Military Rubber Track Systems (IAV 2019)

[@timgetty955]

"We try not to use the word band" very next sentence calls it a band. lol

[@beeamerica5024]

What happens when you have a blowout you replace the whole track with end connectors you replace the one block

[@JerkerDahlblom]

And you field repair them how?

[@Pilotmario]

Take it off, get a new one, keep going. Apparently, this technology isn't entirely the newest kid on the block, being present on the ubiquitous M3 Halftrack from WWII.

[@lucianene7741]

You don't, just get a new track. But they seem to be more resilient that steel linked tracks. They apparently have several high tensile steel cables over the length of the track, and if you snap a cable or two the track will still be good, whilst if you bust a steel link the whole track is broken and the link needs replacement. It's simply a parallel versus series arrangement. Parallel provides redundancy while series does not. And they are certainly less affected by abrasion in some environments such as dessert.

[@Boric78]

When it breaks - which it will in a war - what happens? Changing a Tire is one thing, changing a whole track, then tension-ing it is another. Basically another product designed by people who never been in a real war. Metal tracks replaced by a composite surely a better idea. Plus rubber burns as the guy below mentions. Think this is for counties who need patrol vehicles, but can not afford the mechanics or parts.

[@Weakeyedominant]

There is a video of them somewhere repairing a rubber track on the cv90. It can definitely be done in theatre.

[@asilturkklc171]

Metal tracks can break too, and they too are a pain in the ass to change during a battle.

[@vinniedayhikerb4977]

Very well put.

[@whitescar2]

@@asilturkklc171 You won't change metal tracks "in battle". You will maybe fix them up post battle, or more likely the repair crews will fix them for you. In reality, if you lose a track in mid-battle, you bail the vehicle. Otherwise you're just a sitting duck.

[@whitescar2]

To be honest, you do not fix metal tracks in combat or anywhere close to fighting. Imagine the sort of situation where the tank crew would willingly jump out of their vehicle and spend an hour shuffling around the track, exposed to enemy fire. The rubber track is quite resilient to damage, so you may get away with damage that would incapacitate a normal track, which means you're better off more of the time. When you *do* need to repair it, though, in reality you've either left your mobility-killed vehicle behind and your unit lost the engagement. Or you unit won the fight, and thus you have the option to get repair elements over to help fix the track. There is an extremely borderline situation where you would be able to repair the track on your own and be of benefit to the battle. In other cases, the track damage takes place outside of combat, in which case the loss isn't as critical. Indeed, you'd be more likely to get use of a metal track when you need just patrol vehicles, since they're not engaged in combat, so you can repair their tracks in the field, without needing to call in the repair crew... TL;DR: Steel tracks make the vehicle self-sufficient, which benefits patrol vehicles more. Rubberband tracks make the vehicles more reliant on support, but heavy/combat formations don't operate without heavy support anyway. They just need so much more of it by design.

[@CH-pv2rz]

So what happens when you hit a land mine with a continuous track instead of a segmented track?

[@PlaneEasy]

Hot / burning ruins and power loss are considerations. Jagged rocks also chunk out the rubber. Otherwise rubber tracks are excellent, just as we see in the construction industry.

[@thebeautifulones5436]

Tires burn nicely. Do these?

[@andrewsuryali8540]

They don't. It's not the same kind of vulcanized rubber used in tires. The tracks won't actually burn, but they do get weakened by intense heat. Also, military and industrial grade tires don't burn easily. You need a starter fire to get them burning. You can't just ignite them. Think charcoal on a grille. Gotta spray them with slow burning propellant, ignite that, then wait 3 to 10 minutes. If a vehicle crew is dumb enough to stand on a molotov for 3 minutes, they deserve to burn.

[@theephemeralglade1935]

Everyone Gangsta until someone throws a Molotov onto your track. Also, one side of your vehicle has to be ENTIRELY off of the ground to replace the track - you can't just roll vehicle over the track and pull the loose end over the top.

