Thanks Thanks:  34
Likes Likes:  57
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 63
  1. #26
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like

    As a fan of the big gun concept, the lack of enthusiasm for throwing a few shapes in their advertising for this version is cause for disappointment.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  2. #27
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,065
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle View Post
    "[I]
    If you look at it in raw numbers only, you gotta point... but you shouldn't; we deployed 20 MBTs to Kandahar until 2011, and the effects they brought were disproportionate to their numbers.

    Buit you can't get away from raw numbers, there are less than 20 MBT in Afghanistan with ISAF and were never more than 40 in the first place, intresting that the brits left their MBT behind but brought their MBT based engineering vehicles.

    I'ver no doubt that Canadian MBT were very effective especially in the fighting around September 2006 when they were taking on enterenched Taliban forces, but the key system was the 105mm and the ability to fire HESH, would the MGS not have performed that task as well.

    And you cant get away from the fact that comparable armies in size to ireland don't deploy MBT and have got rid of their large fleets.

    If you look at the infantry battalion ireland can deploy overseas (and there was a really good series of articles on the unit in An cosantoir over the past few months) , then there are areas like the battalion mortar platoon and engineering platoon along with casuality evacuation that are as, if not more important than direct fire support in any environment, where we could do with improving out capabilities in before thinking about direct fire support
    Last edited by paul g; 10th May 2013 at 16:11.

  3. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  4. #28
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    Out of how many armoured vehicles?
    Thousands. How many of these were APCs with large calibre direct fire weapons lobbed up top?

    There are and were plenty of autocannon and HMG equiped ASLAVs, LAVs, Strykers etc (and CV90, Marder and Bradleys too). Thats my point - big gunned wheeled vehicles are not in favour anywhere in the developed world really - the MRV the DF here use is pretty much the ame answer as everyone else arrives at too, unless you happen to have a factory building 90mm turrets and another making the ammunition for it - in your country. I'm not arguing for a second that the DF should operate MBTs (in fact, I haven't really been talking about the DF at all in this thread), just that there are huge compromises associated with this type of weapons system, and that two countries that put a lot of thought into a highly evolved version of one (the MGS) have both walked away from it, not because the mission changed, but simply because it didn't stack up.
    Last edited by Aidan; 10th May 2013 at 16:12.

  5. #29
    Private 3* Jungle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    I'ver no doubt that Canadian MBT were very effective especially in the fighting around September 2006 when they were taking on enterenched Taliban forces, but the key system was the 105mm and the ability to fire HESH, would the MGS not have performed that task as well.
    I think the key ability was the level of protection they brought.

    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    And you cant get away from the fact that comparable armies in size to ireland don't deploy MBT and have got rid of their large fleets.
    They did, but for financial reasons, not because other systems are better. They are jeopardizing long term security capabilities for short term financial gains; I understand the economic climate in some countries, but once a capability is gone, it is extremely difficult to stand it up again. Until it bites you in the ass...

    Some countries could have bought a Sqn+ of modern MBTs to replace their Regt's worth in order to maintain the capability, without spending an enormous sum of money. Buying more tanks becomes a lot easier then reintroducing them in your inventory.
    Last edited by Jungle; 10th May 2013 at 16:56.
    "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

    Never give up!!"

  6. #30
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    35
    Post Thanks / Like

  7. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  8. #31
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    3,280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by acmatman View Post
    I'm glad I don't have the job of washing that afterwards!
    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

  9. #32
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Kongsbergs shiny 30mm RWS replacement



