Thanks Thanks:  107
Likes Likes:  259
Dislikes Dislikes:  10
Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 375
  1. #101
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Banner View Post

    Anyhu, my tuppence worth is that the Govt should invest in something like the CV90 40MM variant. It should be used to replace the Scorps and also used as an additional brigade level asset for each of the INF brigades that we have on paper.

    How many vehicles makes up a squadron? (I have no idea that’s why Im asking) Is it 12? If so then why not get 36 combat vehicles plus 3 Command vehicles plus 3 recovery vehicles. 1 unit of 12 plus command vehicle plus recovery vehicle for each brigade and also a further 12 to replace the Scorpion
    But CV9040 is a IFV it isn't a recce vehicle

    To me if we have the same vehicle in 1 ACS as in the Cav Sqns that means get rid of 1 ACS and ensure the Cav Sqns have the full compliant of approx 12 AFVs.

  2. #102
    Private 2*
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    18
    Post Thanks / Like
    Question, why did the army request wheeled vehicles? It seems to me that we have a good opportunity to latch onto the UK's new Scout programme.....

  3. #103
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    So many things to reply to.

    Firstly, the AML90, it could not fire on the move as it lacks a suitable stabilisation system and associated sights. Also it put a 90mm gun on a 5.5t vehicle. A 105/120mm CMI or OTO Melara turret on a 30t AMV is a totally different matter. Nevertheless the AML90's gave great service over the years despite their many limitations.

    Large guns on wheeled vehicles have a long history, Sd.Kfz 234 an 8x8 the Germans used in WW2, is the Best early example. It at one time mounted the same high velocity 50mm gun they had on their tanks. Later upgraded to 75mm weapons. The modern version is the Italian Centauro, first entering service in 1991 with a 105mm gun. It had perform well on Peacekeeping duty and will now be replaced by the Centauro 2 armed with a 120mm gun. The main advantage of the large gun is munition commonality with the MBT's that Italy operates. They also developed an IFV on the same chassis the Feccia.
    The big advantage that a purpose designed vehicle like the Centauro has is the lower CoG. APC's such as the AMV or Piranha V have a high body due to the need to carry the dismounts. Putting a turret on the top does generate a vehicle with a very high CoG with the associated stability problems. But as the engine, Transmission, suspension etc are all in the lower half it might be worth while modifing the body to lower the CoG with a suitable turret. Sure Timoney could knock out a demonstrater relativly quickly.

    All artillery can do direct fire, I remember seeing the Israelis looking down though the barrel of a M107 to aim it at targets close by! The L118/119's are capable of firing direct at targets. They are fitted with a direct fire sights for this purpose even if they are better for indirect fire.

    We could fit a DENEL T7 turret but there are some fundamental difference between a SPG turret and a CMI or OTO Melara 105/120 turrets. The latter are fully stabilised and have sights designed for direct fire. This normally means laser and night vision equipment. They can if necessary also provide indirect fire out to 10km, but manually laid! The Denel turret is optimised for indirect fire with the appropriate fire control systems. If I had to go for just one it would be either of the CMI / OTO Melara offerings. Naturally if money was available I would buy also the T7.

    The CV 90 could be used in the Recce mode, just look at the Bradley, M2 and M3! Although today the difference is just how many sit in the back.

  4. Thanks DeV, Truck Driver thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  5. #104
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaque'ammer View Post
    Question, why did the army request wheeled vehicles? It seems to me that we have a good opportunity to latch onto the UK's new Scout programme.....
    wheeled are cheaper to buy and operate

    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    But as the engine, Transmission, suspension etc are all in the lower half it might be worth while modifing the body to lower the CoG with a suitable turret. Sure Timoney could knock out a demonstrater relativly quickly.
    bespoke vehicle reduces the advantage of the common hull

    The CV 90 could be used in the Recce mode, just look at the Bradley, M2 and M3! Although today the difference is just how many sit in the back.
    But look at the size of it

  6. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  7. #105
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    330
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    bespoke vehicle reduces the advantage of the common hull
    Yes, but those are mostly due to parts commonality. Patria, if suitably motivated, could probably be persuaded to build a lower hull with mainly the same machanics

  8. Likes EUFighter liked this post
  9. #106
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like
    I always thought the Centauro was the most obvious like for like replacement for the AML 90. I wonder if it was ever consdiered at department level.

  10. #107
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    887
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    Yes, but those are mostly due to parts commonality. Patria, if suitably motivated, could probably be persuaded to build a lower hull with mainly the same machanics
    Perhaps, but an Irish order is not going to be enough to motivate any major company into going off and building a new model, and even if it was what would be the price tag?

  11. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  12. #108
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    330
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Perhaps, but an Irish order is not going to be enough to motivate any major company into going off and building a new model, and even if it was what would be the price tag?
    Agreed - that would be a case of having a conversation and seeing who else might be interested. My ideal fire support would be a lower hull, a modified NEMO // AMOS with a stabilised turret and HEAT and HESH rounds for the 120mm mortar and a coaxial GPMG // LWMMG.

    Also, if one buys the Freccia one has commonality of parts with Centauro.
    Last edited by Graylion; 7th September 2016 at 15:35.

  13. #109
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    Perhaps, but an Irish order is not going to be enough to motivate any major company into going off and building a new model, and even if it was what would be the price tag?
    I understood that the MOU with the UK would allow for joint purchases to obtain max economy of scale savings, could not a similiar effort be made with Eurfor members as appropriate to allow items be accessed for purchase which would not otherwise happen on our own.
    Having said that I think we are very better off getting OPVs on our own steam.

