APC Development and related topics. - Page 20

Suhiir · #**191** January 26th, 2015, 03:07 PM

I just hope they put these thru the same "final testing" they did the LAV when it was adopted.
Basically they turned the three finalists over to a bunch of average Jarheads and gave them a month to play with them at 29 Palms. Reporting on what they liked, what they didn't, how often they broke, how badly, and how easy they were to fix.

luigim · #**192** February 5th, 2015, 12:32 PM

One question. Why only M3 Bradley BUSK and no M2 Bradley BUSK? Thank you.

Edit: Only a question, I really know the slot issue in USA OOB but I ask for interest.

luigim · #**193** February 7th, 2015, 01:32 PM

Hi. Exploring the Russia OOB i saw that two BTR-90 units are in there.

I think two more slots for Russian OOB..

Regards

Edit: in addiction to this, i saw in USA OOB EFOGM ATGM.

According to http://www.army-technology.com/projects/efogm/

" The ACTD program concluded in September 1999. The US Army has no plans for further funding of the EFOGM program."

According to http://www.deagel.com/Anti-Armor-Wea...000959001.aspx

"Up to 300 EFOGM missiles armed with a shaped charge warhead and 12 HMMWV-mounted launchers were procured by the US Army by late 1990s. The program is currently on hold and there are no further plans to keep going with this program"

So I think was only a testbed and not a really fielded unit.

One more free slot?

Suhiir · #**194** February 7th, 2015, 08:08 PM

Russian OOB (011):
Unit# 233 BTR-90 (-) 01/103-12/120, UC=121, VIRSS=1, Weapons 151, 64, 49
Unit# 309 Unused unit (no nation set) 01/114-12/120, UC=251, VIRSS=2, Weapon 151, 237, 64, 49

Apparently Unit#309 is a proposed upgrade of the BTR-90 that has not (as of yet) been implemented.

DRG · #**195** February 7th, 2015, 08:40 PM

The BTR-90 is being used in limited quantities so will stay as a 93 code

There's no "309" in my OOB

FASTBOAT TOUGH · #**196** February 8th, 2015, 02:49 AM

SOFTBALL #2 Item #3...

First to respond...
1. At the time the BRADLEY "BUSK" was submitted, the references I used basically put the priority on getting them (Urban Protection System.) installed on the A3. The A3 is pretty much doing most of the heavy lifting now from what I understand on the front lines. And as you mentioned the slot situation is beyond tight.
Though I'll take this opportunity too throw out my Plan B here (And I have my Steinke Hood handy when I get torpedoed!?!-

) the UAE or as I like to call it the UAE/PITA some of the countries that make this up already have their own OOB's and trying to keep up with the equipment buys and upgrades etc., etc. I gave up even trying myself to do this maybe could we consider killing it and then dividing it up among the most slot restricted OOB's?

2. This might help concerning the EFOGM or not.
http://www.reocities.com/Pentagon/qu...6747/efogm.htm
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/efogm/

3. The end of "Jake's Tale... As a refresher he primarily served in the BRADLEY A2 tracks as a gunner in Korea and saw combat in Iraq. His unit was one of the ones chosen to operationally field test the BRADLEY A3 BFIST. Not to rehash from the previous posts too much...again the auto-cannon is a dual feed ammo weapon that allows the gunner to select between the HE-FRAG and AP belts while engaging targets. In our discussions and based on them his/my concerns are as follows...
A. Are the game units using HE-FRAG rounds as this was the standard round used by all types to his knowledge.

B. It would make sense especially with the ROF of the BUSHMASTER to have either an equal (And preferable.) amount of both HE-FRAG and AP rounds or at minimum, increase the AP allotment over current game levels.

Those were the game issues discussed somewhere.

The last is some insight that would make sense to most of you out here...