[@weikwanglee4383]

What about repairs in the field under combat. Meaning if it encountered a land mine/ or received a direct hit on the track., what time line / work line are needed to "repair".

[@joelferguson9324]

It looks good but How do you repair them and wont they burn.

[@CH-pv2rz]

You don't and yes they do burn… they found this problem with these same tyoe of tracks on the Allied halftracks from WW2… They are perfect until they get damaged or if the vehicle gets hit…

[@geonerd]

It's a GIANT FREAKING RUBBER BAND!!!

[@orsonincharge4879]

Airfix have been making rubber band tracks for years .

[@orsonincharge4879]

Hey , get that Warrior up to full speed and then do a hard brake . With metal track they can nearly do a handstand , how does the rubber one fair ?

[@shanerooney7288]

Pause at 4:05 and you can see the steel reinforcements inside the banded track. I don't see why this would have any more problem stopping a 35 tonne vehicle than the wheels on the Boxer or Etian IFV.

[@orsonincharge4879]

@@shanerooney7288 ...and how much torque is applied at full brake ?

[@shanerooney7288]

@@orsonincharge4879 From the Engine? None. Obviously. From the inertia of the vehicle? Less than if the AFV had segmented metal tracks (because it is lighter)

[@orsonincharge4879]

@@shanerooney7288 how much do the rubber tracks weigh ?

[@shanerooney7288]

@@orsonincharge4879 , according to 1:48 in the video; 50% reduction in track weight. Obviously this is on a per-length basis. Since different tracked vehicles will use different lengths of track.

[@steampunkster2023]

I wonder how soldiers will replace a track on the fly? Remove one of the front wheels perhaps to loosen the track?

[@hakes98]

I was wondering the same, delinking a metal linked track can be quite easy and fast, with the added benefit of being able to be driven on and off. Seemed to me that the composite rubber track can be removed by removing a half from a two part idler wheel wich would then allow the track to be removed. Seems easier than delinking a metal track, but to me atleast it would seem harder to then remove the track seen as it is a continuous band. heavy side armor especially would seem like something that would cause issues.

[@CH-pv2rz]

Thry have to pull the vehicle back because you cant roll it off the continuous track. To get it off they have remove the outside of the drive sprocket and then to lift one side of the vehicle completely clear off the ground to get it off… The do the same to install the replacement…

[@kitosman9057]

CAN IT STAND A BLAST ....OR HEAVY FIRE.....

[@The_Observant_Eye]

especially when it hit a mine or those sort of stuff. No more track shortening trick.

[@mennol3885]

Better than a steel track can.

[@CH-pv2rz]

@ Menno van Lavieren that is not correct. When a steel track is hit only the damaged segments need be replaced. When the continuous band tack gets hit you have to replace the entire track and the vehicle has to be pulled back to do it. They found this a serious problem in WW2 with this type of track on the halftracks. But there were so many of them available then the crew just got a new vehicle instead.

[@arno557]

@@CH-pv2rz how about rubber pads which can be built into track?

[@Soulessdeeds]

So when we were in Iraq and our Bradley's and Abrams were doing hot seating crews and then rolling back out the wire for another 12 hr patrol or just doing heavy patrolling. The tracks would wear out. DUH your putting the stress of moving a vehicle that weighs many tons and going up to 60 MPH (vehicle depending, M88's doing 25 MPH should order a new engine lol) for hours on end. And they were going over asphalt and rough terrain. The bushings would wear out and the track connections required monitoring and adjustment often. I was a M88a1 recovery vehicle operator and a Bradley mechanic. I have seen it all many times. The track pads are the first thing you have to replace with traditional tracks. The rubber simply wears down to the grousers and then you need to replace them or face driving on racing slicks. The problem with this rubber "band" track system is its made of rubber with steel belting. But the part that meets the ground is going to be rubber. So your asking governments and military's to swap over from track systems that can replace a broken shoe or replace worn track pads (note: not the M88 as its tracked at based on the old M60 so its just replace the shoes). And just use a single belt that once its worn down discard and replace in whole. The problem is the logistics of shipping this sort of thing to units in combat. Right now track is sent out on pallets often in sections of 8 stacked 4 or 5 stacks high. And then sent back in the same manner when replaced. But with this you are sending rolls of track out to units. And if the band breaks the crews will have to wait for recovery guys to drag them back to change out the bands or wait for maintenance guys to come out and deliver the bands to the front lines. But with sectional track if a track section breaks you just use rope or chains connected to the sprocket carrier and then let mechanical force carry the ends back together. Then re-connect. How are they going to do this with a band? If it snaps it seems you are F'kd till help arrives. I had my track snap in Iraq one time and I was the ONLY person with track knowledge there. And yet withing 30 minutes I had my track back together on my M88a1 and moving again. But if my track was this band? Yea the whole convoy would have had to wait for a new band to come to me.

[@metanumia]

I was thinking the exact same thing. I wouldn't replace steel linked tracks on any front-line armored fighting vehicles with these rubber-composite tracks, perhaps they would be fine for civilians, paramilitaries, border security, or scout forces in peace time.

[@dposcuro]

I thought about it, and I agreed that having to wait for a new track to be delivered to a broken vehicle would be shit...so I checked Soucy's site. They have a repair kit that will reconnect a busted track. Soucy claims that the rubber compound they use for their tracks, demonstrates 20 times less wear than conventional rubber compounds in lab testing....Which I take with a significant grain of salt, and assume they are cherry picking the data, and realistically, their compound might last 5x as long. Which is still significant. Now, there is the other question: Does the money saved in fuel costs, suspension component wear, drivetrain wear, and the increased crew comfort, offset the cost of replacing the track more frequently? Hell if I know. I just wouldn't write it off, without actually seeing it in action, and learning more about it than what can be offered in a 8.5 minute marketing wank video.

[@hakes98]

@@dposcuro it seems superior to steel segmented tracks in pretty much every other way except the fact that it isn't segmented. One practical consideration that came to my mind was the removal of the track. Steel segmented track can be delinked and then driven off the track wheels. From the promotional material it seemed that a rubber composite track would be removed by removing one half of the idler wheel, wich would then allow enough slack for the track to be removed. It just seems that any mud cover and especially heavier side armor or deep trackwells would be a pain in the ass during the track switching process. The split idler wheel seems much faster than some of the steel segmented track delinking processes that I'm familiar with, but the fact that you cannot cut the track and drive it off the road wheels seems like a major disadvantage.

[@CH-pv2rz]

You hit a mine and you are done… Sorry but you have to wait to be pulled back after you are stuck on the firing line for hours and your crew can do nothing… yea that’s really fuk’n brilliant. Its No wonder they never ask what happens if you drive over a mine…

[@atttim41]

Perhaps the solution to the UK Ajax Combat Vehicle ..... ??

[@Bayofthe91st]

Imagine if you hit a mine, does field replacement even possible for this concept?

[@timmurphy5541]

Those tracks are light so your support vehicles will be able to carry a spare or two. It is also not clear if there is any repairability aspect.

[@jonny2954]

@@timmurphy5541 The problem is how to get them on the vehicle in the field.

[@jimbotheassclown]

Tim what support vehicle ? Lol they don't follow you around in country every time you leave the FOB or posted at a check point. Thats why they have extra track parts on Track vehicles.

[@jimbotheassclown]

What vehicle? In 30 minutes and limp home in a battlefield good luck with that. 30 minutes give me a break lol you have never thrown a track in the field.

[@Lou84mm]

2 years ago I attended a seminar on composite tracks and future BM systems. At the time we were shown video footage of CRT resistance to IED/mine (4-10KG) it showed CRT had better impact and flex resistance then steel link. Currently there is a linking repair kit for CRT under development to replace an earlier kit.

[@markanderson1519]

But why were they banned?

