Infantry of Tomorrow

[Kirkhill]

 

[FJAG]

No being judgy, but the APCs I recall seeing sometimes were full of kit and it was hard to shove troops in between the rucks, piles of ammo cans, jars of Cheez Whiz and palettes of bottled water.

I wonder how many you could pack in there if you just had fighting order, first line ammo, CSupps and weapons, and backloaded all the other gear (except the Cheez Whiz of course) to A/B Ech etc..

In the days before explosive resistant seats, we had folding steel benches in the M113s. Gunner tracks were rarely full of people. As a FOO I rarely had more than 4 folks in my team counting myself. And yet the first thing to go were those steel seats to be replaced by vehicle long storage boxes with padded tops as seats in order to hold even more crap. It's amazing how much shit we had on board - definitely all that Cheez Whiz, no water bottles - all ours water came in plastic 5 gal Jerry Cans, and food - so much extra food. I always felt sorry for the grunts we supported who were squeezed in like sardines - especially when in winter gear - and that's without all the ammo used on real ops.

 

[daftandbarmy]

In the days before explosive resistant seats, we had folding steel benches in the M113s. Gunner tracks were rarely full of people. As a FOO I rarely had more than 4 folks in my team counting myself. And yet the first thing to go were those steel seats to be replaced by vehicle long storage boxes with padded tops as seats in order to hold even more crap. It's amazing how much shit we had on board - definitely all that Cheez Whiz, no water bottles - all ours water came in plastic 5 gal Jerry Cans, and food - so much extra food. I always felt sorry for the grunts we supported who were squeezed in like sardines - especially when in winter gear - and that's without all the ammo used on real ops.

Gunners be like...

 

[KevinB]

View attachment 93990

That’s the layout from the Original Bradley that still used the XM-231 firing port weapons (pre A1)

The A2 thru A4 have seat benches and no one stuck to the side of the turret basket

 

[Kirkhill]

35mm (1050 m/sec 550-750 g) .... 300 to 450 kJ
30mm x 173mm (1050 m/sec 360 g) .... 200 kJ
30mm x 113mm (800 m/sec 250 g) .... 80 kJ
12.7mm (800 m/sec 45 g) .... 15 kJ
40mm HV (240 m/sec 240 g) .... 7 kJ

From another thread.

30x113 seems to be the preferred upgrade to the M2/M3 HB as still within the limits of the lower classes of RWS .

On the Strykers the 12.7 and 40 were mounted for local protection of the vehicle. The 30x113 seems to have a broader target set covering both the 12.7 and 40 targets as well as aerial targets.

 

[FJAG]

Gunners be like...

Did I ever tell you how our track was the only one with a dismounted RCR company on a winter exercise and how my crew fed the whole company for a day with fried egg and bologna sandwiches using the extra fresh rations our battery cooks had given us when the battalion couldn't feed them . . . and then towed all of their toboggans behind our track on a five kilometre night withdrawal?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Did I ever tell you how our track was the only one with a dismounted RCR company on a winter exercise and how my crew fed the whole company for a day with fried egg and bologna sandwiches using the extra fresh rations our battery cooks had given us when the battalion couldn't feed them . . . and then towed all of their toboggans behind our track on a five kilometre night withdrawal?

Yes, you will be going to heaven...

 

[FJAG]

Yes, you will be going to heaven...

Probably not.

 

[PrairieFella]

In 2017 the M1296 Dragoon came out with its 30mm unmanned remote turret. Interestingly it is still designated an ICV, ICVD in fact, with a crew of 2 and 9 dismounts. There are some places where it is erroneously referred to as being in the class of an IFV. That said, it did not enter into general service in SBCTs, but was limited to one cavalry regiment.

Which is a stupid idea. It was realized very quickly in the history of armoured warfare that 2 isn't enough for Cav/tank troops. It's impossible to fight the vehicle effectively, command the truck and run comms whilst simultaneously playing gunner.

 

[FJAG]

Ah! Wheeled LAVs in Latvia.

 

[Kirkhill]

Which is a stupid idea. It was realized very quickly in the history of armoured warfare that 2 isn't enough for Cav/tank troops. It's impossible to fight the vehicle effectively, command the truck and run comms whilst simultaneously playing gunner.

But there was no intention to fight the Stryker. It was a bus. With a self-defence system. Exactly equivalent to an M113 with a pintle mount on the CCs hatch.

Now the Dragoon, a different story. Likely came from the same shop that brought us the Booker.

 

[KevinB]

But there was no intention to fight the Stryker. It was a bus. With a self-defence system. Exactly equivalent to an M113 with a pintle mount on the CCs hatch.