C. As a point of interest he told me the loaded belts had between 72-75 (He couldn't remember which.) rounds each. They NEVER had less than 400 rounds each of HE-FRAG and AP onboard (This matches most refs that show they carried at least 900/or 1000 rounds total.) however, when going on a combat mission they routinely carried much more depending on the mission and threats expected to be encountered. An easy rule of thumb as a gunner he/they used was anything less then an up-armored HUMMER got HE-FRAG and above that standard AP.
http://www.military-today.com/apc/m2_bradley.htm
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/bradley/

Regards,
Pat

FASTBOAT TOUGH · #**197** February 8th, 2015, 04:17 AM

Ran out of time to edit...
BTR-90...Had more but this from ref. 1/para 1 is from the manufacturer GAZ, "The vehicle was intended for the use of mechanized units of the Russian Army as well as marine units of the Russian Navy, as a vehicle for fire support, transportation of personnel, surveillance, reconnaissance, and patrolling tasks." and from para 1/ref.2 "A small number of these APCs are in service with Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs." we had a similar situation when I submitted the BPM-97 (And one of my very first submissions.) we then decided though in use with Border Guards we at the time could not connect it to the main stream military (The link can be made now as new information became available years later.) and we decided not to enter it. If you remember and those refs supported it, the BTR-90 situation is what drove the BTR-82 just over 3 years ago getting into the game when I submitted it. The BPM-97 and BTR-82 data is at the bottom of the refs.
http://www.gaz.vehiclemechanics.net/btr90/1
http://www.military-today.com/apc/btr_90.htm
http://tanknutdave.com/the-russian-b...hting-vehicle/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...sia/btr-90.htm
http://armour.ws/btr-90-apc/
http://www.military-today.com/apc/btr_82.htm
(Tie in again in the first para to the BTR-90.)
http://www.military-today.com/apc/bpm_97.htm
(Original source as posted in the very beginning of the MRAP Thread I believe.)
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/bpm-97-apc/
(Updated source Paras 6/7.)
http://www.military-today.com/apc/bumerang.htm
(This last caused us a lot of aggravation as well because some thought this to be a revived BTR-90 around the time we worked through the BTR-82 some might find that process interesting, it is all in this Thread. This is on my list as well but it is slightly behind schedule at this time.)

I recommend taking out the BTR-90 and I'm personally holding off on the BPM-97 myself though on my submission list again due to some still "lingering fog" on the subject. I would rather the slot(s) be available for at least one or two of the Russian MRAPS I know they're getting/have in the Army just recently. Just my "2 cents" on this.
Only one more Softball left to go the F-35 and what a mess it is worldwide but I will offer a very simple solution.

Nice of my @*#^&+! mouse to cooperate with MozFox so far!?!

Regards,
Pat

shahadi · #**198** February 8th, 2015, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Russian OOB (011):
Unit# 233 BTR-90 (-) 01/103-12/120, UC=121, VIRSS=1, Weapons 151, 64, 49
Unit# 309 Unused unit (no nation set) 01/114-12/120, UC=251, VIRSS=2, Weapon 151, 237, 64, 49

Apparently Unit#309 is a proposed upgrade of the BTR-90 that has not (as of yet) been implemented.

Ditto. This is what I see on my OOB11 - Russia as well.

------

DRG · #**199** February 8th, 2015, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahadi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Russian OOB (011):
Unit# 233 BTR-90 (-) 01/103-12/120, UC=121, VIRSS=1, Weapons 151, 64, 49
Unit# 309 Unused unit (no nation set) 01/114-12/120, UC=251, VIRSS=2, Weapon 151, 237, 64, 49

Apparently Unit#309 is a proposed upgrade of the BTR-90 that has not (as of yet) been implemented.

Ditto. This is what I see on my OOB11 - Russia as well.

------

THINK people....... I've had a year to modify the OOB's...... I pulled that unit months ago, that's why it's NOT IN MY OOB. My OOB's usually start changing within a week or two of a patch release. I figured by saying it wasn't in my OOB any longer that would indicate it's already been pulled

PvtJoker · #**200** February 8th, 2015, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Ran out of time to edit...

I recommend taking out the BTR-90 and I'm personally holding off on the BPM-97 myself though on my submission list again due to some still "lingering fog" on the subject. I would rather the slot(s) be available for at least one or two of the Russian MRAPS I know they're getting/have in the Army just recently. Just my "2 cents" on this.

Regards,
Pat

I don't have time to look for more references you already provided, but I agree with you on the BTR-90. From what I have read it has not been accepted by the Russian Army and it appears that it's no longer even being considered. The Interior Ministry troops (VV, Vnutrenniye Voiska) are using the existing pre-production vehicles, but the numbers are very small, and there is no new production.

Additionally, it seems that the BTR-90 was never even intended to replace the BTR-80, since it's much too expensive for that. The Russian Army still has a huge number of BTR-70 vehicles, which have gas engines and need to be replaced with something relatively inexpensive.