New CA Tank Destroyer (From: Corps 86's Chimera tank destroyer)

[Danjanou]

That idea is so good you should do it twice and create BOTH a Heavy Weapons (MG) Platoon and an Anti-Tank Platoon.  And in their spare time they can be common or garden riflemen.

We could even then put them in their own company and maybe add other platoons as the mood hits like oh I don'tt know say  out of left field another heavy weapon platoon using some sort of indirect weapons system either off the shelf or still to be developed .  Somewhere in Ottawa an under employed Senior Officer is salivating at the chance to get "leading change" base on this. :

 

[a_majoor]

We could even then put them in their own company and maybe add other platoons as the mood hits like oh I don'tt know say  out of left field another heavy weapon platoon using some sort of indirect weapons system either off the shelf or still to be developed .  Somewhere in Ottawa an under employed Senior Officer is salivating at the chance to get "leading change" base on this. :

And all these weapons platoons and the rest of the battalion might need help setting up defensive positions, mobility enhancement or local mobility denial....maybe some big guys with axes and other pioneer tools can be enlisted to do the job.

Just saying  >

 

[MilEME09]

Honestly I think the CF has a bigger gap in our air defense but thats a bigger debate. As its stands of heard rumours or a replacement for the Eryx, though god only know when that would happen now. The Carl G is a good weapon, and could do great against modern armour if we upgraded its munitions, if we could get a APDS round for the Carl G, i doubt much could stop it. Problem with the Carl G is the fact that its un guided. Which on the flip side means it can't be jammed bbut relies more on the user to have good aim of the weapon. Now the M72 is completely outdated and is in need of serious upgrade or replacement in my opinion. against modern vehicles it is ineffective and probably couldn't even penetrate a LAV III that has been up armoured. I know its cheap but its not effective when i keep hearing from our officers we are going back to Green ops a la force on force traditional warfare. If thats the case dismounted infantry need the tools to take on armour, for example the AT4-HP is designed to penetrate up to 600mm of RHA against MBT's while that wouldnt scratch say the front armour of a T-90, you can bet we could score a side or rear armour kill with that kind of penetration power.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

RR will never do APDS as they don't have the velocity, however stuff like (FFV751 is a tandem-warhead HEAT round with an effective range of 500 m and ability to penetrate more than 500 mm of armour. Weight is 4 kg, From wiki) would make it effective.

I do agree that the lack of a sound AD plan will eventually bite us at some point.

 

[daftandbarmy]

And all these weapons platoons and the rest of the battalion might need help setting up defensive positions, mobility enhancement or local mobility denial....maybe some big guys with axes and other pioneer tools can be enlisted to do the job.

Just saying  >

And just maybe they could operate within an infantry self-managed protective dome of indirect fire provided by some simple, effective smooth bore technology that would be man portable.

 

[Kirkhill]

D&B - Check out Danjanou's post.  The one just before Thuc's.  You and he seem to have been visited by the same good idea fairy. 

 

[daftandbarmy]

D&B - Check out Danjanou's post.  The one just before Thuc's.  You and he seem to have been visited by the same good idea fairy. 

Cool. Can you do 'punch bug' on the internet?  ;D