    Early next year, Army maneuver officials at Fort Benning, Ga., will test Stryker vehicles armed with new stabilized 30mm cannons in an effort to increase the firepower of the service’s all-wheeled infantry carriers. In February, the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence will conduct a “proof on concept” test using company’s worth of Styker Vehicles equipped with Kongsberg Protech Systems new Medium Caliber Remote Weapons Station, said Carl Sundin II, who is in charge of senior business development for Army programs at Kongsberg, at the Association of the United States Army’s 2013 Annual meeting and Exposition. Kongsberg began working with Stryker maker General Dynamics Land Systems on the MCRWS in 2008. The company also makes the M151 RWS that’s currently on the Stryker. Army officials at Benning’s Maneuver Center announced the service’s plan to “up-gun” Stryker vehicles in September based on lessons learned from combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Stryker Brigade Combat Teams first saw combat in Iraq in late 2003. The highly-mobile infantry force is equipped with potent variants such as the 105mm Mobile Gun System and anti-tank guided missile. But most Stryker vehicles are infantry carriers armed with .50 caliber machine guns or MK19 automatic grenade launchers. The Medium Caliber Remote Weapon Station looks like a turret mounted on top of a Stryker, but Kongsberg officials maintain that a true turret would consist of a basket that extends down into the vehicle and eat up a lot of space. “That would detract from the main mission of the Stryker — to transport a nine-man infantry squad,” Sundin said, describing how a true turret would make the Stryker “look a lot like a Bradley inside, holding four to five men tops.” The MCRWS can also be loaded from the inside of the vehicle, but the current configuration eliminates one of the Stryker’s four top hatches. Read more: http://defensetech.org/2013/10/21/ar...#ixzz2iOaS7jcp Defense.org
    12
    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

  10. Thanks RoyalGreenJacket thanked for this post
    Likes TangoSierra, hptmurphy liked this post
  11. #33
    Private 3* Jungle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    We are starting to take delivery of the upgraded LAV-IIIs, now called LAV-6:



    GDLS calls it LAV UP:

    LAV UP

    The program will upgrade 550 LAV IIIs of Canada's fleet in four variants: the Infantry Section Carrier, Command Post, Observation Post Vehicle and Engineer variants. Each will undergo a comprehensive upgrade aimed at extending their lifecycle to 2035. The upgrades will be performed at facilities in London, Ontario, and Edmonton, Alberta, and will extend from 2012 to 2017.


    These upgrades will allow for significant improvements in survivability, mobility and lethality. Survivability enhancements include switching to a Double-V Hull offering inherent and weight efficient protection from mine and IED threats as well as energy-attenuating seats at all crew locations. A more powerful 450hp engine is included as well as upgrades to the drivetrain and suspension. Turret sights will be upgraded to extend their range and gun control electronics are being improved to reduce crew workload. The fully upgraded vehicle weighs 55,000lbs (25,000kg), but testing has demonstrated that its mobility is comparable to or better than the original high-mobility 38,000lb APC vehicle that the upgrade is based on.
    An option for 66 additional vehs has since been exercised, bringing the total to 616 upgraded LAVs. The initial LAV-III order was for 650 vehs, and 13 were destroyed in Afghanistan.
    "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

    Never give up!!"

  12. #34
    Commander in Chief RoyalGreenJacket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Home of the British Army
    Posts
    7,757
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle View Post
    We are starting to take delivery of the upgraded LAV-IIIs, now called LAV-6:



    GDLS calls it LAV UP:

    LAV UP



    An option for 66 additional vehs has since been exercised, bringing the total to 616 upgraded LAVs. The initial LAV-III order was for 650 vehs, and 13 were destroyed in Afghanistan.
    we are seriously lacking in such a vehicle. why we don't just buy the licence to manufacture this in the UK by GKN or similar is beyond me, we have wasted so much time and money on FRES, it's sacrilege.
    RGJ

    ...Once a Rifleman - Always a Rifleman... Celer et Audax

    The Rifles

  13. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, hptmurphy liked this post
  14. #35
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    900
    Post Thanks / Like
    I could be wrong but fres not supposed to include a vehicle such as this, the preferred tender was the Mowag Pirhana 5..............

  15. #36
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by RoyalGreenJacket View Post
    we are seriously lacking in such a vehicle. why we don't just buy the licence to manufacture this in the UK by GKN or similar is beyond me, we have wasted so much time and money on FRES, it's sacrilege.
    That was the plan with FRES (and probably part of the problem)!

    Quote Originally Posted by northie View Post
    I could be wrong but fres not supposed to include a vehicle such as this, the preferred tender was the Mowag Pirhana 5..............
    The MOWAG Evolution was selected as preferred bidder for the Utility Vehicle in 2008, which was then withdrawn due to failing to reach agreement on commercial conditions.

    That vehicle developed into the Piranha V (selected by the Canadians).

  16. Thanks RoyalGreenJacket thanked for this post
    Likes RoyalGreenJacket liked this post
  17. #37
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    Can the 90mm MOWAGs carry any troops?

