Infantry Vehicles

[Maxman1]

I like to see something like this fill a lot of the other roles the M113 did so well. Sometimes a armoured box is all you need

How about this:

 

[Kirkhill]

The problem is the M113 really didn’t do anything well. It was not a fighting vehicle, and wasn’t an exceptionally good protected mobility vehicle either.

It was a bit of an improvement over the soft-top wheeled carriers it replaced.

Just like if you give somebody a 1 ton truck to carry a 1/2 ton load they will promptly find 2 tons of stuff to carry, giving someone an armoured box instead of canvas only encouraged them to get closer to the enemy before they dismounted.

 

[KevinB]

How about this:

Which is a decent Ambulance and tracked support/logistics vehicle, but it’s really only a support system for Tracked units.

The lack of a V shaped hull leaves it vulnerable to mines, and the box shape isn’t conducive to other blast attacks.

It was a bit of an improvement over the soft-top wheeled carriers it replaced.

True.

Just like if you give somebody a 1 ton truck to carry a 1/2 ton load they will promptly find 2 tons of stuff to carry, giving someone an armoured box instead of canvas only encouraged them to get closer to the enemy before they dismounted.

Agreed.
But my argument is that an IFV to support MBT’s should be armored like a MBT.

The Medium weight protected mobility vehicle are IMHO better as a Bison type WAPC as that task isn’t to conduct fighting tasks in a major conflict.

 

[Kirkhill]

Which is a decent Ambulance and tracked support/logistics vehicle, but it’s really only a support system for Tracked units.

The lack of a V shaped hull leaves it vulnerable to mines, and the box shape isn’t conducive to other blast attacks.


True.

Agreed.
But my argument is that an IFV to support MBT’s should be armored like a MBT.

The Medium weight protected mobility vehicle are IMHO better as a Bison type WAPC as that task isn’t to conduct fighting tasks in a major conflict.

For a change - no arguments

 

[IRepoCans]

Trophy protection system to be used on new Leopard 2 tanks in Norway, Germany: Rafael - Breaking Defense

The Israeli firm also said it's moving to next phase for the Trophy on the latest British Challenger tanks.

breakingdefense.com

If defence is going active, the fencer is ditching his shield and learning how to parry effectively, how long before a MRZR with a Trophy system and an RWS is as well protected as a CV90?

The Inf School's DFS cell had some fun a while ago defeating some relatively new counter-measures with TOWs, much to the chagrin of some defence contractors involved.

As far as these systems go, it's all probabilities of defeating the incoming projectile (which will also vary on the type of projectile). So if you're comfortable with a light vehicle that may or may not defeat an ATGM but is absolutely shredded by a LMG, sure it's protected.

 

[GK .Dundas]

The British experience includes North Africa. Where German tankers in Mk III's determined that the best defence against British 2 pounder AT guns was to stop just out of it's
range, roughly 600 yards. And using the coax machine gun the gun crew

 

[KevinB]

The British experience includes North Africa. Where German tankers in Mk III's determined that the best defence against British 2 pounder AT guns was to stop just out of it range, roughly 600 yards. And using the coax machine gun the gun crew

Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The problem is the M113 really didn’t do anything well. It was not a fighting vehicle, and wasn’t an exceptionally good protected mobility vehicle either.

I am going to disagree with you. When it came out, it was a very good APC and then it became a very good multi purpose tracked vehicle that evolved as the years went on. What it did well is offering a lot of protected internal volume, which most APC's did/do not. Yes there are better APC's out there now, but most of them struggle with doing the extra bits without major modification. What we need is another large armoured internal box to support the dedicated assault vehicles.

 

[Kirkhill]

Some observations about how the Aussie Bushmaster is holding up in Ukraine.

15 tonne 4x4 with a v-hull and armoured against 7.62 and shrapnel from near misses.

Apparently able to manoeuvre off road in Ukraine at up to 80 km/h - appreciated by the drivers that have to drop off their passengers and retire.
Surviving near misses from artillery.
Surviving RPG strikes and small arms.
Crew and passengers surviving mine strikes even when the vehicle is a right off.
Comfortable.

 

[KevinB]

Some observations about how the Aussie Bushmaster is holding up in Ukraine.

15 tonne 4x4 with a v-hull and armoured against 7.62 and shrapnel from near misses.

Apparently able to manoeuvre off road in Ukraine at up to 80 km/h - appreciated by the drivers that have to drop off their passengers and retire.
Surviving near misses from artillery.
Surviving RPG strikes and small arms.
Crew and passengers surviving mine strikes even when the vehicle is a right off.
Comfortable.

How much weigh was the Bison again?
Honestly I think it’s a much better platform for troop movement than the LAV for most requirements.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

How much weigh was the Bison again?
Honestly I think it’s a much better platform for troop movement than the LAV for most requirements.

Wiki claims 14 tons

 

[Kirkhill]

How much weigh was the Bison again?
Honestly I think it’s a much better platform for troop movement than the LAV for most requirements.

