Abrams

Isto · #1 May 30th, 2019, 02:43 PM

Is there a reason USA does not use ERA, VIRS or CIWS equipment on their MBT's ?

Strangely enough, they use VIRS on their SP-ATGM vehicles.

Suhiir · #2 May 30th, 2019, 04:01 PM

ERA ends to have adverse effects on nearby infantry and soft-skin vehicles.

As to VRIS/CIWS ... "Not Made here"? Tho the USMC has had the "Trophy" system for years and the US Army is adding it to their latest Abrams upgrade.

Mobhack · #3 May 30th, 2019, 04:18 PM

USA OOB has about 3 slots free.

Maybe some day an Abrams might make it in there with one of the new kits they are testing.

But what really valuable things would you suggest we use those few free slots for?

DRG · #4 May 30th, 2019, 05:03 PM

And when It gets introduced for certain it will go into the OOB... NOT before

mccarty.geoff · #5 May 30th, 2019, 05:19 PM

ERA has the neat feature of being disabled by a 9mm round within 50cm sq. doppler dish target surface.
If anything is missing from the modern US OOB it's M4s. All the guys are packing pre-Gulf War issue M16A2s.

DRG · #6 May 31st, 2019, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccarty.geoff

If anything is missing from the modern US OOB it's M4s. All the guys are packing pre-Gulf War issue M16A2s.

Four units in the USA OOB carry M16A2 so maybe you better go back and check what it is you think you are complaining about because " All the guys" are NOT packing pre-Gulf War issue M16A2s

mccarty.geoff · #7 May 31st, 2019, 05:52 PM

I imagined that where it states the soldiers are wielding M16s that it was supposed to denote the semi-automatic A2 variant. The US Army standardized rifle for the last 20 years has been the M4 carbine which only a few units are assigned in the OOB. Reserves and National Guard still use the M16A4 though. Similar receiver and only real difference is a shorter barrel in the M4. Though of course that means reduced range and accuracy.
Why do you put a space after your open quotation? Is it a regional convention?

mccarty.geoff · #8 May 31st, 2019, 07:35 PM

My actual suggestion for US vehicles though is the new M-SHORAD. Stryker chassis with Avenger type turret firing Stingers or Hellfires. Has 30mm auto-cannon like the Dragoon variant and a 7.62mm MG. Pathetic attempt at ground to air defence but, at least we're trying I guess. They're claiming they'll mount a 50kW laser on it in 5 years.

We'll have 1 battalion of 36 units operational with the 2nd Cavalry Regiment USAREUR probably next year. No field classification for the vehicle yet.

Suhiir · #9 May 31st, 2019, 11:40 PM

A few years back the USMC fielded the "Blazer", a LAV with a 25mm gatling gun and 8x Stingers, but it was withdrawn from service.

I suspect this was because the 25mm lacked the range and ability to deal with the Hind (which is highly resistant to light AA).

What they need to do is make a modern version of the "Duster" (add some Chaparrals) OR ... bite the bullet and make an Abrams based version of the Gepard or Tunguska.

The "problem" is the US tends to assume air superiority so short/midrange AA systems are pretty much intended as anti-helo systems. And to date the US has never faced an opponent with a significant helo fleet.

mccarty.geoff · #10 June 1st, 2019, 12:53 AM

I believe we're two steps behind Russia's level of sophisticated air defence. Our best development so far is the AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel. We just don't have missile boosters anywhere near the S-300+. New Stingers can definitely knock anything out 3km away but, after that I bet the chances drop hard. Russian attack helicopters aren't gonna be so kind as too fly low, steady, and without countermeasures for our little stockpile of Stingers to matter.
SHORAD Stryker is just another pigeonholed stop gap attempt at finally doing something about air defence. I bet the program will be cancelled after the 2nd battalion is built.