Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Australia's LAND 400 Phase II Program has passed another milestone with the completion of the weapons trials for the BOXER and AMV as the competition is still ongoing.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/june_..._80806173.html

Personal opinion is I still "feel" at this time the BOXER will come out ahead on this. We'll see with time.

Czechoslovakia... Everyone wants their EUROS.
http://www.janes.com/article/67740/c...w-tracked-ifvs
http://www.defence24.com/367643,cv-9...bmp-2-platform
http://www.janes.com/article/71211/b...ment-with-cv90
http://www.armyrecognition.com/june_..._10606171.html

2 HOUR EDIT TIME I'M IN HEAVEN, HEAVEN (Your supposed to sing along here you know!!) I'M SO HAPPY, HAPPY I THINK I'LL JUST END THIS HERE!! :p

Thank You Shrapnel Games and of course Don!! I feel another song coming on...NEVER MIND. :cool:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

New info/vid on the JLTV/L-ATV.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LusDBNxZhqk

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Chinese are working on a modular HIFV which is at least at the prototype stage.

Probably a tech demo jointly funded by NORINCO and the PLA(N) to try out the HIFV concept to see if it can be made to work with PLA(N) doctrine.

http://defence-blog.com/army/norinco...g-vehicle.html

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

The latest news about Stryker Dragoons

https://www.army.mil/article/192479/...javelin_system

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

If I missed it I apologize but how many Javalins reloads are carried?

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

If nothing else the 1st photo in this certainly settles any unit size issues for WinSPMBT.
https://news.usni.org/2017/06/22/mar...covery-testing

The article also discusses the upcoming ACV-1.2 (a more amphibious capable variant intended to replace the AAV).

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

FYI: Looks like China wants to broaden it's influence in the weapons export market further with the VN-17 HAPC. From the angle of the picture accompany ref. 1, looks like a 20mm and note the ATGW launcher one to each side. And at 30 tons, it should be well protected. A comparison is being made to the VT-5 LMBT. More on the new APS in ref. 2.
http://www.janes.com/article/73248/c...tection-system

GL5 APS: 360 degree protection with sensor (4) covering a 90 degree arc.
http://www.janes.com/article/73227/n...trates-gl5-aps

As a note about my post (About 2/3 weeks back in the MBT Thread.) on Ukraine's ZASLON APS, JANE's has cleared this up in my mind now. Based on what was posted, ZASLON technically speaking, should be a better system regarding detection as if you might remember each sensor covered a min. arc of +155 degrees of arc thus providing overlapping detection. The plus here should be obvious in that a MBT/APC could lose two sensors and still be well protected.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well not that long ago I had a discussion in the MBT Thread I believe it was concerning the state of the Russian OOB and what I had on file just myself in dealing with soon to be and projected Russian equipment. Besides all the fairly new stuff like the T-14, T-15, BUMERANG etc. etc. now we can add the following below equipment to the ever increasing Russian OOB.

But before I do it is important to remember that the "newer" toys of the Russian Army will represent a much smaller part of the Army versus recapitalization of existing or if you resetting platforms much like the ABRAMS with the SEP modernization programs. Plain and simply it's a more cost effective solution especially when modernizing a large military force.

BTR-87:
http://www.janes.com/article/73305/a...ses-btr-87-apc

BMD-4M Airborne:
http://www.janes.com/article/73314/a...ernises-bmd-4m

China is in the act of doing the same (So are most major militaries.) this time a new variant of the VP-10 APC mounting a 105mm MG.
http://www.janes.com/article/73292/n...hicle-variants

The theme continues with the USA and consider this as an ongoing update. They hope to reach FOC by the Summer of 2018.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/augu...d_1180817.html

Some stuff from the ARMY-2017 Exhibition just outside of Moscow. The photos might be of useful for our purposes in many ways.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/army..._12308171.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/army..._12208172.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

From the perspective of the game there is little difference between the BTR-82 and the BTR-87. Based on the specs from

http://www.military-today.com/apc/btr_82.htm

It has a marginally more powerful engine..12HP.... and a slight reduction in top speed.....90 kph vs 100 for the 82 ( but that's just one source......) it might have a bit more armour but that difference in power-speed might be " source distortion"......until there is further info I would be inclined to rename the 82 as BTR-82/87 but the 87 does show ATGM capability but that is not stated in the article

already in the game

knowing what is up and coming is great but I am more interested in what was just delivered to the troops

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

A couple of program updates...

