APC Development and related topics.

[Gooseman2448]

Hey everyone,

I haven't been active in a long while but, I check in on the forum every week. I still keep track of updates to military vehicle and oob changes.

I just came across this article and thought I would post it.

Russian IFV to be upgraded with 57mm AA guns as main armament:

https://www.armyrecognition.com/weap...57mm_guns.html

Cheers

[DRG]

"approved an armor development concept."...... means to me ( having been fooled more than once about things like this.... ) that this is going into the early testing phase. As time goes by we'll see if anything comes of it but I seriously doubt if they will be in service ( IF they pass field trials.....)before 2025

The more powerful 57mm gun will help Russian light armor fight APC and IFV and any adversary tank. It will destroy sights, heat imagers and other outside equipment or destroy highly protected Abrams tank by a side hit.

one of the things we are looking at this year is potentially adding the ability to damage some of the peripheral systems like "sights, heat imagers and other outside equipment"... we will see what might be possible once we get to that point.

as for

or destroy highly protected Abrams tank by a side hit.

you can do that now using an mid 80's era ASU-57 using SABOT on a side shot on a 2018 era Abram or T90 as well... so this is nothing new but going from 30mm rounds to 57 mm round will cut down on the amount of ammo carried.

You can knock out a Tiger tank in WW2 with a 6 pounder ( 57mm ) as well..nothing new

more on this..... a report from 2014
http://warfaretech.blogspot.com/2014...om-russia.html

according to that article, the initial test turret system carried enough ammo for under 1 minute sustained fire (20+73) but with autocannon we simulate bursts of fire so something like that might carry about half the rounds ( bursts ) as a 30mm vehicle

[Imp]

The round size is the issue, 57mm is not twice the size of 30mm probably closer to 3 times the size so ammo loadout is an issue.
That said despite the reduced ammo loadout France discovered putting a remote turret with advanced fire control on was more effective as it required less ammo expenditure for a kill.
Then there is telescopic ammo, cant see Russia going to the expense.

[DRG]

If with the 57 mm a "tactical burst" is 4 rounds for that vehicle/gun combo then if the ammo loads indicated in that article are correct the vehicle would carry 24 in a 12/12 split as rough guesstimate based on sketchy info at best

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
If you will allow it, it's inline with what I've done in the MBT forum, the following...
A1. BRAZIL/ADD/NOV 2018/GUARANI VBTP-MR/COPY UNIT 576/REMOVE UT-30/ADD/REMAX TURRET with 12.7mm + 7.62mm + SMOKE GRANADE LAUNCHERS 76mm x 4/SYSTEM INFO REF. 2// Ref. 2 contains FURTHER system specs.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/nove...rani_apcs.html
http://ares.ind.br/new/en/land-systems/remax.php
https://www.armyrecognition.com/braz..._pictures.html

Does the above format make it easier?

It feels good to be doing some of this again!! But then CINCLANTHOME is in VA. for the GD's "Sweet 16" on Monday!!

Regards,
Pat
Wait a minute, there's another one of those "ANEMIA" things again, sorry, just informed this one is authorized.
Director of the Censor Dept.

[DRG]

So there is no 30mm version ?
that seems to be the VBCI whereas the 12.7mm version is VBTP but I don't see anything about the 30mm version in service

In December 2012, The Italian Defence Company IVECO has delivered the first batch of VBTP-MR Guarani 6x6 armoured vehicle to the Brazilian army. This delivery is the first of the contract of $246 million signed by IVECO Defence Vehicles and the Department of Science and Technology of the Brazilian army to manufacture 86 units of the Guarani for 2014. In March 2014, The Brazilian Army has delivered the first batch of Guarani Armored Personnel Transport Vehicles to a mechanized infantry unit in Western Parana state.

So how do we get from March 2014 to Nov 2018 ?

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,

For 03/2014 UNITS 576 & 577 with UT-30, they are good as I submitted them. Also with 13 at 03/2013 my thinking was and I believe this came up when submitted in my last "Patch Post" they were enough to stand up a unit, my thinking now is a "company" of them if you will.

The following from ref below...
"Aug/Sept 2014: State of the program. At the end of September Iveco delivered the 100th of a total of 128 vehicles to be delivered by the end of 2014 (16 pilot VBTPs, 86 evaluation vehicles + 26 addons). The 2015 budget sets aside BRL 200M ($82M) for 56 vehicles.
An entry on the Brazilian Army’s weblog explained in August how the Guarani was “finally operational.” The 33º BI Mec (Batalhão de Infantaria Mecanizado – Mechanized Infantry Battalion) received its 1st 13 vehicles back in March 2014 and should have 42 of them by 2015. They are being tested in the southern state of Paraná near Paraguay and seem to meet expectations. The vehicle can cross streams as expected, though it has a slight tendency to sink further on its right due to the engine’s position.
Sources: Defensa.com: “Iveco Latin America construye el blindado VBTP-MR Guaraní número 100” | Exército Brasileiro: “Guarani finalmente operacional” [in Portuguese]."

From SIPRI Israel to Bazil timeframe 2000-2017 with no REMAX showing...
"Israel
R: Brazil (216) UT-25/UT-30 IFV turret (2010) 2014-2016 (30)
$260 m deal; UT-30 version; for VBTP-MR IFV produced in Brazil"
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-brazil-06048/

Why no REMAX? Well to start with they should have them already, again from ref above...
Oct 24/12: REMAX RWS. Elbit’s Brazilian subsidiary Ares Aeroespacial e Defensa Ltda. announces a $25 million contract to supply its stabilized REMAX remote weapon stations to the Brazilian Army. This is the 1st production order, and deliveries will be made from 2012-2014.