[@jimbotheassclown]

Because reality their bands and a bad ideas for the battlefield.

[@steampunkster2023]

@@jimbotheassclown - in what way they are " bad" on the battlefield?

[@jimbotheassclown]

You can't store a full track on a IFV or what ever vehicle it's on you blow a rubber track your screwed. You can fix a normal broken track because you carry the parts on the track vehicle so a field repair can be done. This fantasy of a supply vehicle with you in combat is pretty funny they show up if you secured the area not during the fighting and thats if they can get through at all. Hell even in training they don't send mechanics to fix thrown Tracks the Crew does it with the parts on the track.

[@joaovitorsilvagohl682]

but you can fix these tracks @@jimbotheassclown

[@jimbotheassclown]

Well if you have linked sources by all means post them .But i haven't seen them repaired a fully broke track not a track with a little tear. that repair kit is tiny and bolts are a joke that might get back to the rear if they leave the fight to change out the track but the track has to be replaced and soon.

[@ironwolfF1]

The elephant in the room... (crew) field repairs to battle damaged tracks. I noted that question was *not* asked. These sorta tracks will work just fine... against opponents that can't (seriously) damage your vehicles. I'll let y'all logic out what kinda 'opponents' fall into *that* category.

[@jimbotheassclown]

Lol you can lose 3 tires and still function you lose 1 track game over haha.

[@jimbotheassclown]

I've see it .

[@tonyfennell9481]

ironwolfF1 maybe used only for transport? But in short you’re right!

[@peterkung6793]

I am not a mechanic and I have no experience to repair tracks. According to my common sense: 1/ rubber tracks must be much lighter in weight and so could drive faster; 2/ rubber tracks should be cheaper; 3/ a damaged rubber track have to be removed completely and replaced with a new one, while for steel track, you only have to repair the damaged part, no need to replace the whole track. I do not know how they replaced a damaged rubber track, but I think they have to lift up the damaged side of the tank until all the wheels are above ground. This is not easy in the field. However, I think it make no different between steel track or rubber track if it is damaged in the battle field. The tank still lose its mobility and you could only repair it when the battle is over.

[@orsonincharge4879]

Over snow they seem functional , the BV-10 for e.g ... but the desert would eat these in short time .

[@shanerooney7288]

@@orsonincharge4879 , just like the desert eats rubber wheels? or the rubber padding on segmented tracks?

[@orsonincharge4879]

@@shanerooney7288 , yes exactly like the way desert eats rubber wheels , the rubber pads on tracks are meant for road moves , not desert .

[@shanerooney7288]

@@orsonincharge4879 , you do realize they use both rubber wheels and rubber padded tank tracks in the desert, right? They don't have massive problems with using either of them in the desert. So why do you think rubber band tracks would fare any worse?

[@orsonincharge4879]

@@shanerooney7288 , rubber wheels ... you mean tires . The rubber pads are for road moves , just as I said . Why do I think rubber wears out faster than metal under abrasive conditions ? Really ?

[@andrewpease3688]

Military vehicle with greatly reduced noise,only advantages mentioned are health and safety. A sign of the times.

[@jimbotheassclown]

Well noise is a big advantage or disadvantage depends on what side your on. With Bradleys in Iraq they could hear you coming at night in strykers you be at their front door before they knew you were there.

[@carwyngriffiths]

Andrew Pease and not ripping apart roads when transporting

[@jimbotheassclown]

If your transporting it it's on a trailer or train car .

[@shanerooney7288]

"We've atted 6 inches of armor to the from of the tank" "Okay, but why?" "Heath and Safety, of course"

[@Weakeyedominant]

Increased speed and range on top of reduced noise. Pretty big advantages.

[@jonny2954]

Guy claims rubber tracks are more durable, yet they can't endure vehicles over 47 tons. BS. Also no change of rubber pads? That's right, you have to change the whole track lmao.

[@GlenCychosz]

Noise and vibration are reduced. These is are advantages.

