Author Topic: Successul trials held for direct fire system  (Read 41986 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline big bad john (John Hill)

  • Banned
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • -930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,682
  • I am a poser
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #50 on: February 14, 2005, 12:14:31 »
It is very impressive to look at....I'm even told told that they sometimes work....but you can't believe everything you're told.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,650
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,736
  • Freespeecher
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #51 on: February 14, 2005, 15:15:55 »
The AMX-10 (RC) is a recce vehicle, or more precicely a DF platform to support recce operations. It will hang back in the "bushes" and cover the other members of the team as they advance. I am not sure how it is armed now, but the verion 1.0 had a low pressure 105mm cannon, which was rather unique since the driving bands on the rounds were mounted on ball bearings (those whacky French engineers...). Like most systems, it has been upgraded over the years so stabilization, laser rangefinders, LLTV or Thermal Imaging and so on are probably a given.

It is bigger, has better armour and carries more rounds than the MGS, but like all wheeled vehicles, it has low cross country mobility and less armour than a comparable tank (AMX-30 in this case, which was never up there in the protection department either). It does have two "tricks" the MGS is missing; the suspension is driver adjustable so you can "stand up" and increase your ground clearence, and it uses differential steering like a track, so you can pivot steer out of a tight spot.

Over all, this is a 1960s design which has aged well, works for what it is designed for, and is not a tank substitute either. I suppose we could cut and paste all kinds of modifications on the beast to "improve" it, but the French are working on a family of 8X8 LAVs (where have I heard that before?), including an armoured car mounting a high velocity cannon.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline big bad john (John Hill)

  • Banned
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • -930
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,682
  • I am a poser
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #52 on: February 14, 2005, 15:20:03 »
It is alway nice to hear from someone who knows what they are talking about.  Thank you.

That being said, the ones I have seen were in the direct fire support role.  And yes, you really don't want to be in the forward vicinity when the gun goes off.  France has just announced a massive upgrading program for them.  I have also heard that they have a few problems with the suspension.

Offline Zipper

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 562
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #53 on: February 14, 2005, 21:48:33 »
lol, they are rather impressive to look at. I know this sounds weird, but it would almost be better as a support role to be a SP gun. Along of the lines of the old jagdpanzers.

So with all that said above Majoor, do you still prefer the CV-90 family? I know I do.

And why is out military so against the idea of track? Yes it is more maintenance, and thus costs more. But it is so much more capable in many situation.

Hell, I was reading that the Greeks even ordered the latest Leo 2 variants. WTF is that? Like they have the terrain or the money to support them? Sheesh.
Nulli Secondus - Second to none

"You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread" - Heinz Gudarien

"Milli Vanilli wern't frauds, they were prophets" - Ed the Sock on modern music.

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,595
  • Crewman
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #54 on: February 15, 2005, 14:58:32 »
Going back to the AMX10RC for a minute.  It is, as a_majoor stated, an old design, but efficient for what it has been used for.  The Italians have a similar vehicle, the Centaro, which they use in similar roles.  The guys who where in Kosovo with our Leo 1's will tell you about their inabilities, as wheeled vehicles with big gun systems, at moving cross country or on poor road systems that have turned into quagmires. 

I find this a major oversight of our military planners in their moving our Army into a "Wheeled Force".  In time of war, most of our major road systems will be destroyed.  They will be bombed, mined, cratered, etc.  With the movement of heavy Military traffic added to any civilian traffic, and no one repairing roads, they will soon turn to dust.  In absolute perfect conditions, with no rain or snow, these road systems may still remain open, but should it rain or snow they will devolve into swamp very quickly.  Wheeled vehicles don't handle mud and swamp conditions too well, especially large numbers of vehicles travelling over long distances.