Except life happens and often the fight comes to you.

The Stryker got GWOT’d as it was quickly realized the wheels provided rapid mobility on the roads in Iraq to support COIN efforts.

However because it is effectively road bound, it’s easy to ambush given the limited routes.


RWS options didn’t give very good SA, so various options were attempted.

Now the Dragoon, a different story. Likely came from the same shop that brought us the Booker.

The Dragoon was one of the those options.

Hey if the Booker was completed 25 years ago, it would have been a GWOT Hero with the Dragoon…

Unfortunately a lot of stuff is done ‘last war’ or worse pulled out of some idiots ass.

 

[ueo]

Did I ever tell you how our track was the only one with a dismounted RCR company on a winter exercise and how my crew fed the whole company for a day with fried egg and bologna sandwiches using the extra fresh rations our battery cooks had given us when the battalion couldn't feed them . . . and then towed all of their toboggans behind our track on a five kilometre night withdrawal?

Not on this one, but remember many others, "Hey tank, any hot coffee!"

 

[Kirkhill]

Except life happens and often the fight comes to you.

The Stryker got GWOT’d as it was quickly realized the wheels provided rapid mobility on the roads in Iraq to support COIN efforts.

However because it is effectively road bound, it’s easy to ambush given the limited routes.


RWS options didn’t give very good SA, so various options were attempted.


The Dragoon was one of the those options.

Hey if the Booker was completed 25 years ago, it would have been a GWOT Hero with the Dragoon…

Unfortunately a lot of stuff is done ‘last war’ or worse pulled out of some idiots ass.

On the GWOT'd front

If we are going to maintain all the add-ons that the Stryker accumulated, rather than return them to their original configuration and use, does that mean that the up-armoured HMMWV should be retained?

The alternate plan would be to employ systems within their design limits and develop alternate solutions if circumstances demonstrate that those limits are inadequate to the situations encountered.

 

[PrairieFella]

Ah! Wheeled LAVs in Latvia.

The first one happens, that second one though, that's on the crew commander haha. Sidesloping in mud, woof.

 

[Kirkhill]

(Ukrainian BTR-4 Amphibious 3+8 with 30 x 165mm cannon)
(Finno-Polish KTO Rosomak Amphibious 3+6-8 with 30 x 173mm cannon)

Some people seem to think there is a place for a Dragoon type vehicle.
I note that they are amphibious
And
they have a crew of three.

 

[FJAG]

Hey if the Booker was completed 25 years ago, it would have been a GWOT Hero with the Dragoon…

They had the MGS. It did what the Booker was supposed to but on wheels. Most of them did work. It still wasn't a hero. It's a funny thing, but a light to medium direct fire vehicle should have some merit to it but in the end it innately doesn't. I've come to the conclusion that the right direct fire support vehicle for dismounted troops is the tank.

If we are going to maintain all the add-ons that the Stryker accumulated, rather than return them to their original configuration and use, does that mean that the up-armoured HMMWV should be retained?

No. But only as it's aging out and doesn't hold a full section. I think the solution is an IFV for "armoured infantry," a Senator-like battle taxi vehicle for "mech infantry" and a ISVF for specialized "light infantry."

 

[markppcli]

The first one happens, that second one though, that's on the crew commander haha. Sidesloping in mud, woof.

Probably had the edge fall from weight. We had it happen on roads in some training areas. Of course we got to those training areas because we could drive the LAVs in the roads to get there but that’s another topic.

 

[Kirkhill]

They had the MGS. It did what the Booker was supposed to but on wheels. Most of them did work. It still wasn't a hero. It's a funny thing, but a light to medium direct fire vehicle should have some merit to it but in the end it innately doesn't. I've come to the conclusion that the right direct fire support vehicle for dismounted troops is the tank.

Novel idea.



Road speed 4 MPH.

No. But only as it's aging out and doesn't hold a full section. I think the solution is an IFV for "armoured infantry," a Senator-like battle taxi vehicle for "mech infantry" and a ISVF for specialized "light infantry."

In general agreement but the 4x4 Senator is a bit too road bound for my taste. I like it as a security and C&R vehicle but I think there is a role for the 8x8 Amphib as a troop carrier.

I am still yet to be converted to the notion of carrying troops in a light tank. I think the design compromises result in big targets and inefficient use of space. Spend the money on tanks and armoured boxes that can escort each other.

 

[PrairieFella]

Novel idea.

View attachment 94007

Road speed 4 MPH.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Return to cavalry and infantry tanks at our peril haha.