Medium Cavalry: Critical Capability or Poor Man’s MBT?

[daftandbarmy]

Thing to remember, they are discussing ACV-W not having a turret, a la bison, with only a MG and atgm. If this happens MCAV becomes the fire support to the infantry in those brigades.

MBTs, and artillery, are the main sources of fire support to the Infantry.

Everything else tends to be 'window dressing' to the main event and they don't last in a toe to toe punch up which, of course, is what decisive armoured warfare is all about.

 

[GK .Dundas]

We've been using the concept of the Direct Fire Support Vehicle for almost 50 years as an excuse not to purchase MBTs
And without actually proving the concept actually works in Peer on Peer conflicts.
Silly me I forgot Canada doesn't do wars.

 

[daftandbarmy]

We've been using the concept of the Direct Fire Support Vehicle for almost 50 years as an excuse not to purchase MBTs
And without actually proving the concept actually works in Peer on Peer conflicts.
Silly me I forgot Canada doesn't do wars.

I recall a fun little exchange between a couple of senior people about the 'Future of the Army'.

First guy: "We'll all be zooming around in space ships"

Second guy: "While the heavy armoured brigades occupy your capital city."

 

[KevinB]

Thing to remember, they are discussing ACV-W not having a turret, a la bison, with only a MG and atgm. If this happens MCAV becomes the fire support to the infantry in those brigades.

@daftandbarmy already mentioned this, but I really hope that ACV-W is not planned for Infantry Line Companies.

While I like ATGM's on IFV's - they really do need to be F&F setups - furthermore any vehicle that is taking troops into proximity of enemy defenses needs to have a cannon (and C-UAS but I digress).

It doesn't matter if you plan on dismounting your troops on the objective, 100m out, or 1-3 km out - the enemy will be able to engage with DF weapons - and there needs to be a way for vehicles to effectively suppress positions.
MG's are great for soldiers in the open, and .50 does pretty well against light vehicles and lighter fortification, but it does not do well against heavily fortified positions or armored vehicles.
Yes ideally your tanks and Artillery have suppressed those positions - but any good opponent is not going to be suppressed for long unless under constant effective fire (effective fire causes casualties).

 

[daftandbarmy]

@daftandbarmy already mentioned this, but I really hope that ACV-W is not planned for Infantry Line Companies.

While I like ATGM's on IFV's - they really do need to be F&F setups - furthermore any vehicle that is taking troops into proximity of enemy defenses needs to have a cannon (and C-UAS but I digress).

It doesn't matter if you plan on dismounting your troops on the objective, 100m out, or 1-3 km out - the enemy will be able to engage with DF weapons - and there needs to be a way for vehicles to effectively suppress positions.
MG's are great for soldiers in the open, and .50 does pretty well against light vehicles and lighter fortification, but it does not do well against heavily fortified positions or armored vehicles.
Yes ideally your tanks and Artillery have suppressed those positions - but any good opponent is not going to be suppressed for long unless under constant effective fire (effective fire causes casualties).

Can we just go with 'Improved Bradley'?

That thing is a frickin' beast....

 

[Underway]

@daftandbarmy already mentioned this, but I really hope that ACV-W is not planned for Infantry Line Companies.

While I like ATGM's on IFV's - they really do need to be F&F setups - furthermore any vehicle that is taking troops into proximity of enemy defenses needs to have a cannon (and C-UAS but I digress).

It doesn't matter if you plan on dismounting your troops on the objective, 100m out, or 1-3 km out - the enemy will be able to engage with DF weapons - and there needs to be a way for vehicles to effectively suppress positions.
MG's are great for soldiers in the open, and .50 does pretty well against light vehicles and lighter fortification, but it does not do well against heavily fortified positions or armored vehicles.
Yes ideally your tanks and Artillery have suppressed those positions - but any good opponent is not going to be suppressed for long unless under constant effective fire (effective fire causes casualties).

They are talking about a 30mm, so I'm assuming that there will be a turreted option. Doesn't preclude other non-turreted variants for other tasks.

 

[Kirkhill]

It depends on which battlefield.

The Brits fought the Japanese in Burma from Stuart Light Tanks with 37mm guns.

They were totally outclassed in North African deserts but just the ticket for the jungles.

 

[KevinB]

Can we just go with 'Improved Bradley'?

That thing is a frickin' beast....

Honestly if the Canada had Bradley, then go Bradley A4 with the Hellfire and Javelin modifications done to it, I would say up-gun the cannon to 30-35mm and call it a day.

But Canada does not - so there is a clean sheet of paper, which I honestly think is a good thing (as long as it doesn't have wheels)


I am a CV-90 fan as well, but I think it's design is also a little long in the tooth, as while power packs have been upgraded in both, the demands of the current and future vehicles for power, cooling and data are not something ever considered in anything over 5 years old.

The four most advanced companies in this: GDLS, KNDS, RM, BAE (in no particular order).
BAE is the only one without a publicly disclosed next Gen Tank, as well BAE also hasn't publicly debuted their early XM-30 model since pulling out of the program (the company walked away when the cannon was changed to 50-65mm, although they did not disclose a reason for leaving).
*so maybe I did put BAE at the last subconsciously for that reason?

Personally I think a 35-40mm cannon is the best bet - and lean heavily to the 40mm CTA cannon from the Warrior Upgrade (that the UK cancelled). It offers a substantial payload (compared to the 25mm Bushmaster on the Bradley and LAV), has great velocity, the cannon is reliable and the ammo stores very easily (as someone who dreaded loading the belts from the M242, the 40mm belts are not a snag hazard and don't want to grab fingers, thumbs or pieces of your uniform). Ukraine has shown what the 25mm APFSDS-DU round can do to Russian tanks - and a 40mm round in that would have significantly better performance, even better than the GAU-8 on the A-10.

Ideally I want 4 Crew - Driver, Gunner, CC, UAS/SA/Radio guy, where a Dismount Commander can also have clear SA and access to all vehicle sensors and inputs.

 

[KevinB]

They are talking about a 30mm, so I'm assuming that there will be a turreted option. Doesn't preclude other non-turreted variants for other tasks.

Still wish the CA could break away from the wheeled fetish.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Still wish the CA could break away from the wheeled bargain basement fetish.

TFTFY

 

[Brad Sallows]

I recall a fun little exchange between a couple of senior people about the 'Future of the Army'.

First guy: "We'll all be zooming around in space ships"

Second guy: "While the heavy armoured brigades occupy your capital city."

Third guy: "All your base are belong to us."

 

[GK .Dundas]

I recall a fun little exchange between a couple of senior people about the 'Future of the Army'.

First guy: "We'll all be zooming around in space ships"

Second guy: "While the heavy armoured brigades occupy your capital city."

Two Soviet tank Generals taking in the sights in Paris after WW III .
One General looks at the other and asks. " I forget, Yuri which side won the air war again ?"

 

[ArmyRick]

Its 2032, The victor is the one who dominated the drone, electronic and cyber battle.

 

[Kirkhill]

Hope springs eternal at BAE

Swedish CV90120 Light Tank Couldn't Find Buyer for 25 Years, Now Gets Major Upgrade as Slovakia Deal Looms | Defense Express

BAE Systems Hägglunds partners with Slovak Koval Systems for 16-round autoloader, Rheinmetall L44A1 LR turret as 25-year search for customers continues

en.defence-ua.com

And fear stalks the RCAC.

 

[KevinB]

Its 2032, The victor is the one who dominated the drone, electronic and cyber battle.

Who then has enough artillery and maneuver units to exploit that advantage.