GW
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Zipper

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 562
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #55 on: February 16, 2005, 00:37:22 »
I find this a major oversight of our military planners in their moving our Army into a "Wheeled Force".   In time of war, most of our major road systems will be destroyed.   They will be bombed, mined, cratered, etc.   With the movement of heavy Military traffic added to any civilian traffic, and no one repairing roads, they will soon turn to dust.   In absolute perfect conditions, with no rain or snow, these road systems may still remain open, but should it rain or snow they will devolve into swamp very quickly.   Wheeled vehicles don't handle mud and swamp conditions too well, especially large numbers of vehicles travelling over long distances.

Good point. I find it difficult to understand why they are so against track, when so much of Canada is not paved? As well, the idea that you have to "truck" you armour into a theatre also doesn't make much sense (unless its hundreds of KM's). How far did the Sherman's in WWII and Korea have to travel without the benefit of transport? If you need maintenance, then get it.
Nulli Secondus - Second to none

"You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread" - Heinz Gudarien

"Milli Vanilli wern't frauds, they were prophets" - Ed the Sock on modern music.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 208,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,758
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #56 on: February 16, 2005, 01:11:16 »
Quote
How far did the Sherman's in WWII and Korea have to travel without the benefit of transport?

Not very far Zipper.  Juno to Falaise - 3 months and 40 miles (one side of Toronto to the other), Falaise to Antwerp about 300 miles (Toronto to Montreal).  And that stretch was mainly a run on paved roads.    As to the Juno-Falaise bit - I don't think many of the Shermans that landed on D-Day were still runners when the Falaise Gap was closed.

As to Korea, Pusan to the Hook is about 300 miles again and most of the Tanks spent their time dug in as pill boxes.

Even the Americans haven't been able to keep all of their tanks running in Iraq -  the factories couldn't supply shoes and links fast enough.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2004/Jan/Army_Catching.htm

Quote
Track usage in Iraq has been staggering, as armored vehiclesâ ”especially Bradley fighting vehiclesâ ”have been crunching sand and asphalt on continuous patrols and convoy escorts. â Å“In some cases, we were having a year's worth of op tempo in a week or a month,â ? according to Dugan.

The numbers speak volumes. Before Operation Iraqi Freedom, average peacetime demand for Bradley track was 7,500 track shoes per month. Demand soared nearly 1,300 percent, to an average of more than 100,000 shoes per month from March to October 2003. In Operation Desert Storm, track usage wasâ ”adjusted for the lesser durability of older trackâ ”the equivalent of 50,000 shoes per month in February 1991.

Abrams track usage multiplied nearly tenfold, from an average 8,500 shoes per month to 79,500 per month from March to October 2003. Equivalent demand in February 1991 was 41,500 shoes. And the surge in track usage in Desert Storm lasted for a much shorter period, noted Dugan.

Dugan said he did not know of any missions that were hampered by track shortages. â Å“Some readiness rates were bad, but nothing that stopped a commander from doing his mission,â ? he added. While the readiness goal is 90 percent vehicle availability, in some cases it was 60 or 70 percent in Iraq. However, Dugan emphasized that track durability depends on numerous suspension-related items such as road wheels, as well as terrain, temperature and vehicle weight.

The track breakdown does not appear to be a design flaw. â Å“I talked to a soldier in the 3rd Infantry Division,â ? Dugan said. â Å“He said the track held up well. They just wore it out.â ? In a test environment, Abrams track lasts 2,100 miles, while Bradley track is good for 2,400 miles.

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,962
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2005, 07:32:40 »
Good point. I find it difficult to understand why they are so against track, when so much of Canada is not paved? As well, the idea that you have to "truck" you armour into a theatre also doesn't make much sense (unless its hundreds of KM's). How far did the Sherman's in WWII and Korea have to travel without the benefit of transport? If you need maintenance, then get it.


I think we all have to admit that, rightly or wrongly, the idea of fighting in Canada is probably one of the very last things included in any Statement of Requirements for any new combat vehicle system: we don't train (or even plan seriously...) for the defense of Canada. I would argue that if we did operate in Canada(probably in support of law enforcement), it would be in inhabited areas with roads.

