Infantry Vehicles

[Colin Parkinson]

It’s on AJAX as well but I don’t hold that against it. How they managed to only carry 65 rounds is beyond me but I suppose if your reference point is RARDEN then everything is an upgrade

One thing I say for Raden, it was impressively small and took up minimal space in the turret. The concept of clip loading autocannons might be still useful for upgrading the firepower of small vehicles without creating stability and space issues.

 

[markppcli]

One thing I say for Raden, it was impressively small and took up minimal space in the turret. The concept of clip loading autocannons might be still useful for upgrading the firepower of small vehicles without creating stability and space issues.

I think now we’d just use an rws turret and save the space while keeping belt loading. See the Croatian Patria as an example.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was think more like VBL and Sandcat sized vehicles. The British Fox was a remarkably small vehicle, I agree a tad to small for what they wanted. If you want a 25-30mm gun on a small chassis is a belt fed RWS or a clip fed gun a more doable for that size gun?

 

[markppcli]

I was think more like VBL and Sandcat sized vehicles. The British Fox was a remarkably small vehicle, I agree a tad to small for what they wanted. If you want a 25-30mm gun on a small chassis is a belt fed RWS or a clip fed gun a more doable for that size gun?

Belt fed RWS
It puts the weapon “outside” and thus out of the confine of the vehicle. And you don’t need to account from crew in the size.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Belt fed RWS
It puts the weapon “outside” and thus out of the confine of the vehicle. And you don’t need to account from crew in the size.

Oh I understand the concept well. I thinking more of stability issues with the upgunning small 4x4 vehicles, and not just for the CAF. Just mulling which might work better under that constraint.

 

[markppcli]

Oh I understand the concept well. I thinking more of stability issues with the upgunning small 4x4 vehicles, and not just for the CAF. Just mulling which might work better under that constraint.

I’d have to imagine that a clip based run requires a manned turret, which is going to be heavier and larger surely.

 

[Kirkhill]

I was think more like VBL and Sandcat sized vehicles. The British Fox was a remarkably small vehicle, I agree a tad to small for what they wanted. If you want a 25-30mm gun on a small chassis is a belt fed RWS or a clip fed gun a more doable for that size gun?

This is a Low-recoil Force 30mm mounted in a Kongsberg Protector RS6 on what looks like a JLTV.

M230LF main weapon, 7.62mm coax weapon and an Anti-Tank Weapon can be installed simultaneously

PROTECTOR RWS LW30

The PROTECTOR RWS LW30 is an extension of the existing PROTECTOR RWS family providing enhanced operational capability by use of a low-recoil 30mm cannon.

www.kongsberg.com

Army Guide

Army Guide - information about the main battle tanks, armoured vehicles and armament of the land forces and also the information concerning other army subjects - M230LF, Gun, Weapons & Weapon Systems

www.army-guide.com

M230 chain gun - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It uses 30x113 ammunition (AH64s, ADEN and DEFA guns)

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Thanks Kirkhill, seems to answer my question.

 

[Kirkhill]

An interesting twitter thread covering some of the same ground being covered here.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1404453458347016195

And a related article about the US Army fielding a programmable 30x113mm airburst round

“Developed by defense contractor Northrop Grumman and dubbed the XM1211 High Explosive Proximity (HEP) cartridge, each 30×113 mm round comes outfitted with a tiny radio-frequency sensor that detects unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and explodes, giving soldiers a better chance at destroying an airborne target than relying on a direct hit.

“The 30mm x 173mm airburst cartridge will feature a contact set fuze design with three operational fuze modes: Programmable Airburst, Point Detonation and Point Detonation with Delay. The initial contract will fund the completion of the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase and final qualification by the Army….The newly fielded gun system nearly doubles the range of the platform’s current .50-caliber machine gun. The addition of an airburst cartridge provides a complete family of ammunition that arms the crew to meet the challenges posed by peer and near-peer adversarial threat systems.”