[@cahsahhhhhhhn]

It seems more like they haven’t designed/tested them for vehicles over 47 tonnes, possibly because there’s less of a need or market for the heaviest MBTs and similar vehicles. Or the tech may not be there yet. I’ll remind you that a T-80U and the early T90 only weigh 46 tonnes each Edit: spelling

[@VladiSSius]

It's good enough for lighter armored vehicle. An IFV could get the advantage of quieter tracks and vehicles like Wiesel could have huge advantage in terms of greater reduction in track noises.

[@timmurphy5541]

He says clearly that it's the heat from the big tanks that makes the composite rubber less durable. Without that they are stronger.

[@sofianmisadi3879]

“There is no maintenance required” - sends chills down my spine, everytime i hear it from a manufacturer

[@jebise1126]

25% reduction of fuel use and 10kmh higher speed? too good to be true?

[@shanerooney7288]

Why? The track is half the weight. A heavier track takes more energy to physically move the track. Imagine the difference between having 1kg in each of your pants pockets vs 1kg on each of your shoes. The weight placement means a lot about the energy needed to move it.

[@jebise1126]

@@shanerooney7288 but the vehicle is not half of the weight...

[@shanerooney7288]

@@jebise1126 , But the tracks are. Have you ever gone hiking and noticed how hard it is to walk with thick layers of mud on the bottom of your shoes? Even though the weight of the mud itself isn't the great, the _location_ of that weight makes a big impact. Same with armored vehicles. 1 tonne of weight in the tracks has a larger impact on fuel economy than 1 tonne of weight in the turret. Or in this case, 50% reduction in track weight can result in a 25% reduction in fuel economy, despite the fact that the tracks are less than 50% of the vehicle's overall weight.

[@mennol3885]

No, most driving energy is lost in the tracks. Metal links rub against each other and against the ground.

[@dposcuro]

@@jebise1126 The overall weight of the vehicle has drastically less effect on fuel economy, than the weight of the running gear. It's the same in cars, trucks, everything that uses wheels (or tracks).

[@gchavez43096]

2007?

[@thewomble1509]

No sane Gov't or army will consider having to use two differing sets of tracks for vehicles of differing weights! Any purchase cost benefit would immediately be removed. i wonder too, how do you fit and remove a single piece track and can they be retro fitted to existing steel tracked vehicles? A lot of work still needed here methinks.

[@shanerooney7288]

Oh, sure. Every "sane" military will use the same tracks for 60 tonne tanks, 30 tonne IFVs, and 15 tonne APCs. I mean, it isn't like the different weight requirements would necessitate different tracks or anything. Can you imagine that in the past they even used tracks _and wheels _*_For The Same Weight Class_* of vehicles ! unbelievable.

[@thewomble1509]

@@shanerooney7288 That is not what i mean and you know it. Try learning to read analytically before trying to be clever and failing miserably.

[@shanerooney7288]

@@thewomble1509 , please elaborate on what you mean by *"No sane Gov't or army will consider having to use two differing sets of tracks for vehicles of differing weights!"*

[@thewomble1509]

@@shanerooney7288 If you can't work that out from the commentary on the video, I'm not doing it for you.

[@shanerooney7288]

@@thewomble1509 , when you write a comment on public forum, the point is usually to convey some form of message to other readers. You have evidently failed at that. I read your post. I made an interpretation. You said my interpretation was wrong. Despite being explicitly asked, you don't provide an alternative interpretation. Ergo, I'll be sticking with my original interpretation... which leads me to believe you aren't very smart.

[@wanjevi]

Band, rubber band, band tracks, rubber tracks, rubber band tracks....kept going round and round to avoid rubber band tracks but just found them self calling it what it is rubber band tracks

[@Herr_Scheissemann]

I assume that this kind of rubber track 'band' was not intended for military vehicle

[@GCJT1949]

The US Army had a track like this on the M-114 Recon vehicle. It was a total failure and withdrawn from service starting in 1972. Geoff Who learned to repair the 20mm cannon in 45B training in 1972.