As far as suggesting that in modern war we will see total destruction of the transportation infrastructure, I suggest two things.

a) modern war (ie: the type of war most commonly being fought in the world today, and likely to be fought in the near future) no longer features the massive total destruction of all infrastructure. All infrastructure in Iraq, for example, was not destroyed, nor was it in Afghanistan nor even in Kosovo. Wheels should be quite adequate in most of those situations; and

b) if we were to actually get ourselves into a conflict in which somebody decided to devastate the transportation infrastructure, the MBTs might get through, but the CSS that keeps the MBTs running would not. After a while the MBTs would be big steel targets. This point (vulnerability of and reliance on a large CSS chain) has been brought home very clearly both in Afghanistan and Iraq. IIRC WWII had a few good examples too.

Cheers
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,595
  • Crewman
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #58 on: February 16, 2005, 10:29:43 »
I think we all have to admit that, rightly or wrongly, the idea of fighting in Canada is probably one of the very last things included in any Statement of Requirements for any new combat vehicle system: we don't train (or even plan seriously...) for the defense of Canada. I would argue that if we did operate in Canada(probably in support of law enforcement), it would be in inhabited areas with roads.

As far as suggesting that in modern war we will see total destruction of the transportation infrastructure, I suggest two things.

a) modern war (ie: the type of war most commonly being fought in the world today, and likely to be fought in the near future) no longer features the massive total destruction of all infrastructure. All infrastructure in Iraq, for example, was not destroyed, nor was it in Afghanistan nor even in Kosovo. Wheels should be quite adequate in most of those situations; and

b) if we were to actually get ourselves into a conflict in which somebody decided to devastate the transportation infrastructure, the MBTs might get through, but the CSS that keeps the MBTs running would not. After a while the MBTs would be big steel targets. This point (vulnerability of and reliance on a large CSS chain) has been brought home very clearly both in Afghanistan and Iraq. IIRC WWII had a few good examples too.

Cheers

I disagree.  I don't like to use Iraq and Afghanistan as good examples of warfare to come.  I would not agree that the road systems there are sufficient to constantly hold up to a high volume of heavy military vehicles and transport.  Look at the problems we have with our own road systems in Peace, then compound that with the lack of maintenance and heavy military traffic.  Many of the roads in Kosovo and Macedonia were reduced to quagmires.

On the argument that our CSS would fall behind, again I would disagree.  In all our major conflicts, we have had no problems keeping the bullets, fuel and food flowing in the long haul.  We have our Engineers following up and maintaining the Supply Routes. 

What we don't have anymore, is the maneuverability of our Cbt Arms to properly defend the CSS in the Rear.  In example like Iraq, we have a strong large force overwhelming a much weaker small force, who has been reduced to using Guerrilla tactics and foreign terrorists to carry on a reign of terror, which no Army in the world can successfully fight.  It is now up to the civilian populace and police to round up these people who are hiding amongst them.

GW
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline plattypuss

  • Member
  • ****
  • -10
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 107
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #59 on: February 16, 2005, 15:12:11 »
A couple of comments
1)  Apparently the VOR for the Stryker fleet in Iraq was 98% despite the fact that they looged over 3 million miles in a 12 month period.
2)  PBI, I totally agree with you.  Sustaining the infrastructure of the country which you are in, is a big part of the hearts and minds campaign.  If you start bombing roads, bridges you will lose the hearts and minds of the civilian populace which will then in turn be more encouraged to become the geurilla which you do not want.
3)  George, what  major conflicts are you referring to?  If you are referring to the WWs, then you must admit we did not have neccessarily a more manoueverable combat force to protect the echelons but a larger combat force which was helped in that we were operating with extended supply lines in countries which we were liberating.  We might have the engineers following up but they would need protection in a non-contiguous environment.  Also even the Americans were stuped on how to protect their convoys and for a while were seriously thinking of pulling a large portion of LAVs back from the Marines to do the job.
Our plans miscarry because they have no aim. When a man does not know what harbor he is making for, no wind is the right wind.
       - Seneca

