Somethings to keep an eye on

[assaulter_44d]

I was just browsing around and found some Vechs i thought you guys might want to take a boo at.

Army Tech SHADOW

Army Tech AL FAHD

Army Tech FCLV

Also I have noticed quite a few countries going w/ 105mm Wheeled.

The Pandur II 8x8 can be fitted with a two-person 105mm Low Profile Turret System supplied by General Dynamics Land Systems. Other weapons up to 105mm calibre can be fitted to suit the operational requirements.

Al Fahd The vehicle can be equipped with a turret for the installation of 105mm low recoil weapons on the AFRV, and 40mm weapons on the personnel carrier.

There are two turret configurations for the AMX 10RC: the TK 105 turret with light 105mm gun or the TML 105 turret with 105mm NATO standard gun, both manufactured by Giat Industries.

The Centauro Reconnaissance Antitank Vehicle has a crew of four (commander, gunner, loader and driver) and is equipped with an Otobreda 105mm/52 calibre gun.

The Giat TML 105 stabilised turret installed on the Vextra 105 is a light 3-man turret armed with a 105 mm CN 105 G2 NATO standard low recoil gun. :cam:

 

[dano]

The Shadow, to me is the interesting one.

I can and can‘t see Canadian Forces using it.
The hybrid engine is an amazing concept! It would be essentially valuable to any fighting force!

Judging by the design, it seems to be capable of major modifications.

Also it’s American.... So at least we know its going to be expensive.

 

[mattoigta]

"The vehicle is able to negotiate natural and engineered trenches to 2,500mm and 2,000mm."

Now why would they measure trenches in millimetres?

 

[assaulter_44d]

Sound Bigger I guess.

 

[chrisf]

Which translates as 2.5m

 

[Brock]

That‘s a really good article on the Stryker. Critics are--at least some are--going to start changing their minds soon. If those US Army soldiers had been in a M113/MTVL a lot of them would have been seriously hurt. In a M113/MTVL the brunt of a blast from underneath a vehicle is absorbed by the vehicle due to the flat bottom hull. In a LAV III/Strker the "V" shaped hull deflects most of the blast strength up and away from the vehicle.

I think the GIAT 105 TML turret would be much better than the General Dynamics Low Profile Turret--which apparently is still having major development issues. The TML 105 is fully developed whereas the GD LPT is not and suffers from some major flaws. Furthermore, the GD LPT really is no more low profile than the TML 105.

 

[Maxpower]

Being an Iltis driver I would give my left pinky toe to have the SHADOW as part of our fleet. But sadly we probably will never see this kind of kit in Canada. It‘s about time that we get some money for R&D of this type of equipment to call our own, instead of buying other countries Surplus and/or outdated equipment.

 

[RCD]

The way our politicans are steering us is to a more economical wheel type of force.
An if you notice, we are the only country that want‘s to get rid of tanks.
History repeating itself again.
For the 66 Stykers they would fit in nicely with the Infantry battalions anti-tank platoon

First in - Last out

 

[Bzzliteyr]

Brock. I regret to inform you that your opinion on the flat underside of an M113 vs. V shaped hull LAV 3 is misinformed. The underside of the LAV 3 is just as flat as the underside of an M113. The benefit of the LAV 3 in my opinion is that is has more "giving" components designed to absorb and dissipate the shock of a mine blast. The underside of the Lav has a smaller "footprint" than the M113 family, so that might be helping save it against certain doom in the event of a mine strike.

I am a tanker, and am qualified LAV 3 and for what it‘s worth.. it‘s an awfully nice piece of kit. I would have like to have seen more upgrades to the Leo family than a purchase of Strykers, but if you sit back and put feelings aside, then you will realize that Canada made a semi-smart decision in purchasing that vehicle. They were looking into the future, and that future is much like what we have been seeing since 1993 when I joined. Small Peacekeeping type missions and no real use for heavy armour.

All this country really needs now, is our own independent fleet of transport aircraft so that we can put the Stryker to use as the "quick response", air transportable vehicle it is designed to be.

 

[assaulter_44d]

RECON MAN

Rumor has it that the Anti Armour tasking is coming over to the Armoured Corps when the LAV 3 TUA is delivered this is just a rumor that I heard floating through the air I don‘t know if anyone else can add to this or confirm it.

 

[Maxpower]

Another think i just heard about the striker: When it was developed in order to reduce recoil there is a muzzle break that diverts the explosion to the side, effectively cooking anyone that would be near at the time of fireing. Now also, the gun may work well with HESH rounds, but what about your sabot rounds? In order to pierce most of today‘s thick armor you need sabot, but with most of the power of the gun diverted in order to make it stable it is not very effective in shooting sabot to great distances. Someone told me that the US are selling M1‘s for a bit more than a Million dollars while this Stryker is around 10 million apiece. Now the M1 is a good peice of kit, not a very good recce vehicle mind you, but at least with M1‘s we could be involved in a battle. I think that money needs to be spent better by people who know what they are buying. But again i‘ll have to wait until i‘m acually driving one of these strykers to fairly judge it.

 

[East Side Soprano]

Not a very interesting design... :boring:

 

[Maxpower]

I found this pdf release on the stryker :Stryker PDF
I believe that it said Canada is spending 600 million on 66 Stryker vehicles. I couldn‘t find a more official source, so this reference will have to do.

 

[Danjanou]

Hmmm...I guess you haven‘t been watching the value of the US Dollar vs CDN Dollar. Maybe in the future there will be a 25% advantage for CDN purchases.

Hey careful some of us are old enough to remember when our dollar was worth MORE than the US one.

 

[mattoigta]

Originally posted by Danjanou:
[qb]

Hmmm...I guess you haven‘t been watching the value of the US Dollar vs CDN Dollar. Maybe in the future there will be a 25% advantage for CDN purchases.

Hey careful some of us are old enough to remember when our dollar was worth MORE than the US one. [/qb]

haha my FATHER told me about that.. how when he was a teenager they‘d go down to the states cos our dollar was worth more..

 

[Danjanou]

haha my FATHER told me about that.. how when he was a teenager they‘d go down to the states cos our dollar was worth more..

Now I really feel old. Shut up Private.

 

[RCD]

If we wait a few more months our dollar, will probability be on par with the US greenback.

 

[Gunner]

Don‘t say that! I‘m sitting on a whack of US dollars hoping the Canadian Dollar will go down!

 

[Danjanou]

Likewise I get 5-6 royalty cheques from US publishers a year.

 

[Franko]

I WANT MY TANK BACK!!! LAVs are just a stop gap measure. Piece of junk. The guy who made the deal should be hunted down for sport. Wonder how the Stryker will make out when it gets battle proven? :tank: