency in 10
steering that no other transmission system can 0
100
10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90
0

provide. The vehicle with this transmission, at

Steering zone [%]
the best cross-country speed, performs steering
within a very little slip of clutches, Figure 18, Figure 20: Efficiency characteristic
throughout the whole steering zone, Figure 20, in steering for 25-45 km/h
from straight ahead motion (0%) to the
kinematic radius of 25 m (100%). The vehicle can run on a path of any radius within the
steering zone all day long using the maximum of the engine power without any fear of
overheating.

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 9

The TITR transmission concept is a simple and very effective solution. Based on this
transmission concept a transmission for the new Croatian tank DEGMAN has been
developed. The transmission was tested on the experimental vehicle EV-21. The vehicle
had 18 kW/t gross power-to-weight ratio and has shown great mobility, agility and
manoeuvrability.
Rk=10 m; R=10; 25 m; v=15-25 km/h
Rk=25 m; R=40 m; v=25-45 km/h The effectiveness of transmission in steering
has been tested by guiding the vehicle on
marked paths of various radii [12], Figure
21. The paths were followed with
R

remarkable precision. Concerning power

losses, i.e. the efficiency of transmission,
temperatures on friction elements and of
transmission oil were recorded. There was
no significant indication of any increase
either in temperature on friction elements or
Figure 21: Special steering tests of the of transmission oil, even on the longest path
TITR transmission on the experimental of 40-m radius. Due to the great kinematic
vehicle EV-21 radii arrangement of the transmission, the
power losses in steering were insignificant.
There is no other transmission system for high speed tracked vehicle working with so
much efficiency and effectiveness.
The consumption of energy by the cooling
system is the most significant indicator of the 14
efficiency of the power train as a whole. Figure
Power consumption of the fan - % of the

12
22 shows the part of the maximal engine power 10
consumed by the fan of the experimental vehicle
engin power

8
EV-21 and the most representative of the 6
contemporary tanks – Leo 2 and LECLERC. 4
The diagram is based on the driving power 2
needed for the cooling systems. Since the engine 0
under load delivers less power than its EV-21 Leo 2 Leclerc
maximum, the part spent on the cooling system
becomes enormous on tanks with Figure 22: The power consumption
hydromechanical transmissions. Even the latest of the cooling system
launched French LECLERC needs 150 kW fan
power [5]. Aware of this fact, some designers envisage solutions of shutting down the
cooling system in case more power is necessary for the vehicle to accelerate. Such a
solution seems like giving adrenaline to a sick, dying man.

3. Conclusion
A simple translation of the tank mobility by its gross power-to-weight ratio does not
make any sense. It is impossible to say what a good tank is from the mobility point of
view if there are no consistent criteria established that could apply for assessment of any
vehicle of the kind. Some model of reference as “modern technologies” etc., which

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 10

 trapped the tank development years ago, and even created a mind-set difficult to clear,
should be definitely ignored.
Small size and weight of the vehicle and more effective power are two issues leading
towards more mobility, agility and manoeuvrability, and eventually towards more
fighting ability.
Getting rid of hydraulics as energy transmitter and an innovative solution of a
transmission named Transmission with Independent Turning Radii (TITR) have
provided excellent tank mobility, agility and manoeuvrability, challenging all the
comparable “modern technologies”.

Bibliography

[1] Jenkins, C.: “The Old, the New and the Future”, BATTLE TANKS – Supplement to
International Defence Review 9/85
[2] Fletcher, R.: “Dooming the behemoths – European Nations Consider Innovative
Approaches To Reduce Tank Size And Weight”, Armed Forces Journal International,
May 1997
[3] Hilmes, R.: “Battle Tank Mobility”, BATTLE TANKS – Supplement to International
Defence Review 9/85
[4] Lett, W. Ph.: “Future Trends in Tank Engine Design”, International Defence Review
5/1989
[5] Tosi, P.: “The Tank Power Train – Its Influence in the Architecture of the Vehicle”,
International Defence & Technology, June 1994
[6] Ilijevski, Ž., i dr.: “Povećanje snage turboprednabijanjem jednog motora posebne
namjene”, Promet, vol. 7,1995, suppl. br. 3
[7] Foss, F. C.: “EuroPowerPack for Leopard 2”, Jane’s Defence Upgrades, Volume IV,
No 17 (1-15 September 2000)
[8] Ilijevski, Ž., Koroman, V., Behavy, L.: “The Impact of Transmission Kinematics on
the Operating Efficiency in Tracked Vehicles Steering”, Tracks and Wheels Symposium,
Royal Military College of Science, Cranfield University, UK, 1998.
[9] Zabavnikov, N.A.: “Fundamentals of the Theory of Transporting Tracked Vehicles,
Mashinostroenie, Moskow”, 1968 (In Russian: Забавников,Н.А.: Основу теори
транспортных гусеничных машин, Машиностроение, Москва, 1968)
[10] Ilijevski, Ž.: “Influence of the Power to Weight Ratio on the Tracked Vehicle Speed
in Straight Ahead Motion and in Steering”, Naučno-tehnički pregled, Belgrade, 4/1983.
[11] Ilijevski, Ž., Koroman, V.: "Transmission with Independent Turning Radii (TITR)
for Tracked Vehicles ", Proceedings of the 7th European ISTVS Conference - Ferrara,
Italy, October 8-10 1997, 180-187
[12] Ilijevski, Ž., Behavy L., Koroman, V.: " An approach to the transmission with
independent turning radii for tracked vehicles", Proceedings of the 13th International
ISTVS Conference - Munich, Germany, September 1999

What is a Good Tank From the Mobility Point of View Page - 11

View publication stats