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,595
  • Crewman
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #60 on: February 16, 2005, 15:29:06 »
I see "Wheels" as playing a role, but in most cases, not a front line role.  I agree with the British idea with their Saxons.  They transport their Troops forward in the armoured Saxons, from Britain to the front, where the troops then transfer to Warrior AFVs.  In essence, they have "armoured" their "Wheeled" CSS, and left the fighting AFVs "Tracked".  To me this makes sense.  I don't see the true benefits of going totally "Wheeled", let alone start mounting a DF system on wheels. 

It is super that wheeled vehicles can move up to the Front faster than Tracks, but once there and engaged with the enemy, their lesser abilities at manoeuvre will be their downfall. 

I look at the MGS as a bigger dinosaur than the Tank.  It is a fall back to a WW II system of Assault Gun or Tank Destroyer that did not survive past the 1960's, due to it's weapons shortfalls and maneuverability being less than a MBT.  It will not be able to replace a Tank in the Advance, Quick Attack, or Withdrawal.  It may be able to provide some role in the Defence.  It will not be able to do many of the smaller tasks called upon MBTs in the Rear, Reserve or Counter Attack.

GW
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Tango2Bravo

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 50,785
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,804
  • All your base are belong to us.
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #61 on: February 16, 2005, 15:39:36 »
The protection of the lines of communication for a coalition would be a good task for the Armoured Cavarly (Coyotes and LAV IIIs).   Not necessarily as glorious as charging across the battlefield in tanks but still an important task.   There is historical precendence for the use of wheeled AFVs in Recce roles (Canada/UK, US and Germany in WW II).   

Linking this back to the thread, I'd like our Cav forces to have an anti-tank capability in a general warfighting scenario, but perhaps missiles would be better.   RAS (Rear Area Security) battles and security operations are probably best fought by our 25mm and 7.62mm systems (along with the small arms of the crews).   TOW, ADATs and MGS may have limited utility in the "three block war."  Long range missile fire may not be the best thing to pin our hopes on in the urban environment.  At least the MGS uses gun fire so perhaps it could find a role there (but I don't think that it can take an RPG hit).  Then again, these trials may prove me wrong and I'm sure that they will learn some interesting lessons regardless.   ADATS and TOW may be more useful as surveillance platforms that as direct fire systems (saves on missiles)!

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that an army without tanks (and tracks) cannot perform the whole range of combat (including perhaps the warfighting block of the three block war).   We are becoming somewhat of a niche army, but I think that we can find a meaningful niche.


Cheers,

2B

p.s. I did have some CV9030 envy in Kabul...
Well-trained, older Panzer crews are the decisive factor for success...It is preferable to start off with fewer Panzers than to set out with young crews who lack combat experience.

 - Verbal report of Gen Balck 1943

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 176,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,318
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #62 on: February 16, 2005, 16:35:34 »
I disagree. I don't like to use Iraq and Afghanistan as good examples of warfare to come. I would not agree that the road systems there are sufficient to constantly hold up to a high volume of heavy military vehicles and transport. Look at the problems we have with our own road systems in Peace, then compound that with the lack of maintenance and heavy military traffic. Many of the roads in Kosovo and Macedonia were reduced to quagmires.

Honestly George, how can we not look to Iraq and Afghanistan as good examples of warfare to come?  Since 1990, except for a few skirmishes in the Balkans and in Somalia, where else has "future war" taken place?

I'm not too quick to look as Wheel/Track as a +/- thing, leading to the inevitable and ubiquitous debate that has been on-going for years.  Although I don't buy into the argument that the Coyote proves that wheeled vehicles are better in that regards, because you could easily stick that mast on a tracked chassis, I feel that there is a demonstrable utility in having some sort of wheel-capability.  As the US Marine Corps' 1st Marine Division Lessons Learned document point out, the Marines noted that the Light Armored Regiments (LARs) of the 1st Marine Division where able to utilize the mobility of their older model LAV's to strike out from Baghdad and successfully seize the key city of Tikrit and Bayji, more than 200 km away.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oif-lessons-learned.htm

Obviously, for the interim, we've made our stake in the Wheeled force and it is up to us to figure out how to best configure it to work and be effective.  We can't afford not to because when the flag goes up, we have to be ready to fight the enemy the best way we know how.  Considering that for quite some time, we only really ever had a few squadrons of Leo's, I think we've been out of the Armour game longer then we care to admit - we would never have been committing ourselves to any operational tank maneuvers.

My hope is that the Wheeled Force is truly "interim" and that we can move to a lighter, more effective tracked force (a future model of the CV series or perhaps the US FCS) down the road along with abit of a wheel capability for suitable tasks.  But until then, Cav screening and flanking it is.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Cdn Blackshirt

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,407
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #63 on: February 16, 2005, 16:47:48 »
Isn't the Coyote great because of the add-on's as opposed to the chassis?

Specifically, if you put the same gear including a telescoping mast on a CV90 chassis, would it not be an even more capable vehicle (although more expensive to operate)?




Matthew.  ???



IMPORTANT - 'Blackshirt' is a reference to Nebraska Cornhuskers Football and not naziism.   National Champions '70, '71, '94, '95 and '97.    Go Huskers!!!!

Offline Zipper

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 562
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #64 on: February 16, 2005, 17:14:07 »
Isn't the Coyote great because of the add-on's as opposed to the chassis?

Specifically, if you put the same gear including a telescoping mast on a CV90 chassis, would it not be an even more capable vehicle (although more expensive to operate)?

I believe your right. At least that is all they ever talked about when the thing came into service.

Obviously, for the interim, we've made our stake in the Wheeled force and it is up to us to figure out how to best configure it to work and be effective. We can't afford not to because when the flag goes up, we have to be ready to fight the enemy the best way we know how. Considering that for quite some time, we only really ever had a few squadrons of Leo's, I think we've been out of the Armour game longer then we care to admit - we would never have been committing ourselves to any operational tank maneuvers.

I agree with you there. Ever since we brought the 4CMB home from Germany and sent the 8th down to reserve.

My hope is that the Wheeled Force is truly "interim" and that we can move to a lighter, more effective tracked force (a future model of the CV series or perhaps the US FCS) down the road along with abit of a wheel capability for suitable tasks. But until then, Cav screening and flanking it is.

Mine as well. Its not so much an argument of wheeled versus track outright. They both have their place. For myself, it is the fact that we are getting (for all intents and purposes) out of track all together. We've basically pigeon-holed ourselves into operations on road. And well maintained roads at that.

What gets me worked up (and this is that social side of me again ;D) is that we are going with vehicles that have a low survivability against RPG's/heavy MG, and the like. As we've seen in all our operational theatres, the weapons that the "other side" have had access to have been more then enough to kill us outright. Its just been by the kindness of God that we haven't had more causalities to worry about. Wheeled vehicles can only carry so much armour.

As well. The idea of our new "layered" approach in lighter vehicles relying on TOW/ADATS/MGS is just not going to work within alot of the missions we do which are patrol/close contact in nature. The TOW and ADAT are long range support platforms requiring alot of support and protection, and useless within the "urban" environment. The MGS being a cannon is better suited, but once again it may get one shot off before counter fire takes it out.

So no argument about the Coyote and the LAV. Good pieces of kit. Its the rest that are questionable.

Survivability is what worries me most.
Nulli Secondus - Second to none

"You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread" - Heinz Gudarien

"Milli Vanilli wern't frauds, they were prophets" - Ed the Sock on modern music.

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,595
  • Crewman
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #65 on: February 16, 2005, 17:19:20 »
One real advantage of Wheeled over Tracked is "Vibration".  Anyone who has worked tracks knows how much vibration there is in the vehicle.  With all the new electronics that we are installing in our vehicles today, the vibrations caused by tracks would cause serious problems with N/S kit and prolonged VOR rates on operations.

GW
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline pbi

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,725
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,962
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #66 on: February 17, 2005, 04:20:21 »
Quote
On the argument that our CSS would fall behind, again I would disagree.  In all our major conflicts, we have had no problems keeping the bullets, fuel and food flowing in the long haul.  We have our Engineers following up and maintaining the Supply Routes. 

I disagree with this. In both WWII and in the two Gulf Wars, IIRC, Allied ground forces faced serious logistics problems caused by the inability of any logistic system to keep up with the speed and voracious appetite of modern mechanized forces. I am  not suggesting they were brought to a halt, but close to it, especially for fuel.

Anyway, as Infanteer said, wheels are what we've got, so we better start thinking about how to be as effective as we can with them, since we have no way of knowing what we'll be called upon to do next, or where, or against whom. I would love us to have a heavy tracked combat capability, but the days of the MBT appear to be numbered in our Army, and anyway we are probably never going to buy adequate lift to get a heavy force anywhere in a hurry. We're going to medium weight now, and those who have to make this work need to consider what is the art of the possible, vice pining for heavy armour.

Cheers.
The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. ...

The true measure of a man is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out...

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,650
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,736
  • Freespeecher
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #67 on: February 17, 2005, 12:28:02 »
We have seen mixed fleets of wheels and tracks in the past; Soviet Motor Rifle Regiments often had the infantry and many AT support weapons carried in wheeled vehicles (BTR-60/70/80 90 series and BRDM anti tank platforms).

After the Persian Gulf war, I attended a briefing where a US Company Commander explained how they drove a company of 16 M-2s and a convoy of 25 HEMMET trucks carrying their fuel and ammunition into Iraq to cut the highway between Basra and Bhagdad under combat conditions. This is probably a better model of the future, "embedded CSS" to allow wide ranging "Cavalry" style manoeuvres. Using my crystal ball, I would think a "Bison" type development of the LAV 3 chassis would be the next logical step to support this.

I think much of this debate is becoming misplaced. Like Infanteer said, we are going to have wheeled vehicles for a generation, so we best figure out the best way to use them. There will be technical changes to the LAV family as the years go by, to increase protection and mobility, new or modified weapons systems, improved sensor systems and so on. Yes, tracked CV-90 style platforms can do most of what the LAV can do, superior in some aspects and inferior in others, but if Santa or Gen Hillier isn't coming down the chimney with them, then we just have to get over it.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Zipper

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 562
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #68 on: February 18, 2005, 00:03:00 »
Yes, tracked CV-90 style platforms can do most of what the LAV can do, superior in some aspects and inferior in others, but if Santa or Gen Hillier isn't coming down the chimney with them, then we just have to get over it.

Damn if you haven't made me into a CV-90(family) believer Majoor. Sigh.
Nulli Secondus - Second to none

"You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread" - Heinz Gudarien

"Milli Vanilli wern't frauds, they were prophets" - Ed the Sock on modern music.

Offline Maclimius

  • New Member
  • **
  • 4,674
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 37
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #69 on: February 21, 2005, 23:54:18 »
We also have to keep in mind what the Government refers to as interim. The ILTIS was an "interim" vehicle. The AVGP familiy of vehicle were "interim" training vehicles never intended for deployment overseas. I recall a crusty old Sargeant discussing his time "well" spent in them on operation. The MILCOTS is an "interim" vehicle that was supposed to only go to reservists. Go figure, that didn't last long. Kind of like the Bison which never did go to reservists. Like it or not, we're stuck with these "interim" vehicles and we just have to figure out how best to employ them.