[@steampunkster2023]

Well that was back in 1972. The engineering technology have made leaps and bounds a century later. Up until now some people are skeptic about composite materials replacing aluminum in fighter planes like the Raptor, although aluminum hulls back in the 70s can be shot through with a gun, and even decades later it wouldn't make a difference with the new composites.

[@shanerooney7288]

Did it fail _because of the rubber band tracks_ or did the vehicle fail for other reasons? Has technology learned from the failure and have now come up with solutions?

[@CH-pv2rz]

It failed due to the tracks failing and coming apart. On the flip side the most effective halftrack ever produced used then in WW2… On every Allied halftrack. They lasted all the way to the 2000s in Israeli use. However when damage by a mine they presented a huge challenge to get off and back on again due to the design of the running gear. Plus they burned easily when the vehicle brewed up.

[@BenVaserlan]

When will you talk to some Russian defence companies?

[@jimbotheassclown]

Why just talk to the junk yard attendants to hear the real truth. LOL

[@professionalpussypetter2929]

*Laugh in Western*

[@konfunable]

Russians are not competitive. Only 3rd world markets buy their cheap unreliable stuff. Ask Indians why they decided to cooperate with French.

[@NeuSatz72]

Just aim for the tracks and the ivf or tank will be useless. Funny the Ruski's don't use the rubber tracks. They use metal linked tracks with additional rubber on it. I say 1 : 0 for the Ruski's 😂

[@FRDDPFAL]

Nowadays any shot a tank gives to Another Disables It in some aspect. the shooting comes down to basically 2 or 3 shots from one of the tanks

[@vanessavinluan396]

Rubber tracked slippery when wet

[@shanerooney7288]

"Additional strength" of Rubber band track vs steel link track. I know a lot of people who disagree with this claim. But then again, those people are all key-board warriors and don't work for the company that builds the product.

[@CH-pv2rz]

More likely all this company has ever employed IS keyboard warriors because this track is totally impractical for combat situations with land mines, and IEDs, artillery, bombs, etc…

[@shanerooney7288]

@@CH-pv2rz Less weight. Less noise. Less vibrations. All three of which benefit the vehicle in combat. Common claims against rubber tracks include: "It's all one track. You can't just fix one section." Which is why _"Segmented_ rubber band tracks" exist "The tracks are all rubber. Too delicate". Wrong. The rubber is over a steel mesh. "You can cut through the track with small arms fire" Wrong. For the same reason as above, the rubber is over a steel mesh. "At risk from artillery shells / shell fragments" This is a silly claim. And is one of the ones you specifically mentioned. A direct hit from a shell will screw up both metal tracks, rubber tracks, and the vehicle itself. An indirect hit from the side is unlikely to hit the tracks at all. Due to the flat angle of the track, and the fact the top track is covered by the track skirt, while the bottom track is in the ground. From the front, shell fragments will do as much damage to the tracks as small arms fire.

[@alvydasjokubauskas2587]

2008 video...

[@brentoninsertname5948]

Call it what it is, a rubber band. Lol

[@ravener96]

Its a flexible steel track with overmoulded rubber, it doesent stretch

[@shanerooney7288]

A continuous band of steel mesh, set inside a rubber-like composite.

[@макслюлюкин]

the caterpillar of the tank looks monolithic, it means that if it breaks in one place it is necessary to change all entirely, it is not convenient and expensive, secondly absolutely all rubber caterpillars stretch over time, in the third on abrasive soils it will very quickly be erased, in the fourth and what with it will be if will come to move on the burning earth? in the fifth near the car burst explosive shells it is easy to risovat this caterpillar shrapnel. Conclusion it's rubbish and completely unnecessary idea for the army

[@thewomble1509]

Just one point, Steel link tracks stretch too with use . That is why "track bashing" needs to be done and track length monitored. After a certain number of link renewals the track has to be discarded.

[@sbgMike1]

not god vor kopat kann not repire on the plase