Australia: After over a year now the ADF has declared that Phase 1 Testing in the LAND 400 program has been completed on time. This is where the ADF is evaluating the AMV 35 against the BOXER. I still feel "my gut" instinct has me thinking the BOXER will win this competition. Phase 2 decision will be made during the 1st half of 2018 when evaluation of the Phase 1 results should be completed.

You'll notice I'm using a new ref. for this story. I've been mirroring this site against my normal ones for several months now and am confident enough to start using it out here. I hope some of you might find it useful as well.
http://www.asdnews.com/news-71565/Te...(LAND_400).htm

USMC: The CORPS has ordered a low rate production of 21 AAV-SU tracks. They should be delivered sometime between JAN - APR 2018 for what amounts to them being put into a "reliability growth testing program" for as of yet an unspecified period of time. The CORPS up to this point, took it through an initial 1.5yr. testing program.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/augu..._83108172.html

Just a couple of quick ones, have a good day. Hoping IRMA doesn't ruin my mini vacation! :eek:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Looks like I need to change the introduction date for the AAV/SU to 1/118 vice 1/117.

Thanks sailor!

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

You might want to move that to the right about another year or so. The AAV-SU is just going into the next phase of the op eval is all. There are still concerns with the new systems added to an "old" hull design, in particular it seems there are concerns with the engines and drive trains on the hull. Also the unit assigned with these 21 units will be assigned the task of putting them through "real world" op eval and testing to identify any issues as noted etc. and offer recommendations for further improvements. This realistically will take another 9 - 18 months pushing possible FOC back to maybe JAN 2019 depending on what issues come up. Full rate production, I believe isn't scheduled to begin until 2023.

From ref. 1...
"A key area for the Marines to continue studying is the effect of the new systems, such as the engine and drive train, on the old hull. Leimbach said that, while everything fit into the vehicle, the new engine and other components may vibrate differently than the old one, for example; the AAVs were built to be reliable based on the legacy components, so the Marines will have to continue studying the effects of the new equipment to see what that means for reliability rates and maintenance procedures."
https://news.usni.org/2017/08/23/27689

From ref. 2 starting on Pg. 17, quote taken from Pg. 18...
"Milestone B in the spring of 2014 , and ten prototypes are currently undergoing developmental test and operational assessment. Milestone C is planned for the fourth quarter
of FY 2017 and IOC is planned for FY 2019. FOC is planned for FY 2023."
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS...A-20170524.pdf

From ref. 3 a well respected think tank...
The news here is as follows A) Addresses the issues from the above but, B) though off topic somewhat this caught my eye quote,
"The AV-8B Harrier, designed to take off from the LHA and LHD amphibious assault ships, will be retired from Marine Corps service in 2026. The AV-8B received near-term capability upgrades in 2015 that will continue in 2017 (Mine-This will need to be looked it.) in order to maintain its lethality and interoperability until the F-35 transition is complete."
http://index.heritage.org/military/2...-marine-corps/

Finally and this should "cap it off" from ref. 4...
A very good read on both the AAV-SU and ACV 1.1 current program status. On the AAV-SU in particular, it deals more deeply with some of the legacy issues the CORPS is concerned with in this next phase of the op eval. For instance the original pump for the water jets was one designed to handle sewage waste versus the new one that's purpose built for the job.

You (I) can see the potential issues that can arise from this against the hull from the equipment mounts, sound mounts will play a key role here in significantly reducing noise and vibration through the hull. For failed sound mounts can lead to failed and or degraded system operations and ultimately get you killed in the submarine world if someone is hunting you. They'll have to potentially access their sound mounts as well with the new equipment installed over the long term to determine from a mechanical point of view they can handle the new systems.

I can offer my expertise in this area as I was one of a handful onboard assigned as a "Sound Silencing Petty Officer" and let me tell you we have a bunch onboard!! Each one having to be inspected.
http://www.businessinsider.com/marin...siness+Insider)

From the surface NAVY side (The mission outcome is the same.) and for further reading if desired an over view of the "Sound Silencing" Program.
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/doc.../NEWIS9_7.html

Not what my MARINE friend I think wants to hear.