As for the MGS, in a support role, I'm sure it's fine to get out of the vehicle to fix a jam on the coax, but think about it. If you're using the coax, generally you're using it at a range of no more than 1200m. That's some awfully close support if you ask me.

Offline Zipper

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 562
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #70 on: February 27, 2005, 15:49:15 »
As for the MGS, in a support role, I'm sure it's fine to get out of the vehicle to fix a jam on the coax, but think about it. If you're using the coax, generally you're using it at a range of no more than 1200m. That's some awfully close support if you ask me.

Tell me about it.

But since the decision is already made to take us all wheeled, niche roll, and MGS. Its no sense arguing about the pros and cons. We all know it is a bad idea, but hey...                     ...we wern't asked.

We're just going to have to do with what we get and hope to God that we're not packing body bags when things get heavier then we can handle.

In other words...             ...somewhere no-one is shooting at us.

Nulli Secondus - Second to none

"You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread" - Heinz Gudarien

"Milli Vanilli wern't frauds, they were prophets" - Ed the Sock on modern music.

Offline Sheep Dog AT

  • The Fly in Someone's Ointment - Giggity
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 58,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,219
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #71 on: February 27, 2005, 16:27:48 »
"In other words...             ...somewhere no-one is shooting at us."

Why bother then?
Apparently infamous for his one liners.
Oh Giggity Well...........Giggity

Offline Zipper

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 562
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #72 on: February 27, 2005, 16:58:24 »
Why bother with the MGS? I agree...

Why bother upgrading the military? Because we need one, even if they are equipped with gear that doesn't suit our long term self-determination interests.

Why bother going to someplace people are shooting at us? Because it is our jobs, and serves the interests of our Government. However, the people who make the decisions (the people) will not like us filling body bags because of "light" equipment. We'll have to learn the hard way on that one though.
Nulli Secondus - Second to none

"You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread" - Heinz Gudarien

"Milli Vanilli wern't frauds, they were prophets" - Ed the Sock on modern music.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,650
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,736
  • Freespeecher
Re: Successul trials held for direct fire system
« Reply #73 on: April 07, 2005, 14:43:54 »
The MGS idea can still be saved, just ditch the current turret (From Janes Armour and Artillery 2002-2003):

Quote
90 mm assault gun vehicle
Late in 1986, MOWAG demonstrated the AGV-90 in Switzerland and France. This is essentially an improved MOWAG Piranha 8 x 8 fitted with the Giat Industries TS 90 Weapons Station. This is armed with the 90 mm gun with a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun.
      The 90 mm gun fires APFSDS-T, HEAT-T, HE, smoke and canister rounds with 18 ready rounds carried in the turret. A further 25 rounds are in the hull.
      Optional equipment includes a land navigation system. Other improvements include a fuel tank with increased fuel capacity which increases operational range to 1,000 km, a small access hatch in the left side of the hull and a winch with a direct pulling capacity of 6.8 tonnes.
      Combat weight of the AFV-90 is 13,000 kg, length with gun forwards 7.28 m, width 2.5 m and height 2.7 m.
      Significant quantities of the Canadian-built MOWAG Piranha (8 x 8) vehicles fitted with the Giat Industries TS 90 turret were supplied to the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Defence and Aviation (MODA) by the now General Motors Defense. Additional details of this contract are given under Canada.
      More recently, the MOWAG Piranha has been fitted with the latest Cockerill LCTS Mk 8 90 mm turret armed with a Cockerill 90 mm gun and this version has been ordered by Qatar (built by Alvis Vehicles of the UK) and the Saudi Arabian National Guard (SANG), additional details are given under Canada as this forms part of a complete order for 1,117 vehicles.


It's not as if we don't know how to build these things, and having 33 main gun rounds available is certainly an improvement over 18...

« Last Edit: April 07, 2005, 14:47:56 by a_majoor »
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.