  18. #38
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,204
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Can the 90mm MOWAGs carry any troops?
    Crew of three only.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  19. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  20. #39
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    602
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Can the 90mm MOWAGs carry any troops?
    Would that not come down to the space the turret basket takes up and the requirement for ammunition. The B1 Centauro had accommodation for 2 - 4 soldiers. Ok so that was designed as a Tank Destroyer that evolved into an IFV but surely the Turret basket doesnt take up the whole crew compartment in a MOWAG

  21. #40
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,204
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Turret basket takes up a considerable space on the Piranha MRV, and its only a 2 man turret for a light cannon. The 90 is a far larger turret.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  22. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  23. #41
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    602
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    The Turret basket takes up a considerable space on the Piranha MRV, and its only a 2 man turret for a light cannon. The 90 is a far larger turret.
    Looking at pistures of the belgian Mowags with the CMI 90mm turret it doesnt seem to take up all the room in the back although extra ammunition would. I think ready ammunition is carried in the bustle
    View on black">

    View on black

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD411tvBwUE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBUF-txQdGs
    Last edited by apc; 24th January 2017 at 12:07.

  24. #42
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    577
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Hitfist turret fitted to the MRV has a cage with a diameter of 1.4m, the Hitfact turret which can take up to a 120mm gun has a diameter of 2m. Therefore if you can get 6 troops in the back of a MRV then 4 should be possible when fitted with a 120mm gun! Also the newest generation vehicles like the Piranha V, Terrex and AMV are all larger than our Piranha IIIH.

  25. Thanks DeV, apc thanked for this post
  26. #43
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    I wonder if BREXIT will effect the MOU with the UK?

    And how long will their MIV take to deliver ?

  27. #44
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    602
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The Hitfist turret fitted to the MRV has a cage with a diameter of 1.4m, the Hitfact turret which can take up to a 120mm gun has a diameter of 2m. Therefore if you can get 6 troops in the back of a MRV then 4 should be possible when fitted with a 120mm gun! Also the newest generation vehicles like the Piranha V, Terrex and AMV are all larger than our Piranha IIIH.
    They would be a great addition and give an extra deterent on peacekeeping duties

  28. #45
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    48
    Post Thanks / Like
    I can't see if this has been mentioned here already but, in General dynamics 2016 report they mention Ireland in the context of ordering new Piranhas. It seems to indicate new builds.
    pg 4
    http://www.generaldynamics.com/sites...ual-Report.pdf

  29. #46
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,207
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocinante View Post
    I can't see if this has been mentioned here already but, in General dynamics 2016 report they mention Ireland in the context of ordering new Piranhas. It seems to indicate new builds.
    pg 4
    http://www.generaldynamics.com/sites...ual-Report.pdf
    Given the speech in the Daíl stating that the contract is €50 million I doubt that there's new hulls, guessing more that they were limited in what they could say.

  30. #47
    Commander in Chief apod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ass in the grass.
    Posts
    5,030
    Post Thanks / Like
    The refit involves stripping the existing cars down to the hull and building from scratch nearly.
    Infantry Corps - An Lámh Comhrac


    "Let us be clear about three facts:First of all.All battles and all wars are won in the end by the Infantryman.Secondly the Infantryman bears the brunt of the fighting,his casualties are heavier and he suffers greater extremes of fatigue and discomfort than the other arms.Thirdly,the art of the Infantryman is less stereotyped and harder to acquire than that of any other arm".
    -- Field Marshall Earl Wavell.1948

  31. #48
    Lt General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,204
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by apod View Post
    The refit involves stripping the existing cars down to the hull and building from scratch nearly.
    Good practice. The US have been doing the same with M1 Abrams for years. The Armour is usually perfect and just needs a shot blast and repaint. Better then to rebuild transmission and drivetrain outright. Easier to do than part refit. You are building a new car around the original armour.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  32. #49
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,557
    Post Thanks / Like
    A proper overhaul, not a sporadic half arsed job, would leave the cars as good as new and fit for overseas service. If they do it right, the electronics would be up to date and future proofed.

  33. Likes DeV liked this post
  34. #50
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,727
    Post Thanks / Like
    Will there be any work done on the hulls, ie V shaped.?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •