New MBT(Leo 2, M1A2, or Challenger 2), new light tank (Stingray), or new DFSV (M8 or MGS)?

[Zipper]

Yaniv - Sigh, if only we could convince our government of the need to spend the money and it would fit with our operational outlook. Otherwise it is a fine set of vehicles that you guys have created.

GW - I would guess your right in many cases. But I interpreted Majoor's OWS stations to be something that is "set up" and capable of holding that ground with something like a squad to platoon inside. It is only mobile if you break it apart and transport it to another site. Kind of like those modular fire bases in the movie Starship Troopers.

Or, its almost like we are talking of coming up with something out of a science fiction novel (movie) where you have a moving pillbox with automated gun turrets on all quarters and capable of going "through" buildings while still being able to carry an infantry support unit. Sheesh, what a sight that would be. Kind of a larger tank with guns all around (360 simultaneous fire arc).

Someone put a call into the galatic empire will ya?

 

[a_majoor]

The "Urban Gunfighter" is an idea for an escort vehicle which has armoured mobility and protection, and firepower to support dismounted infantry in complex terrain, such as urban ops.

It needs to cover a 3600 arc, as well as be able to shoot up into the rooftops and down at basement windows, but the illustration of an Achzarit shows the broad outline of the vehicle. This Achzarit is hatches up, the front weapons station is an OWS with a 7.62mm GPMG, and there are two pintle mounted GPMGs on either side. If these were replaced by OWS, then the crew could fight while protected by armour, and cover multiple arcs and multiple engagements. Heavier weapons like an HMG or AGL are probably required for this role, and OWS mounts with wide vertical arcs are also needed.

"New" doctrine suggests armoured vehicles should act as cut offs, which the gunfighter could do, but the armour would also allow it to provide intimate support, and it could be used in a defensive position as well. The second picture shows an Achzarit operating in urban terrain; there would not be much time or space to fend off an attack, hence the armour protection.

 

[Zipper]

This conversation is probably better suited to your new thread on future armoured vehicles Majoor. But I see your point. However the vehicle in the pictures seems to me to NOT have any of the requirements such as 360 fire arc and ability to fire high and/or low?

I guess it has yet to be produced yet.

Also, this idea of having urban specific vehicles sounds great. But it seems to me that there are few countries in the world (US, Britain (barely), China, etc.) that could support such specific formations, and even the idea of forming Urban Divisions with which to use them. We sure as hell could not.

 

[McG]

This conversation is probably better suited to your new thread on future armoured vehicles Majoor.

There are Heavy APC threads: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/28040.0.html

 

[baboon6]

Now this is what I call a wheeled fire support vehicle
www.army-technology.com/projects/rooikat

 

[Tanky]

12Alfa - Sorry but you have been playing too many computer games - the ones where 4 Abrams defeat over 200 enemy tanks in about 11 minutes.

Please state your sources to back up your preposterous claims.  I had to laugh at the way you granted victory to the Abrams over ATGMs and then went on to claim that the Russian ECM is easily 'defeated' 'by western systems'.  The Arbams' optimal range is 1500 metres, by which time it could have easily been blown away since the T-90/T-80 series of tanks can target it and destory it with ATGMs aimed at the top of the turret etc.

Tyr to live in reality and not in a world of computer game induced hubris.

regards,

Alex

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

The Scorpian (like the German metal band it was named after) is a somewhat cool if old design.  That being said, it did fill the role of light tank rather well.  It could be transported by air or sea with greater ease than larger vehicles, had some firepower and could go just about anywhere.  I understand that they did quite well in the Falklands.  

I would certainly be interested in a modern incarnation of the Scorpian idea, but not necessarily the Scorpian with the 90mm that was kicking around.   A small, light tank with tracks and a gun capable of firing HESH/HE.   Modern FCS (including TI) with perhaps a 90mm firing HESH and you have a decent bunker/building buster.  You wouldn't count on it to battle T72s, but rather to support light forces against dismounted opponents in faraway places where the bad guys are not expecting to face tanks.  It would be vulnerable to RPGs, but so will any other vehicle light enough to be rapidly deployable with light forces.

Cheers,

2B

p.s. If you are reading this and wondering why it looks out of context it is because it was moved from another thread (that had been talking about Scorpians and Cougars).

Tanky,

Against better judgement I will ask where you got your 1,500m range for the M1?

 

[Strathcona_Recce]

Personally, having very little Tank time, I think that Tanks are a good thing to have, but the way the Canadian Army is going, with the public being the way it is, we will not have any heavy assets for quite sometime! I agree with the need for a wheeled medium asset, and honestly I don't think Canada will ever require a tank, as most of the "battles" we will be doing is going to be on harpacked roads in built up areas and you will need a very mobile gun system!
The MGS is still awaiting the American stamp of approval before we will sign off on it! We in the west are supposed to be getting it, and it is meeting alot of resistance from the troops. (most joined to be on tanks) It could be a good thing, if the higher ups and the older folks don't think of it as a Tank replacement, unfortunately thats what most people think of it as!

 

[TCBF]

Here is my prediction (You read it here, first!):  The MGS will NOT be onstream for the first DFS Sqn tours, and the Army will pull twenty-odd COUGARS out of the rust pile to equip the DFS Sqn. Why not?  Light.  Portable.  Proven.  Good gun in Canadian hands.  Lots of parts.  Made in Canada (unlike the MGS).  Besides, the MGS is just a $6,000,000 Super-Cougar anyway, right?