US Army "takes delivery of anti-drone ammunition for Stryker defence" - Unmanned airspace

The US news service Task and Purpose has reported the US Army has begun fielding a new ‘proximity’ airburst round to its Stryker force for

www.unmannedairspace.info

The M230 LF Specs

Specifications: Property Value Main weapon caliber (mm) 30​ Muzzle velocity (m/s) 850​ Length (mm) 2143​ Barrel length (calibres) 50​ Width (mm) 277​ Height (mm) 288​ Weight (kg) 34.5​ Rate of fire (rds/min) 200​

Army Guide

Army Guide - information about the main battle tanks, armoured vehicles and armament of the land forces and also the information concerning other army subjects - M230LF, Gun, Weapons & Weapon Systems

www.army-guide.com

 

[KevinB]

FWIW the Strykers generally had a 50:50 Mix of M2’s and Mk19’s
For Iraq it was a great mix as you where not seeing significant (or any after week2) armor or light armor from the opponents.

However the ugly truth about medium weight forces has popped up again.

 

[markppcli]

An interesting twitter thread covering some of the same ground being covered here.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1404453458347016195

And a related article about the US Army fielding a programmable 30x113mm airburst round

US Army "takes delivery of anti-drone ammunition for Stryker defence" - Unmanned airspace

The US news service Task and Purpose has reported the US Army has begun fielding a new ‘proximity’ airburst round to its Stryker force for

www.unmannedairspace.info

The M230 LF Specs

Property Value Specifications: Main weapon caliber (mm) 30​ Muzzle velocity (m/s) 850​ Length (mm) 2143​ Barrel length (calibres) 50​ Width (mm) 277​ Height (mm) 288​ Weight (kg) 34.5​ Rate of fire (rds/min) 200​

Army Guide

Army Guide - information about the main battle tanks, armoured vehicles and armament of the land forces and also the information concerning other army subjects - M230LF, Gun, Weapons & Weapon Systems

www.army-guide.com

Now compare that RWS to where the weapon on a boxer is and tell me which you’d rather use.

 

[Kirkhill]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1300836370567565312

https://twitter.com/x/status/1244379118747226120

I'm not sure I follow.

The RWS solution looks adequate for an APC/ACSV for self defence against a range of close in threats. It also looks like a useful upgun for light forces limited by transport or terrain to light and unmanned vehicles. I think I would prefer a forward mounted RWS, keeping the rear clear for cargo and pax.

A larger turret? More suited to a separate manoeuver vehicle perhaps? The Boxer and the LAV6/ACSV both feel to this civilian to be very large vehicles for a combat vehicle.

I guess I am still hung up on the Saladin/Saracen split. Automotively identical. Different hulls. Different turrets. The RWS would make a great solution for a modern Saracen. For a modern Saladin? An unmanned turret? Or better with a 35mm version of the current LAV 6 Delco? I think I would lean towards the manned turret. With a couple of 5 to 8 km ATGMs and a UAV?

 

[Kirkhill]

FWIW the Strykers generally had a 50:50 Mix of M2’s and Mk19’s
For Iraq it was a great mix as you where not seeing significant (or any after week2) armor or light armor from the opponents.

However the ugly truth about medium weight forces has popped up again.

One unnecessary compromise too many.

 

[KevinB]

View attachment 76371

I'm not sure I follow.

The RWS solution looks adequate for an APC/ACSV for self defence against a range of close in threats. It also looks like a useful upgun for light forces limited by transport or terrain to light and unmanned vehicles. I think I would prefer a forward mounted RWS, keeping the rear clear for cargo and pax.

A larger turret? More suited to a separate manoeuver vehicle perhaps? The Boxer and the LAV6/ACSV both feel to this civilian to be very large vehicles for a combat vehicle.

I suspect @markppcli was referring to the placement on the one above.

Its positioning on the rear deck means two main things.
1) Limited Depression due to that position, so a run up won’t allow a steeper angle to the front glacis plate.
2) No top hatches for egress of the GIB’s (if your LAV has ever fallen rearward into a trench that blocks the ramp you will appreciate the ability to exit via the top ‘air sentry’ hatches.

A third issue is that in some operations the GIB’s in the air sentry hatches are extremely effective at both providing 360 degrees of observation and small arms fire against individual threats (like person carried explosives) or VBIED where the target is located among non hostile civilians that the main gun isn’t a practical engagement method.

 

[markppcli]

I suspect @markppcli was referring to the placement on the one above.