This is why I like the Bison
From 3:00 to 5:00
The mobility trials.

 

[Kirkhill]

CV90 - Sweden looking for a Hybrid Electric version of CV9035NL.

Sweden eyes next-gen, hybrid CV-90 infantry fighting vehicle - Breaking Defense

The commander of the Swedish Army told Breaking Defense he’s looking forward to “kick-starting” development for the next, next BAE-made CV-90.

breakingdefense.com

The Swedish Army currently operates a total fleet of more than 500 BAE-made CV90s in a variety of configurations including Armoured Recovery, Forward Observation, Forward Command, Mortar and Anti-Aircraft variants.

In November 2022, the Swedish Army also elected to procure a further pair of new variants in the form of the CV90 Forward Maintenance vehicle and Combat Engineer vehicles.

Ahead of any potential procurement of a next-gen CV90, the Swedish Army is already looking at upgrading its existing fleet of CV90s with Engelbrektson highlighting demand signals for BLOS anti-tank guided munitions; signature management; training and simulation; and general capacity to renew, expand and enlarge the family of IFVs.

According to BAE Systems Hägglunds, there are approximately 1,300 CV90s currently in service across Europe. A company spokesperson told Breaking Defense, “The vehicle has a combat-proven track record and is designed to accommodate future growth to meet evolving missions. More recently, both Slovakia with 152 vehicles and the Czech Republic with 210 have selected CV90 to replace their legacy infantry fighting vehicle fleets.”

HB Utveckling AB, received a $30 million contract modification from the FMV calling for an additional 20 CV90 Mjölner mortar systems for the Swedish Army

the army will benefit from a total of 80 mobile mortar systems,

500 CV90s (IFV, Cmd, FOV, Mor, AA) + (MRT, CEV)
Total of 80 mortars
8 mortars per battalion in 2 platoons of 4 in the Support Coy with the Air Defence platoon and the Recce platoon

So 80/8 = 10 battalions with 50 CV90s per.

 

[markppcli]

I am going to disagree with you. When it came out, it was a very good APC and then it became a very good multi purpose tracked vehicle that evolved as the years went on. What it did well is offering a lot of protected internal volume, which most APC's did/do not. Yes there are better APC's out there now, but most of them struggle with doing the extra bits without major modification. What we need is another large armoured internal box to support the dedicated assault vehicles.

I think calling am M113 armoured is a bit generous myself.

 

[KevinB]

@Kirkhill just to quibble they have more than 500 currently and are adding more, I understand total holdings will be IVO 750 units, and potentially more, due to restructuring.
Furthermore some of both the original ~550, and the additional ones aren’t in their 8 Mech Inf Bn’s

 

[markppcli]

This is why I like the Bison
From 3:00 to 5:00
The mobility trials.

You mean the driving around missing a wheel stuff ? It’s a capability of pretty much any wheeled AFV.

How much weigh was the Bison again?
Honestly I think it’s a much better platform for troop movement than the LAV for most requirements.

As an armoured people mover for sure. Anything getting close to contact no thanks. Ukrainians like it but look at their alternatives: up armoured hmvws, and sentinels.

 

[KevinB]

You mean the driving around missing a wheel stuff ? It’s a capability of pretty much any wheeled AFV.



As an armoured people mover for sure. Anything getting close to contact no thanks. Ukrainians like it but look at their alternatives: up armoured hmvws, and sentinels.

I totally get that -- my point is, for the weight and ability to fit in a Herc, it is a good NEO type transport / people mover for less direct threat areas.

Honestly for getting close contact / ATC stuff the NAMER is more my type of armored infantry carrier

 

[KevinB]

This is an interesting little beast

https://x.com/Heroiam_Slava/status/1702562789347283249?s=20

 

[Kirkhill]

You mean the driving around missing a wheel stuff ? It’s a capability of pretty much any wheeled AFV.



As an armoured people mover for sure. Anything getting close to contact no thanks. Ukrainians like it but look at their alternatives: up armoured hmvws, and sentinels.

I am talking about the vehicle as an armoured bus. A logistical vehicle that can move troops and cargo closer to the front than they can get in a canvas covered TCV.

I'm with you and Kevin on the value of lots of steel plate if you are going to roll over a well defended objective.

I would say that the Ukrainians are demonstrating that some positions that are less well defended can be closely approached in vehicle that have less steel plate.

But that decision on what is possible with which type of vehicle and the level of opposition, surely that is a judgement call properly left with the commanders on the scene?

PS - Isn't it more likely that an 8x8 will be less disadvantaged losing a wheel or even two than a 4x4?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think calling am M113 armoured is a bit generous myself.

The reason we bought them was that our infantry were running around in 3/4 trucks and during one exercise in Germany was deemed to have been completely wiped out. That was the reality of the day. At the time the amphibious need was deemed much more important than it is now, likley as much of the infrastructure was not rebuilt or expected to be standing during a full scale war. Plus the choice of APC's in 1965 was very limited, even the Marder had yet to enter service.