They didn't get them because of Brazils economic crisis (There he goes again about economics! Well it matters you can't afford to but it or maintain w/o a good economy. Look what happened to the ROOKIVALK AH of the SANDF, grounded the whole fleet for 18 months, long enough that I made the case at the time to change it's dates for that period of time and we did. When the economy improved they had enough financing to not only get them flying again but also accomplished a significant upgrade to them as well, also entered in the game.

The cost to South Africa? Well they were going to show case them at the opening/closing ceremonies when they hosted the "World Cup" and couldn't. There were at least 3 countries of record (Turkey being one of them and bought the AW-129's (From memory.) instead.) looking to buy it during this time, and timing is everything, and they didn't. To this day, and this is one of the best AH helos out there, none have been exported.

More on Brazils issues...
https://www.thebalance.com/brazil-s-economy-3306343

This is just one part of the formula I use in submitting dates. Not always right but, generally pretty close.

Don I hope this answered your question,, and if you missed it, also in the first ref above, they did an update dated last fall I believe, showing the contracts were signed for the REMAX. This along with my last post should work for the VBTP-MR with REMAX as submitted. I think you might have missed "COPY" UNIT 576.


Regards,
Pat

[luigim]

https://www.armyrecognition.com/army...army-2018.html

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.w...rt-ammunition/

Even for Armata T-15 there has been some testing with 57mm weapons.

In game we have IMHO too low T-15 protection values in comparison with T-14 tank. Remember that we are talking about the same shared platform. The only difference is that the chassis is "inverted". The rear of the tank with the engine, in the IFV is on the front. The front of the tank is the back of the IFV but there is a door for the soldiers. So there is obviously a difference in armor values but in my opinion in game there is too much difference between the two models

From http://www.military-today.com/apc/armata_heavy_ifv.htm

"The T-15 Armata is one of the most protected, if not the most protected IFV in the world. It seems that in terms of protection it is superior to most heavy armored personnel carrier and heavily-armored vehicles such as German Puma IFV.

It has newly-developed base armor, made of steel, ceramics and composite materials. Also it has Malakhit add-on explosive reactive armor, that is claimed to be of new generation. A front-mounted engine provides additional protection."

In my opinion, like Namer has armor values similar to Merkava, ARMATA T-15 IFV should have protection values similar to ARMATA T-14 TANK

[Suhiir]

I keep thinking about how happy the guys in M3's and Sd.Kfz. 251's were that they weren't in an unarmored truck, and now we have "APCs" with almost as much armor as a top tier MBT.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well I guess I'll kick off 2019 with the first post in TO&Es with a couple of FYI stories. The first was brought up in Amit's (Gingertanker) IDF OOB Thread with Don and the next is for my MARINE friend lest she thinks I forgot about her. After all you can't keep a good rivalry down, now can you!?!

Israel: NAMER IFV test fired SPIKE LR from new turret. The launcher can fire two of these missiles that can be reloaded from within the unmanned turret protecting the crew. I estimate the following: 1) It will carry at least eight missiles and I see the distinct possibility it could be ten based on the fact again, this is an unmanned turret. 2) There are still other system checks to be done, so I believe we could possibly see it in service as early as 10/2019 but I feel it'll be closer to 12/2019. It'll also be "armed" with the TROPHY HV. Note: Ref. 3 is unusually a little behind in it's reporting, however, it's still an outstanding source on the progression of the NAMER.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/dece...v_armored.html
https://www.armyrecognition.com/augu..._10208171.html
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...the-usa-06620/

Also on EITAN I know I posted some info on this to include the IDF OOB Thread and gave a FOC projected date. I just didn't have a chance to verify when I did that, so, I don't know if some of that decision was based also on the following ref. If so my apologies in advance. From the ref. (Now deleted when this posts.) below...
"Israel’s new Eitan armored personnel carrier is in final field testing with the Nahal infantry brigade. Its series production is scheduled to start in 2021. Once the Israeli army has received enough Eitans to replace the last of their old M113s, the vehicle will be made available for export."
https://www.armyrecognition.com/nove...n_in_2021.html

USMC: Well the CORPS has been chasing their tail on a replacement for the AAVs for almost a decade now. Even the ACV Program has had many developmental issues to include changing mission requirements etc. The process has now been settled and the first step of possibly three has begun with the ACV 1.1 with the BAE Systems vehicle having won the competition. From ref. 1 below...
"U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command at Quantico Marine Base are ordering 30 Amphibious Combat Vehicles (ACVs) and accompanying vetronics to replace the Corps's ageing fleet of Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAVs). A $140.4 million contract has been signed with BAE Systems Platforms & Services segment in Sterling Heights, Michigan. Expected delivery of the first vehicles is fall 2019 and the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force’s 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion out of Camp Pendleton, Calif., is expected to be the first to get them the following year."
So depending if everything goes alright, then USMC SYSCOM will be conducting the OPEVAL and possibly IOC evaluations. I feel though the IOC/FOC will be done by the "3rd AAB".
So I'm projecting FOC 01/2021. Oh that'll include the Grenade Launcher also being equipped.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/dece...s_to_usmc.html

Also this I believe I had gotten this fixed with Don already as I've been posting on the CORPS LAV-AT for some years (Since around 2011/2012) now. I believe as in the game now we had changed the date to reflect the following ref. and others at the time. If not Oops! and . Will check this later in the morning. In the meantime here's on of the better refs. on the topic...
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...killers-07373/

Looking at the "TYPE" now I remember this was a "minor" PITA at the time. Anyway LAV-AT2 as we had to call them, UNIT 018 01/2018 is good as entered.

Well I did say "a little later this morning.". and that last was well, a little later.

Happy New Year everyone!!

FOLLOW UP ON THIS POST!

Regards,
Pat