As much as I like new equipment sometimes you have to be patient as a general rule.

Heading back to bed!!

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

We'll shoot for Jan 2019 on the AAV/SU for now, we can adjust the dates later.

We also have the ACV 1.1 scheduled for Jul 2020 since it's suppose to replace the rest of the AAV7 fleet (presumedly the 1.2 version).

Lastly, the Harrier is currently scheduled to be around till 2025.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Done

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Taiwan is going to produce a IFV variant of the CM32 'Yunpao' armed with a 30mm Mk44 Bushmaster II cannon:

https://www.defensenews.com/global/2...hicle-program/

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

It seems that the Indonesian Marine Corps (obat79) has five BTR-4M APCs:

http://defence-blog.com/army/video-i...th-btr-4m.html

http://spetstechnoexport.com/en/news/76

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well they're here! Well really not so much here as much as over there-Germany to be more precise. The 2nd Cav. just received it's first new "DRAGOON" STRYKER w? 30mm. End user field tests are to start in Apr. 2018. If all goes well, the rest will arrive somewhere between ~Jul. 2018 into early 2019. Still can't confirm ATGW system as of now and of course the picture has the turret covered :rolleyes:.

Anyway...
https://www.armyrecognition.com/dece..._regiment.html

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Finland to order a test batch of MISU class MRAP vehicles for evaluation:

http://www.defmin.fi/ajankohtaista/tiedotteet?9_m=8998

Vehicle information (from manufacturer)
Capacity: 2 + 10 men
Top speed: 110 km/h (~ 70mph)
Weight: 16 tn (metric)
Carry: 10 tn (metric)
Swimming: yes, even on most armored versions (level ?)
Imaging: TI (front)
Armor: Exote (composite material, http://www.protolab.fi/index_tiedost..._Ballistic.htm)

https://www.armyrecognition.com/finl..._12611154.html
http://www.reservilainen.fi/uutiset/...nssariajoneuvo

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

To say I've been following it's development for awhile would be an understatement. This program for the USA, USMC and CADF has finally reached it's apex now that the USMC has begun fielding their version. I personally would recommend a JAN 2018 FOC+ date allowing for unit integration and crew certification training.

So for my Marine friend I don't have the time to pursue this further (We have something of a "BIG" event over a couple of weeks that'll soon garner most of my attention at work.) everything has already been posted, this might already be in the game only requiring a date change (Don't know.) but I know this is the final piece of the puzzle.

For CADF looks like yours is closer to the USA version. And they did not convert all of them to APC's back in 2007.

The ref. covers all of the above. Again this from DID which means further info/links are in the highlighted words or phrases of the articles with refs. listed at the bottom.

So "get hot" my indubitable MARINE, the USMC needs them as noted above. ;) You'd almost think I liked the CORPS, that thought scares the crap out of me!?! :p
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...killers-07373/

I on the other hand need some sleep.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Looks like I need to revise the dates on my LAV-ATA2 (currently 2015).
Thanks.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

It's NOT 2015 in the game USMC OOB...it's 2017........now 1/2018 as Pat recommended....that is " close enough "

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I didn't want this to get lost from the ref. as well, that beyond dates issues as I see it turned out, that the USMC will also be using the same FCS and ATGM as the USA. Might already again be addressed, so please bear with me as I'm almost running on fumes now, from the ref. as I last posted..."Second, the M220A3 TOW system is being replaced by the M41 SABER", (Mobile ITAS TOW) which is much more capable and effective. TI/GSR 60.

Concerning CADF STRYKER TUA the military bought the "Bunker Buster" TOW for them back in late 2007/early 2008. This off one of the links from the same ref. now reposted below.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...killers-07373/

Wanted to emphasize these points in my last but, just spaced them out-sorry for inconvenience, just now taking the long road around to avoid any rework on these units down the road. It was enough to present them the first time as old info was interspersed with these being tested with a different ATGM program that fell through as I remember which lead to also deleting a couple of units.

Anyway my weekend is here and our bed is calling to me. Good something where ever you are.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Since WinSPMBT treats bunkers as armored units it means any AT weapon is a "Bunker Buster" assuming it has enough armor pen.

