Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[KevinB]

An that nice quick, hatches down swap. It’s the reason we should all do Yoga.

I think we can agree it is a two man turret for a reason.

If you get a 1 man turret - then things will change, but the LAV and Bradley turrets are not conducive to being operated by a solo Gunner/CC.
It's an Admin Move only sort of thing when one can hang out the hatches to get SA.

 

[Infanteer]

I think we can agree it is a two man turret for a reason.

If you get a 1 man turret - then things will change, but the LAV and Bradley turrets are not conducive to being operated by a solo Gunner/CC.
It's an Admin Move only sort of thing when one can hang out the hatches to get SA.

I thought that was established 219 pages ago?

 

[Kirkhill]

I thought that was established 219 pages ago?

So which is cheaper - pop the existing turrets and put new one man / RWS systems in their place or rewire the existing turrets so that one person can operate them?

 

[Kirkhill]

Force 2025 Long Range Precision Fires - and why wheels not tracks

Ukrainian army shows combat use of HIMARS in Zaporizhzhia region

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have begun to use HIMARS multiple rocket launcher systems in the Zaporizhzhia region. — Ukrinform.

www.ukrinform.net

Russians abandon military warehouses fearing HIMARS

Russian fear of HIMARS multiple launcher rocket systems forces the occupiers to abandon their military equipment warehouses en masse, Zaporizhzhya regional military administration reported on July 7.

news.yahoo.com

 

[markppcli]

So which is cheaper - pop the existing turrets and put new one man / RWS systems in their place or rewire the existing turrets so that one person can operate them?

Neither ? If you expect the vehicle to do any kind of fire and movement you need some one to coordinate that. As we discussed a 100 pages ago. I truly an baffled by where you see the issue here, but more so by your consistent disregard of the experience of the end user. A mere page ago you discussed your admiration for an autocannon taking the stress of AT weapons, while simultaneously you go on about the merits of not having them on armoured vehicles. But mostly it is that you simply refuse to understand that when a vehicle is jockeying on a position you need to have some one telling the driver when to turn and they can’t do it with their face in a sight.

 

[Kirkhill]

Neither ? If you expect the vehicle to do any kind of fire and movement you need some one to coordinate that. As we discussed a 100 pages ago. I truly an baffled by where you see the issue here, but more so by your consistent disregard of the experience of the end user. A mere page ago you discussed your admiration for an autocannon taking the stress of AT weapons, while simultaneously you go on about the merits of not having them on armoured vehicles. But mostly it is that you simply refuse to understand that when a vehicle is jockeying on a position you need to have some one telling the driver when to turn and they can’t do it with their face in a sight.

And yet some armies do it (strykers) and others are contemplating it. All in a world where it is getting harder to recruit people to fill those seats.

 

[markppcli]

I thought that was established 219 pages ago?

Oh we did… and again 100 pages ago.

 

[Kirkhill]

Wiesel AWC - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

20mm Wiesel - 2 man crew, one man turret.

Crew	Driver, gunner/commander or driver, gunner and commander depending on variant.

 

[markppcli]

Read the second half of that. If your going to try and be smug, you ought to read the full comment.

All of that aside that is a design choice to make the size work, but I’m sick and tired of this conversation. Your lack of knowledge of armoured fighting vehicle employment, the LAV specifically, I can understand. The refusal to take in the knowledge and experience coming from others is a different matter entirely.

 

[McG]

Wiesel AWC - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

20mm Wiesel - 2 man crew, one man turret.

Crew	Driver, gunner/commander or driver, gunner and commander depending on variant.

Is that cannon stabilized? Does that turret have 360 degrees of rotation? If the answer to both questions is not yes, then does the system represent something that we should aspire to emulate?

 

[Kirkhill]

Is that cannon stabilized? Does that turret have 360 degrees of rotation? If the answer to both questions is not yes, then does the system represent something that we should aspire to emulate?

It is an infantry support vehicle. It carries a heavy "machine gun" to the infantry fight and allows it to be rapidly relocated from one firing position to another.

 

[Kirkhill]

Wiesel 1 Airportable Armored Vehicle | Military-Today.com

The Wiesel 1 airportable armored vehicle was developed by Porsche at the end of 1970s. It entered service with German airborne units in 1982. Over 300 of these vehicles were built.

www.military-today.com

And here is the proposed replacement with a 27mm RWS - and a two man crew.