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Oh...my...God!  Someone in Ottawa is all too likely to read this idea and say, "Brilliant!  A perfect lead-in trainer for the MGS!" 

"Super-Cougar"  ;D

It wouldn't do much good.  To my hazy recollection, Alvis ceased making most of the turret parts ages ago.  Besides, I'm not sure you could scrounge 20 vehicles that didn't have turret ring cracks or similar "issues"...

 

[George Wallace]

Personally, having very little Tank time, I think that Tanks are a good thing to have, but the way the Canadian Army is going, with the public being the way it is, we will not have any heavy assets for quite sometime! I agree with the need for a wheeled medium asset, and honestly I don't think Canada will ever require a tank, as most of the "battles" we will be doing is going to be on harpacked roads in built up areas and you will need a very mobile gun system!
The MGS is still awaiting the American stamp of approval before we will sign off on it! We in the west are supposed to be getting it, and it is meeting alot of resistance from the troops. (most joined to be on tanks) It could be a good thing, if the higher ups and the older folks don't think of it as a Tank replacement, unfortunately thats what most people think of it as!

There was hard standing at Casino and in Ortona.   Have you seen the pictures?   There were marvelous road networks in all the major European cities - did you see any of the pictures after they were bombed.   Roads, Railroads, Airstrips; all cratered.   Anyone who thinks that we can go to War and expect to stay on roads and hard standing is ROTL.   I persopersonallydn't want to be 'Road   Bound' as that would make the enemies arcs sooooo much smaller and more likely to ambush me - heck just make the right side of any road your Right of Arc and the left side, your Left of Arc - Traverse you Arcs!  Those silly Canadians, it is like a shooting gallery, so easy to kill them!

 

[Zipper]

But GW! We're never going to fight a in a REAL war again. There will never be bombed out cities with all the smart weapons around. The idea of the other side using mines when there against international law is ludicrous. C'mon, all that cold war doom saying is a thing of the past.

We fight only limited wars now with complete air cover and lots of rear area support nearby. We only go where we're invited to go and play nicey nicey with the local populations.

We're the good guys remember?

:

And if you didn't get the sarcasm... :-*

 

[12alfa]

12Alfa - Sorry but you have been playing too many computer games - the ones where 4 Abrams defeat over 200 enemy tanks in about 11 minutes.

I only play 1 pc sim.

Please state your sources to back up your preposterous claims.  

Look up your own info and facts to prove me wrong, or go to the Janes site or other mil sites.

I had to laugh at the way you granted victory to the Abrams over ATGMs

Please state where a M1 has been destroyed by a ATGM (non American) if you can

and then went on to claim that the Russian ECM is easily 'defeated' 'by western systems'.  

This has been known for some time now, just like Serb defeated Nato Int systems in that war by simple spoof systems, this too can be found on the net.ECM systems are by large controled by computers, and thous have some limitations, these have been seen to be defeated by counter ECM methods, some simple, some not, but still they can be defeated.

The Arbams' optimal range is 1500 metres,

Maybe the co-ax, but the 120mm cannon can reach out further than the 125mm, but really its not the cannon, but rather the FCS and the ammo to penerate the armour at great ranges, simply the 125mm ammo dosen't cut it in that department comparied to western ammo, thous the reason for the missle, it can reach the needed ranges and has the power to do the job.

by which time it could have easily been blown away since the T-90/T-80 series of tanks can target it and destory it with ATGMs aimed at the top of the turret etc.

Tyr to live in reality and not in a world of computer game induced hubris.

Alex, you seem bitter, why?

regards,

Alex

 

[Zipper]

Maybe the co-ax, but the 120mm cannon can reach out further than the 125mm, but really its not the cannon, but rather the FCS and the ammo to penetrate the armour at great ranges, simply the 125mm ammo doesn't cut it in that department compared to western ammo, thous the reason for the missile, it can reach the needed ranges and has the power to do the job.

To further qualify that, it is the western ammo of the depleted uranium variety that fills that claim. Not all NATO countries allow the use such ammo (such as ourselves).

 

[TCBF]

"Not all NATO countries allow the use such ammo (such as ourselves)."

- Don't our sailors use 25mm DU on the CIWS?

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Actually, you're right - or at least we did.  See the link (noting in passing the typical CBC spin on the story):

http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/1999/09/22/navy990922

 

[TCBF]

Ya gotta love that 'Low-level radiation in the food chain' thing.  Wait until they read up on the flouridation of our water.

"Ice cream, Mandrake, even children's ice cream!" - Gen 'Buck' Turgeson (the Wing Commander who launched "Wing Assault Plan R" in stanley Kubrick's brilliant "Dr. Strangelove", 1964).

Tom

 

[a_majoor]

The DU penetrators and armour inserts on the M1A2 explains why American tankers are so good:

The third eye and extra pair of arms gives them advantages we just can't match ;D

 

[Zipper]

Hmmm...      ...our Navy uses it? Ok. Did not know that. I only know that we were not allowed to use it in the Armoured Corp.

Maybe they tried it. Don't know. All I know is that it packs a hell of a bigger punch.

 

[TCBF]

It gives about a ten to fifteen per-cent advantage in penetration, which means a much greater range for equivalent penetration.  In effect, the increased effective range has a greater battle influence than the increased penetration.  Most of the targets they knock out with DU could also be knocked out with Tungsten Alloy, just not at as great a range.

Tom