Its positioning on the rear deck means two main things.
1) Limited Depression due to that position, so a run up won’t allow a steeper angle to the front glacis plate.
2) No top hatches for egress of the GIB’s (if your LAV has ever fallen rearward into a trench that blocks the ramp you will appreciate the ability to exit via the top ‘air sentry’ hatches.

A third issue is that in some operations the GIB’s in the air sentry hatches are extremely effective at both providing 360 degrees of observation and small arms fire against individual threats (like person carried explosives) or VBIED where the target is located among non hostile civilians that the main gun isn’t a practical engagement method.

It also means you need to expose about 60 percent of your vehicle to get a fire position in an urban / congested battle space. Use of autocannon a in urban environments has been proven effective in Ukraine, and brining the carrier into that space has proven required, even comparatively light / unsuitable ones like the Sentinel.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1300836370567565312

https://twitter.com/x/status/1244379118747226120

View attachment 76371

I'm not sure I follow.

The RWS solution looks adequate for an APC/ACSV for self defence against a range of close in threats. It also looks like a useful upgun for light forces limited by transport or terrain to light and unmanned vehicles. I think I would prefer a forward mounted RWS, keeping the rear clear for cargo and pax.

A larger turret? More suited to a separate manoeuver vehicle perhaps? The Boxer and the LAV6/ACSV both feel to this civilian to be very large vehicles for a combat vehicle.

I guess I am still hung up on the Saladin/Saracen split. Automotively identical. Different hulls. Different turrets. The RWS would make a great solution for a modern Saracen. For a modern Saladin? An unmanned turret? Or better with a 35mm version of the current LAV 6 Delco? I think I would lean towards the manned turret. With a couple of 5 to 8 km ATGMs and a UAV?

I think you’re hung up on trying to relate back to vehicles of yore. I don’t think anyone is trying to replicate Saracen and Saladin. We’re giving soldiers who’d previously be driven in Saracen substantially better protection, fire power, speed, and frankly comfort in getting them to the fight, and allowing them to be supported in that fight.

 

[Kirkhill]

It also means you need to expose about 60 percent of your vehicle to get a fire position in an urban / congested battle space. Use of autocannon a in urban environments has been proven effective in Ukraine, and brining the carrier into that space has proven required, even comparatively light / unsuitable ones like the Sentinel.

View attachment 76372




I think you’re hung up on trying to relate back to vehicles of yore. I don’t think anyone is trying to replicate Saracen and Saladin. We’re giving soldiers who’d previously be driven in Saracen substantially better protection, fire power, speed, and frankly comfort in getting them to the fight, and allowing them to be supported in that fight.

I am indeed hung up on days of yore - principally because I am not progressive. I am conservative. In my universe people and principles don't change.

And yet. I may not be the only fan of the split missions.

200 LeClerc - MBT
300 Jaguar - Wheeled Armd Recce
1872 Griffon - Wheeled APC

SCORPION Program | Knds

www.nexter-group.fr

 

[markppcli]

I am indeed hung up on days of yore - principally because I am not progressive. I am conservative. In my universe people and principles don't change.

And yet. I may not be the only fan of the split missions.

I’m not really sure where the splits came up, I was commenting on my view as to why I don’t like the RWS placement on the Boxer and how we’d like RWS most small wheeled platforms.

200 LeClerc - MBT
300 Jaguar - Wheeled Armd Recce
1872 Griffon - Wheeled APC

SCORPION Program | Knds

www.nexter-group.fr

View attachment 76373

I suppose in a certain surface way I can see the comparison. I’m not a fan of the Griphon myself, I think it suffers from a lot of the issues that the TAPV does - too concerned with the last war.

VCBI ought also be in that list, was it’s exclusion intentional ?

 

[Kirkhill]

I’m not really sure where the splits came up, I was commenting on my view as to why I don’t like the RWS placement on the Boxer and how we’d like RWS most small wheeled platforms.

I suppose in a certain surface way I can see the comparison. I’m not a fan of the Griphon myself, I think it suffers from a lot of the issues that the TAPV does - too concerned with the last war.

VCBI ought also be in that list, was it’s exclusion intentional ?

The VCBI exclusion wasn't intentional - I just went to the Nexter site. For some reason they didn't mention it.