This is a bit of a problem at times as VS any opponent with lots of ATGMs using fortifications can actually make your units more vulnerable then if you just used foxholes/emplacements/trenches.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Do we need to add the "New" version of the BRM-3K "Lynx" with 57mm automatic cannon AU-220M Baikal turret system?

http://militaryleak.com/brm-3k-recon...e-vehicle.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=2f66zIhENZ4

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Let me know when it rolls through Moscow in a parade......

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

This sounds like the Russian BRM-3K RYS which was a purposed Recon vehicle developed in late 80's early 90's and reveled in 1993. Then it operated with a 30mm/7.62mm turret. It's a prototype, that now seems to be a test bed for that newer weapons system.

"Early in 1995, it was disclosed that this vehicle is referred to as the BRM combat reconnaissance vehicle in the Russian Army, or the Lynx (Rys). It is also known as the BMP-3K."

Everyone loves a parade, however, look where that's gotten us with the ARMATA, ALTAY and ARJUN Mk II!?! They all have had them and we've been changing dates ever since, to include this patch if the inputs were used. It's something we REALLY like doing. :rolleyes:

Again Russian Defense Ministry Asst. Sec. said the ARMATA might not see serial production until 2025, as I posted last week.

Last I looked into this site it was Russian not too bad, but was wrong on the Turkish LEOPARDS, I have a hard time forgiving them for that one, though it was one of the best I thought I had at the time. :doh:
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product701.html
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product5170.html
http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index...howtopic=41909
http://armyrecognition.com/idex_2015...un_turret.html

No reports on a quick check that the UAE got these for their ENIGNA 8x8 IFV units. Seems to be discussion that the T-15 ARMATA and KURGANETS 25 IFV's are slated to have this turret.

The ONLY problem with vacations, no matter how long, is that they end. :D Go back on Thur. but, not before I see the "tax man" later this evening. :eek:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

After 3+ years of tracking the LAND 400 Program and having made my prediction of the winner, once all the other competitors were lined up, I can now say "I called the shot." Rheinmetall's been contracted to provide the ADF with at least 211 BOXER Recon vehicles armed with the LANCE turret. Those vehicles are expected to be around for 30 years and will gradually replace their current recon vehicles over time. Ref. 3 will paint the best picture overall of the developments and capabilities of the BOXER for the ADF.
http://www.army-technology.com/news/...r-crvs-4-09bn/
http://www.armyrecognition.com/march...0_program.html
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/

I'll stay on it until they get it.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

He's always showing off!?! :rolleyes: Don they look good. And if there's time for ICON work, which he likes, the mood must be good and the Patch testing is going well to this point, or it could just simply mean, I wasn't asking for them to be entered:?: :dk:

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Personally I'm going to be VERY interested to see the changes to the passenger capacity of the upgraded USMC AAVs. Fitting the units that make up a "standard" USMC Rifle Platoon and Company plus the necessary transport into the ten slot formations has always been a challenge. There are some disadvantages to those 13-man squads.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

If a Rifle Co (Mec) is bought with the SU as the transport everyone fits including the HQ unit...It just requires a bit of creativity if you buy the 2 man sniper tms

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

The Icons have been in the files for 7 years......eventually I will get around to re-working the gun ( now done for the Boxer and the Puma )

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

New Portuguese aditions:

US Army MRAPs on loan for Portuguese next Afganistan deployment
Crews allready training in Germany with MAxPro.

Portuguese new Pandur ATGM with new ITAS TOW

Thanks

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Since two-man sniper teams (shooter & spotter) are standard since snipers were officially reintroduced I guess we'll just have to be creative!

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/b...oxer-programme

So the UK chooses Boxer for MIV (again)

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I wonder how much of that had to do with Australia having chosen the BOXER for their LAND 400 Program. There was some industry speculation that given the degrees of terrain etc. that the APC's from the start faced some of the hardest endurance tests to date for those manufacturers. It really says something about the down selected final two candidates and specifically for the BOXER in general. The UK definitely could've done worse, that being said, they could change their mind again as well. They are after all facing some tough competition as the first ref. indicates. Watch for the TERRIX 8x8.
http://armyrecognition.com/march_201...tish_army.html
https://www.army-technology.com/news...le-production/

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Just read Andy's post it sure would seem like the BOXER has the inside track. I had forgotten that the UK helped develop it. After reading it though, I remembered posting several articles on the topic in regards to the beginning of the FRES Program, how long ago has that been now!?! A sign you're getting older, THE CLOCK'S MOVING FASTER!!

