Thanks Thanks:  107
Likes Likes:  259
Dislikes Dislikes:  10
Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 375
  1. #26
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    For air defence I would intigrate the turret from the Korean K30 BiHo. Twin guns, missiles, radar etc all on one vehicle.

  2. #27
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The South African Rooikats have an APFSDS round. And what do we use APFSDS for? Ahhh yes talking out armour (also known as tanks).
    In fact during the Bush war they would use their Elan90's and Ratel90's to take out Angolan T55's. Tactic was to hit them from the sides. They would do the same today if they got the chance. The T54/55 series is still the only tank they are likely to meet.
    I don't think the SAA commanders are shy of engaging armour with the Rooikats.
    Reason for the 76mm was weight as the primary mission is very long range scouting as well as "seek and destroy" in sandy desert conditions. And if there is a chance then take out a tank or two!
    By the late 1980s the 90mm was proving to have great difficulty penetrating the upgraded armour on Angolan T55s. Repeated hits and luck was the only chance their HEAT rounds had. That's why they developed the 76mm high velocity gun, and you're right.. Little apart from T55s to worry about in southern Africa. Denel did stick a 105 on the rooikat for the as yet non-existent export market.

  3. #28
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    504
    Post Thanks / Like
    We could do worse than follow the Russian doctrine that every armoured vehicle should have an anti-tank capability, based on the Russian doctrine that every armoured formation includes tanks.

  4. #29
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by expat01 View Post
    We could do worse than follow the Russian doctrine that every armoured vehicle should have an anti-tank capability, based on the Russian doctrine that every armoured formation includes tanks.
    But in that case I'd stick a RWS that also has ATGW on the IFVs. Mind you' I'd rather have the Samson Dual with HMG and 40mm AGL and the ATGM. Or 30x113 and GPMG.
    Last edited by Graylion; 29th August 2016 at 08:55.

  5. #30
    Captain Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    Last time TERREX (Not Terex, they make construction excavators) didn't make the cut as it was not in full production, while Mowag and Pandur were already in full production and used by other armies.
    TERREX has a long way to come yet. Singapore are still currently the only operators. The USMC version under development is coming in currently at $7.5m per unit.
    Terrex was not offered by Timoney the last time around. Bushmaster was their offering. With Bushmaster being 4 x 4 and the tender specifying 6 x 6 it wasn't considered. In the end an 8 x 8 variant was selected as we all know.

  6. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  7. #31
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    As for the logic of sticking a large gun like the 120mm on a 8x8 such as the Centauro rather than ATGW'S is
    (a) Rate of fire, a good gun crew will get up to 10 rounds off per minute. Most missile launchers are either single shot or maximum of 4 rounds.
    (B) The price per round for a good ATGW round is 10-20 times that of a 120mm APFSDS
    (c) The weight of a Centauro is half that of a MBT, this means it can be airlifted by a plane such as A400m or Kawasaki C2
    (d) You get two big bang for your money, first when it fires and then again when it hits something
    Last edited by EUFighter; 29th August 2016 at 16:39.

  8. #32
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    As for the logic of sticking a large gun like the 120mm on a 8x8 such as the Centauro rather than ATGW'S is
    (a) Rate of fire, a good gun crew will get up to 10 rounds off per minute. Most missile launchers are either single shot or maximum of 4 rounds.
    (B) The price per round for a good ATGW round is 10-20 times that of a 120mm APFSDS
    (c) The weight of a Centauro is half that of a MBT, this means it can be airlifted by a plane such as A400m or Kawasaki C2
    (d) You get two big bang for your money, first when it fires and then again when it hits something
    But you can stick ATGW on APC - not so much a 120mm. As for mixing it up with more modern MBTs, that is a losing proposition of course. I am quite frankly more thinking given our Nordic buddies a hand in the Baltics if so needed. For Africa I agree that a gun is probably better. Do we know what 90mm the South Africans used and how it compares with the Cockerill 90 MP?
    Last edited by Graylion; 29th August 2016 at 17:21.

  9. #33
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    What you can stick on an APC depends on what payload it can carry. APC's such as the CV90 series or the AMV-XP have a maximum vehicle weight of 35tons. This gives them enough payload to carry a turret with a 105mm or 120mm. Of course then is no space for anyone other than the crew.
    For an IFV version the Hitfist turret can be fitted with Spike missiles alongside the 30mm chaingun.

  10. #34
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    What you can stick on an APC depends on what payload it can carry. APC's such as the CV90 series or the AMV-XP have a maximum vehicle weight of 35tons. This gives them enough payload to carry a turret with a 105mm or 120mm. Of course then is no space for anyone other than the crew.
    For an IFV version the Hitfist turret can be fitted with Spike missiles alongside the 30mm chaingun.
    Buy why have a manned turret? These guys think they are history. And I am not sure about IFVs. I'd go with a decently armed APC. As I said before - Samson Dual with 2 added ATGM. If every APC carries ATGM this could make life more difficult for armour.
    Last edited by Graylion; 29th August 2016 at 20:20.

  11. #35
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    So what would you battalion look like if it incorporates, say 120mm, T7 and AMOS?

  12. #36
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,360
    Post Thanks / Like
    It would get to fire about once every ten years for a start. The more pressing need is more a Scorpion replacement and a revamp of the Mowags.

  13. Likes DeV liked this post
  14. #37
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    I would have one platoon of 4 AMV-120's, a battery of 4 AMV-T7's and a battery of 4 AMV-AMOS's.
    3 companies of AMV's each with 4 platoons of 2 AMV-35's and 2 AMV's with a dual RWS's.
    I would have 2 platoons with AMV's fitted for ISTAR /RSTA

  15. #38
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    I would have one platoon of 4 AMV-120's, a battery of 4 AMV-T7's and a battery of 4 AMV-AMOS's.
    3 companies of AMV's each with 4 platoons of 2 AMV-35's and 2 AMV's with a dual RWS's.
    I would have 2 platoons with AMV's fitted for ISTAR /RSTA
    Why the mixed guns in the infantry platoons?

    What is RSTA? And the ISTAR platoons need drones IMO.

  16. #39
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,761
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    What is RSTA? And the ISTAR platoons need drones IMO.
    Recconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition

    Drones carried in the vehicles

  17. #40
    BQMS spider pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    517
    Post Thanks / Like
    The cars won't be replaced until 2020 from what I have heard. So powers that be have plenty of time to put out a realistic tender and let select crews test them. I'd say they'll stick with near enough the weapons systems they have with exception of 30mm turn into a rws version. Possibility of a bigger gun for Cav element is being talked about but is simply a suggestion.
    As for rws with and anti armour capability, I agree but ca t see it happening.
    Sir I cant find my peltors........Private they are on your face

  18. #41
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    The reasons for fitting two different systems is as follows:

    AMV -35 is more for open country where it can provide long range support to dismounted troops. The 35mm proved very effective in Afghanistan where the Danes had their CV9035's. They could engage at long range and destroy Taliban even when protected by thick local mud walls.

    AMV with a RWS is for urban areas where sometimes the firepower of the 35 would be too much. Also the long barrel of any decent cannon would restrict the turret rotation in tight alleys. The smaller RWS weapons do not have this problem.

  19. #42
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    The debate about RWS's versus turret will go on for a long time. I can see the advantage of both, sure a RWS gives better protection but the turret allows the commander to get a better situation awareness when they stick there head out of a high turret. And yes sadly this is confirmed by the numbers of Israeli tank commanders killed as even today they stick there heads out for a better view.

  20. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  21. #43
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    504
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    But you can stick ATGW on APC - not so much a 120mm. As for mixing it up with more modern MBTs, that is a losing proposition of course. I am quite frankly more thinking given our Nordic buddies a hand in the Baltics if so needed. For Africa I agree that a gun is probably better. Do we know what 90mm the South Africans used and how it compares with the Cockerill 90 MP?
    The SA 90mm was a licence-built version of the GIAT 90mm, so if I'm not mistaken the SADF noddy cars were using the same weapon as Ireland's. As I said, they were considered obsolete by 1990 and were mounting anti-tank missiles as well. The Cockerill firing APFSDS sounds better, but is it better enough to be worth considering?

  22. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  23. #44
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    356
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Stryker MGS had a 105mm fitted to basically a Piranha III. The CM32, the Centauro and japanese MCV 8x8 tank destroyers all have a 105mm gun. Although the italians are upgrading to a 120mm.

    I would say skip the 90mm and go for one of the bigger calibre weapons. 105/120mm ammo is more widely available.

  24. #45
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by expat01 View Post
    By the late 1980s the 90mm was proving to have great difficulty penetrating the upgraded armour on Angolan T55s. Repeated hits and luck was the only chance their HEAT rounds had. That's why they developed the 76mm high velocity gun, and you're right.. Little apart from T55s to worry about in southern Africa. Denel did stick a 105 on the rooikat for the as yet non-existent export market.

    There is an obsession with 90mm guns on armoured vehicles on this board that borders on the ridiculous, as it’s an old low velocity gun, and the type of ammunition it fires is also dated. As you rightly point out the SADF were lucky and truth be told had Angolan tank crews higher levels of training it would have been a different story .I suspect that many who praise it have never seen it or 30mm ammunition in action, 30mm is miles ahead

    The us army have a paper project at the moment called "mobile protected firepower" which is essentially going to provide light tank for the us army sometime in the early 20’s, from the little that’s been published about it, the vehicle appears to have a turret which will have a 50mm bushmaster and twin javelins, which they believe will provide direct fire support for the infantry units and take anything up to T72 level armour out. There are other projects in development provide cannons on AFV between the 50-60mm range (the Germans even mounted a 57mm bofors on their marders back in the 1980’s) and I suspect in ten years’ time guns in that range of calibre will increasingly be fitted to AFV.

  25. Thanks na grohmití thanked for this post
    Likes EUFighter, DeV liked this post
  26. #46
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    There is an obsession with 90mm guns on armoured vehicles on this board that borders on the ridiculous, as it’s an old low velocity gun, and the type of ammunition it fires is also dated. As you rightly point out the SADF were lucky and truth be told had Angolan tank crews higher levels of training it would have been a different story .I suspect that many who praise it have never seen it or 30mm ammunition in action, 30mm is miles ahead

    The us army have a paper project at the moment called "mobile protected firepower" which is essentially going to provide light tank for the us army sometime in the early 20’s, from the little that’s been published about it, the vehicle appears to have a turret which will have a 50mm bushmaster and twin javelins, which they believe will provide direct fire support for the infantry units and take anything up to T72 level armour out. There are other projects in development provide cannons on AFV between the 50-60mm range (the Germans even mounted a 57mm bofors on their marders back in the 1980’s) and I suspect in ten years’ time guns in that range of calibre will increasingly be fitted to AFV.
    Isn't that the 90mm LP you are talking about? This is the one I mean:

  27. #47
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Don't take any corners at speed with that. I estimate overall height to be about 5-6m?
    Well, there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that Neil will be taking over both branches, and some of you will lose your jobs. Those of you who are kept on will have to relocate to Swindon, if you wanna stay. I know, gutting. On a more positive note, the good news is, I've been promoted, so... every cloud. You're still thinking about the bad news aren't you?

  28. Likes DeV liked this post
  29. #48
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    it even has a stove fitted!

  30. Likes Orion, pym, sofa liked this post
  31. #49
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The reasons for fitting two different systems is as follows:

    AMV -35 is more for open country where it can provide long range support to dismounted troops. The 35mm proved very effective in Afghanistan where the Danes had their CV9035's. They could engage at long range and destroy Taliban even when protected by thick local mud walls.

    AMV with a RWS is for urban areas where sometimes the firepower of the 35 would be too much. Also the long barrel of any decent cannon would restrict the turret rotation in tight alleys. The smaller RWS weapons do not have this problem.
    kellys heros anyone...

  32. Likes Flamingo, Shaqra liked this post
  33. #50
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    945
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by restless View Post
    kellys heros anyone...
    Ah childhood memories...

  34. Likes restless, EUFighter liked this post

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
  •