  14. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes Graylion liked this post
  15. #110
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    I understood that the MOU with the UK would allow for joint purchases to obtain max economy of scale savings, could not a similiar effort be made with Eurfor members as appropriate to allow items be accessed for purchase which would not otherwise happen on our own.
    Having said that I think we are very better off getting OPVs on our own steam.
    It would if we were piggy backing a UK order for 500 APCs, it won't if the UK piggy back an Irish order for 100 with an order for 50.

    http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Lib...015_174233.pdf

    Not to be forgotten
    https://www.eda.europa.eu/what-we-do...ng-and-sharing

  16. #111
    C/S EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    We have maybe missed the bus with what support weapon to put on an 8x8!http://www.kmweg.de/home/artillerie/...itzen/agm.html

    They have already tested it on the Boxer and found it did not need any additional stabilisation or further modifications. Fully automatic turret with modular charges.

  17. #112
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    330
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    We have maybe missed the bus with what support weapon to put on an 8x8!http://www.kmweg.de/home/artillerie/...itzen/agm.html

    They have already tested it on the Boxer and found it did not need any additional stabilisation or further modifications. Fully automatic turret with modular charges.
    12.5 t on its own? 'bit much, no?

  18. Likes DeV liked this post
  19. #113
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    658
    Post Thanks / Like
    Eh , have you seen the size of a boxer? It's twice the size of a mowag

  20. #114
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like

  21. #115
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,150
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    12.5 t on its own? 'bit much, no?
    'Bout the same weight as a Scania 6x6 TCV
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  22. #116
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    When (ie if) the MOD ever sign a wheeled APC/IFV (that is good (and affordable)) may not be a bad idea to get in on the deal

  23. #117
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    522
    Post Thanks / Like

  24. #118
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Except we aren't talking about creating an APC mounted Bde (unless they find oil when digging Metro North and DART Undeeground). We are talking about probably up to 100 APCs @ up to €1.5m each

  25. #119
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Banner View Post
    Ok here is my complete 100% Amateur opinion on this.

    Firstly can a thread split be done by the mods so that posts relating to SP artillery be moved to the Arty Section? There seems to be some confusion here about the difference between SP Arty and direct fire vehicles.

    Anyhu, my tuppence worth is that the Govt should invest in something like the CV90 40MM variant. It should be used to replace the Scorps and also used as an additional brigade level asset for each of the INF brigades that we have on paper.

    How many vehicles makes up a squadron? (I have no idea that’s why Im asking) Is it 12? If so then why not get 36 combat vehicles plus 3 Command vehicles plus 3 recovery vehicles. 1 unit of 12 plus command vehicle plus recovery vehicle for each brigade and also a further 12 to replace the scorps.

    This is not challenging from a political perspective. Wont cost a fortune, provides a significant boost to firepower, can effectively take on T55 /T62 and is in use with a number of countries that contribute to EU Battlegroups.

    The downside is introducing another calibre of weapon. And also the crusties will go bananas about Ireland buying “Tanks”. (no bad thing and at least they are Swedish tanks that play ABBA as the default setting not nasty American killing machines. :-))
    Of course you omitted the fact that the running costs of tracked vehicles are higher than wheeled so it's much more efficient to move them on a flat bed than under their own steam.

    And the purchase price of a CV9040 is about 3 times that of a MOWAG.

  26. #120
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    522
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Except we aren't talking about creating an APC mounted Bde (unless they find oil when digging Metro North and DART Undeeground). We are talking about probably up to 100 APCs @ up to €1.5m each
    It just throws out the opinion that 8x8 or Mowag are not the only options

  27. #121
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by apc View Post
    It just throws out the opinion that 8x8 or Mowag are not the only options
    So go for either 4x4 or 6x6 probably less armour and definitely less mobility?
    Or go tracked for twice the price and probably three times the life cycle cost?

    Most countries are going 8x8 for APCs
    Last edited by DeV; 13th October 2016 at 10:44.

  28. #122
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    They will never get tracked vehicles again unless they are as light as Scorpions, because of the damage to roads and the sheer cost of maintaining even light tanks. If a track is only good for 10,000 km, then you have to truck the vehicle everywhere or adopt a very restrictive use policy, so a wheeled vehicle that can go anywhere under it's own steam makes so much more sense, especially on our limited budget.

  29. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  30. #123
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well on paper comparing the following from the brochures:
    Piranha V
    Patria AMV XP
    Nextor VBCI
    ST Kinetics Terrex 2 (they don't have one for the 3 on the website)
    ARTEC Boxer

    It looks like the winner would be probably the Piranha 5. This is mainly due to mobility (as protection isn't normally advertised and firepower would be similar for all)

  31. #124
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    658
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    They will never get tracked vehicles again unless they are as light as Scorpions, because of the damage to roads and the sheer cost of maintaining even light tanks. If a track is only good for 10,000 km, then you have to truck the vehicle everywhere or adopt a very restrictive use policy, so a wheeled vehicle that can go anywhere under it's own steam makes so much more sense, especially on our limited budget.
    Armoured tracked recce vehicle for the DF should be something like the German Weasel

    https://www.google.ie/search?q=germa...1-kI_4s9nlM%3A
    Last edited by TangoSierra; 13th October 2016 at 21:40.

  32. #125
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    Armoured tracked recce vehicle for the DF should be something like the German Weasel

    https://www.google.ie/search?q=germa...1-kI_4s9nlM%3A
    Too small to carry DE personnel
    Under armed
    Under armoured
    Poor surveillance equipment

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
  •