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well I guess it now official, UK has apparently signed the contract with ARTEC. The BOXER is in. I don't know if this new camouflage scheme will be effective though in the field however!?!
https://www.army-technology.com/news...oxer-vehicles/

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Yeah but the question remaining is......which version is going to be the "MIV"..... the basic APC shown in the photo or the IFV with the 30mm...

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I honestly can't answer that question right now. With it not projected to be in service until 2023, there is sometime left for them to make that final decision. If they follow Australia's lead then the answer would be yes. The plan is for them to be integrated with the AJAX but I feel if the AJAX falls behind the simple answer would be yes. I can also see where there would be one for each section of BOXER's as well for fire support. for now 2C/10P. All we can do is wait and see.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

There are a host of possibilities. The first one that springs to my mind is they may want a IFV version but using the same turret and 40mm gun as the Ajax.... or use the Ajax turret with a Rarden instead of a 30mm MK 30.....when common sense mates with national politics anything can happen.....

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1523532102

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I should clarify, Australia's BOXER was evaluated with the German 30mm. That's what they are supposed to get along with a mortar, command and ambulance versions. I haven't anything to indicate just a base model for Australia.

UK is to get model as shown, my speculation is again that if AJAX falls behind I would expect UK to follow Australia by mounting the 30mm for the sake of continuity of equipment. I do agree, UK does have several options available to them in regard to weapons stations. We'll just have to see what happens

Regards,
Pt
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

It's looking like the carry capacity issue for the AAV/SU may solve itself.

The USMC is considering eliminating the anti-tank squad of USMC infantry companies (currently 6x SMAW teams) and issuing the M3A1 MAAWS (i.e Carl Gustaf) as a squad level asset (replacing the AT4 in current WinSPMBT units). The SMAW may be retained in engineer units as currently the M3 doesn't have a thermobaric round.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

I'll wait until just before the next patch before changing anything.......so remind me again in late Feb 2019

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Yep.
The idea is still under discussion.
Not sure how it'd be implemented. Increase the squad size to add an AT-man (the way they added the M-79 Grenadier)? Drop one AR or GL (seems most likely)?

Definitely NOT something to worry about till the "powers that be" decide what they'll actually do.

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Allready protecting Cabul
Using MaxxPro & Oshkosh M-ATV by Portuguese Army

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well the USMC finally selected a producer for the new ACV.
https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Di...o-produce-acv/
BAE wins !

And a better look at the BAE vehicle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWoL2LIyou4

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Yeah...... I don't have to change the Icon......

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Yay!

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

Well I figured a better show a "pulse" out here, so I've just come across the following...

As many of you know I've been following developments in Australia for many years now going back to the development of the HAWKEI and some formation data I received from the Army concerning MBT unit composition going back to the Vietnam War. Of late it's been the LAND 400 program which recently down selected the BOXER. The LAND 400 Program has now reached Phase 3, this Phase is to decide which IFV they desire for the Army.

Before people get too excited, acquisition isn't slated until 2026. However their M113's are getting older, and though the BOXER is very capable, it's still not a true IFV, even with the 30mm RWS onboard, which is the plan for now and as tested.

However, the Australian Army has been very motivated and aggressive in it's recent acquisitions. Their evaluation programs are very aggressive but, the thing I look at is they're evaluating "proven off the shelve" equipment which might speed up the process, I dare say, for the possibility of acquisition and acceptance by calendar last quarter 2024 or Summer of 2025. Otherwise the ref. is only for FYI (Which it really is now anyway.)
https://www.armyrecognition.com/sept...forces_18.html

"Going Deep, Deep, Under" WQC speak.

Until next time.

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: APC Development and related topics.
 

China is being unusually active, the Chinese Marines (aka 'Smurfs' for their blue camouflage) have been seen with new or previously Army only equipment in their characteristic blue smurf camouflage lately.

Not including photos because China is China -- notorious for FUD or for limited prototypes being given troop trials and then disappearing forever.