LuWa Airborne Armored Vehicle | Military-Today.com

In 2021 demonstrator of a new airmobile tracked armored vehicle was revealed in Germany. It was designed as a replacement for the Wiesel. This armored vehicle is carried inside military helicopters and supports airborne troops.

www.military-today.com

Valhalla turrets

www.valhalla-turrets.com

In my view these are vehicles designed to accompany infantry. The LAV is a vehicle for infantry to accompany vehicles.

 

[KevinB]

And yet some armies do it (strykers) and others are contemplating it. All in a world where it is getting harder to recruit people to fill those seats.

One man or unmanned turrets are different.

It’s both a space issue, and an SA issue.
Personally having dealt with both types of turrets - I prefer the two man system for an IFV. I don’t believe that one can get enough SA from a RWS to jockey and direct support Infantry on the ground.
I’m also going to say that vehicles are inherently dangerous to dismounted personnel. A good friend of mine who retired as the CDD SGM from the Army SMU down here likes to point out the most dangerous thing in combat to the 11B was the M1A2 Abrams tank - because even a two man turret on a AFV jockeying and fighting the vehicle isn’t able to keep track of dismounts.
Crew tend to call dismounts crunchies for a reason.

The Styker is IMHO an APC, the 25mm on the LAV makes it more than a simple APC and it is expected to support the fight - the same with the Bradley.

OMFV will have a lot more sensors and ability to provide SA to the driver and Gunner/Commander - I’m still leery of a 1 man turret for that role however as target selection, vehicle commanding and target engagements are a lot do expect from one person in combat, while ensuring you don’t drive over your troops.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The Styker is IMHO an APC, the 25mm on the LAV makes it more than a simple APC and it is expected to support the fight - the same with the Bradley.

Hypothetically speaking,
4x Lav 6.0 with 25mm, 7 dismounts per
vs
3x Lav6.0 with .50/40mm RWS, 8 dismounts per + 1x Lav 6.0 upgunned ATGM equipped turret / RWS, 6 dismounts

 

[OldSolduer]

I’m also going to say that vehicles are inherently dangerous to dismounted personnel. A good friend of mine who retired as the CDD SGM from the Army SMU down here likes to point out the most dangerous thing in combat to the 11B was the M1A2 Abrams tank - because even a two man turret on a AFV jockeying and fighting the vehicle isn’t able to keep track of dismounts.
Crew tend to call dismounts crunchies for a reason.

The highlighted part - its a critical safety requirement for dismounts to be well aware of the AFVs in the area. The AFVs lines of sight are terrible and are full of blind spots.

 

[Kirkhill]

The highlighted part - its a critical safety requirement for dismounts to be well aware of the AFVs in the area. The AFVs lines of sight are terrible and are full of blind spots.

Navy rules. Little boats give way to big boats.

 

[KevinB]

Navy rules. Little boats give way to big boats.

The problem is - boats just can’t randomly back up Immediately…

You can be minding your own business getting your kill on, and then some guy from the enemy team fires a missile - and every AFV on Blue all of a sudden decides to act like a elephant that has seen a mouse - that house you where busy in - all of a sudden has an Abrams drive into it…

 

[Underway]

Navy rules. Little boats give way to big boats.

That's not the rules. Power driven vessels give way to sailing vessels, or vessels that are fishing, or vessels that are restricted in their ability to maneuver, or not under command or.... So many rules.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That's not the rules. Power driven vessels give way to sailing vessels, or vessels that are fishing, or vessels that are restricted in their ability to maneuver, or not under command or.... So many rules.

In my kayak, I'm officially at the bottom of the food chain so should be able to insist that the biggest ships yield to my awesomeness.

However, unlike some cyclists, I know that physics is not on my side so am somewhat more circumspect

 

[Underway]

In my kayak, I'm officially at the bottom of the food chain so should be able to insist that the biggest ships yield to my awesomeness.

However, unlike some cyclists, I know that physics is not on my side so am somewhat more circumspect

There are the rules and then there is common sense self preservation. Those big ships couldn't avoid you even if they saw you depending on where you are paddling.

---

Army Reorg.

Seems the the Cavalry squadrons are a go. But they seem to be square (aka all the exact same vehicle). Is that a good idea? Do they have attachements? Why is Canada allergic to mixing vehicle types into a squadron organization (like say a command vehicle into the squadron)? Or are there mixed vehicles and I just don't know it? Or perhaps its early days still and the mix may come as the squadrons shake out.