.com.unity Forums - The Tank is dead

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Campaigns, Scenarios & Maps (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=106)

- - The Tank is dead (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=51339)

Re: The Tank is dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir (Post 835536)

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99 (Post 835534)

For myself, I worry a bit that the whole light armoured, 8x8 APC thing has become very overblown. Light armour is useful if you are fighting a second or third rate enemy, - ie, South Africa v Cuba and Angola 1987-88- especially if you can move it, in useful numbers, quickly by air. Other than that, training etc being roughly equal, it is worse, in most respects, than having heavier armour.

So given they could put a low velocity 90mm gun on a Scorpion/Scimitar CVR(T) 'light tank' export varient, why not put the excellent 40mm gun from Ajax and Warrior 2000 on something like Scimitar Mk2 rather than a big heavy Ajax that is next to non air portable?

What I suspect is it was about 'force protection', especially from IED's that ends up giving one a over large and heavy Ajax that is neither fish nor fowl and does not deliver a whole lot that Warrior 2000 does not provide, beyond the ability for it to be crewed by the Royal Armoured Corps (ie, the Cavalry and the Royal Tank Regiment)...

It really comes down to - "Are they APCs or IFVs?"

If you try to make every vehicle an IFV of course you're going to have mass and firepower issues. The only time the USMC had an IFV was late WW II/Korea with the amphibious "tanks" made out of LVT3s and 4s, and even those didn't carry troops they only operated in close support of them.

With the current world situation of "low intensity" conflicts vs guerilla type forces IEDs have become the major casualty inflictor and thus the "need" for transports that are less vulnerable to them. But that of course means more mass and since it's now capable of withstanding mines and small arms it needs a weapon capable of taking out it's equal.

I totally agree a 40mm AGL or 25-30mm chaingun is more then adaquite to the task, I've never really seen the need for a 50/75/90mm weapon in the first place. Too small to deal with real tanks, larger then needed to deal with APC/IFVs.

The British Army has ended up with a lot of kit, in the form of light protected APC's purchased especially for Afghan, that it cannot yet afford to replace, although how useful they will be outside a COIN campaign is highly debatable.

The British Army also wants an 8X8 APC , after all every other army (US,Germany, France, Israel, etc) has them. The funny thing is I recall a time when nobody was all that impressed with the Russian BTR 60 series, that seems to have a very close resemblance to an 8x8 APC...

on the 90mm gun: 90mm SADF Elands (Based on a French Panhard) etc, did pretty well against, generally poorly handled, Angolan/Cuban T54/55-T62's 1970's-late 80's, although I am sure that would not be the case with more modern Russian tanks. Hence an ATGM under armour might be a good idea, especially if you cannot be certain of heaps of good anti tank helicopters overhead most of the time.

Re: The Tank is dead

Isn't the answer to ATGM under armour for the UK already available with the export warrior / desert warrior with its TOWs?

Or is the thought that the Exactor (NLOS Spike) can provide the facility to the fast moving mobile troops?

Re: The Tank is dead

Fortunately the USMC didn't go too crazy with acquiring MRAP type vehicles, and most of those they did acquire were probably turned over to the US Army ... they always like to collect special purpose toys.

I'm something of a fan of 8X8 APCs, their mobility is nearly as good at a tracked vehicle and they require a lot less maintenance on, and have a longer service life, with regard to their suspension system. They're also generally lighter, again due to wheels vs tracks.

Re: The Tank is dead

And what of the US Stryker AFV. It carries 9 troops, a crew of two, excellent maintenance records (better than the tracked Bradley).

Perfect speed and mobility for MOUT operations.

It comes in a variety of packages to complete a mission: an essential battle taxi, gun vehicle, ATGM, reconnaissance vehicles, mortar, engineer, and a C3 wagon.

No one vehicle does it all as the BMP and series.

And with the wire cage bolt on it take survive an single shaped RPG.

Plus it plays great in winspmbt.

The thing about MRAP, we make a modification and the enemy makes stronger IED's. The cycle continues.

Plus, these groups in Syria and Iraq change allegiance on a dime (or a quarter or a dollar). Point being, you give a group TOWs and next month a splinter group is using those ATGMs against us. The MRAP is short gapped.

=====

Re: The Tank is dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi (Post 835548)

Plus, these groups in Syria and Iraq change allegiance on a dime (or a quarter or a dollar). Point being, you give a group TOWs and next month a splinter group is using those ATGMs against us. The MRAP is short gapped.

=====

Rah!

Tom

Re: The Tank is dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi (Post 835548)

The thing about MRAP, we make a modification and the enemy makes stronger IED's. The cycle continues.

Plus, these groups in Syria and Iraq change allegiance on a dime (or a quarter or a dollar). Point being, you give a group TOWs and next month a splinter group is using those ATGMs against us. The MRAP is short gapped.

=====

Unlike civilians we need to keep in mind the MRAP is an armored truck not an APC/IFV.

It's good at what it was designed for ... patrolling roads and villages dealing with lightly armed guerillas. It was never designed, nor intended to be a front-line APC.

It's useful for getting troops near the battle, just like the truck it is.

Re: The Tank is dead

Oshkosh won the bid to replace the Humvee and produce Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) about a year ago. The whole of Northeast Wisconsin was thrilled. It's a huge contract.

So, whatever the intended mission was for the Humvee, the MRAP (Oshkosh Corp) took that over and now extends that mission considerably with the JLTV.

Now the extension to the MRAP is a hybrid if you will that can transport, protect, and fight bad guys in cities, towns, villages, and the country side. That's the big contract Oshkosh won to produce the next vehicle that as the names implies does more than transport troops to the battle (the battle is everywhere in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.)

Oh, and the idea of A/B armor kits continues on the JLTV. So, as the idea goes, as armor protection improves, Oshkosh makes a difference bolt on A/B to counter the improvement of mines and other threats. You don't have to design a new vehicle just slap on the improved armor kit.

Anyway, should be a real hoot.

=====

Re: The Tank is dead

By way of an update...Have been long tracking and posting on this from the start. Getting here sooner than some of you might realize in fact for the sake of argument 1 Oct. 2016 for the USA, for the CORPS they'll start getting theirs in 2018.
http://www.janes.com/article/63662/j...n-in-september

Others in my files...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/us_ar...ctures_te.html
http://asc.army.mil/web/tag/jtlv/
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...rotests-05147/
https://oshkoshdefense.com/jltv/?utm...FdcVgQodQecEKA
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...r-leaders.html

Also if you read the last ref. from military.com you'll have noticed how fast the weapons issue was addressed from the more recent JANE's ref. at the top. We're talking ref. dates here to be clear. Remember as well that the JTLV is only considered to be an interim vehicle for both services.

I hear you...Most others on the topic I believe I put into the MRAP Thread already over the years.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: The Tank is dead

Well we currently have the Oshkosh M-ATV which has been in service since March 2010.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_M-ATV
Looks like the JLTV is just a finalized production version of that.

Re: The Tank is dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by scorpio_rocks (Post 835544)

Desert Warrior mounts a different turret with a 25mm gun. The British Army is upgrading to Warrior 2000 with a good 40mm gun, granted if it was affordable and could be fitted on Warrior 2000 Tow might well be the answer.

Extractor/NLOS Spike seems to be treated as a Royal Artillery asset in the British Army.

I remain rather dubious about 8x8 APC's for the British Army unless they use them to replace almost all the assorted short term, urgent buy, stuff that they purchased for Afghan, much of which is worn out and almost all of which is less than useful for anything else.