VBCI - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So, from FEBA to the Rear?

Jaguar, LeClerc, VBCI, Griffon?

 

[markppcli]

I think you’ll find the Griphons doing the job of the VAB and equipping light / overseas forces.

 

[Kirkhill]

Leclerc - 200 MBT - 57 tonne tracked - 120mm - autoloader - crew of driver, gunner and commander - 0 pax

VBCI - 120 VPC (CP) - 32 tonne 8x8 - 25mm - one man turret - crew of driver, gunner and commander - 7 pax
VBCI - 510 VCI (IFV) - 32 tonne 8x8 - 25mm - one man turret - crew of driver, gunner and commander - 8 pax

Jaguar - 300 EBRC - 25 tonne 6x6 - 40mm - two man turret - crew of driver, gunner and commander - 0 pax
Griffon - 1872 VBMR - 25 tonne 6x6 - GPMG, HMG or GMG - RWS - crew of driver and gunner - 8 pax
Serval - 489 VBMR-L by 2025 growing to 978 by 2030, - 17 tonne 4x4 - GPMG, HMG or GMG - RWS - crew of driver and gunner - 8 pax
Serval - 1060 VLTP P by 2033

Jaguar/Griffon/Serval are all based on commercial designs.

Design[edit]​

The vehicle is based on a 6×6 commercial all-terrain truck chassis and will carry up to eight infantry soldiers. The consortium building the "Griffon" and "Jaguar" is contractually obliged to keep the price per Griffon under €1 million. Currently, six versions of the Griffon are planned, with four of these (Armored Personnel Carrier, Command Post, Ambulance, and Artillery Observer) ordered in the first tranche.

The vehicles are designed for simple maintenance and logistics. For example, Griffon and Jaguar both use standard commercial truck engines, which have been adapted to use a wider range of fuel. The vehicle has an overpressure system to maintain constant protection to the troop compartment against chemical, biological and radiological threats. For service in hot climates, the Griffon is equipped with air conditioning.

• Complementing the heavier Griffon armoured vehicle, the Véhicule Blindé Multi-Rôle Léger Serval (English: "Lightweight Multirole Armored Vehicle Serval") or VBMR-L Serval is also intended as a replacement for the VAB. 4-wheeled and designed to operate in areas of contact with the enemy, it is particularly maneuverable and will primarily equip infantry units of light brigades such as the 11th Airborne Brigade and the 27th Mountain Infantry Brigade.[7] The contract for the French Army was awarded in February 2018, which included funding for 489 units by 2025, reaching 978 vehicles by 2030.[8][9]
• Furthermore, 1060 additional Serval VLTP P (véhicule léger tactique polyvalent protégé) (multipurpose light tactical vehicles protected) will also be purchased by 2033.

Serval VBMR Multi-Role Vehicle, France​

The Serval véhicule blindé multi-rôles (VBMR) is a 4×4 multi-role armoured vehicle manufactured by French state-owned defence systems integrator Nexter Systems in collaboration with mobility solutions provider Texelis. The vehicle is intended for deployment in the primary contact area on the battlefield to engage light units.

Mission capabilities of VBMR​

The Serval can be used to transport light infantry, intelligence, and reconnaissance units in contact zones on the battlefield. It will be deployed by the French rapid reaction force.

The vehicle will be available in three different variants, including armoured patrol vehicle (VPB), tactical communication node (NCT), and surveillance, acquisition, intelligence, and acknowledgment (SA2R).

Serval VBMR mission equipment and systems​

The vehicles under the Scorpion programme will have a high degree of commonality in their integrated equipment.

Serval VBMR is equipped with the SCORPION Combat Information System (SICS), which supports collective combat capabilities by ensuring communication between all the platforms and weapons systems of the Scorpion network. The SICS enables automatic exchange of data and timely decision-making by the group leaders of the military regiments.

Serval VBMR will also be integrated with a remote machine gun operated from the cabin, threat detectors, and a contact radio station.

Serval VBMR Multi-Role Vehicle, France

The Serval véhicule blindé multi-rôles (VBMR) is a multi-role armoured vehicle manufactured by Nexter Systems in collaboration with Texelis.

www.army-technology.com

Army Guide

Army Guide - information about the main battle tanks, armoured vehicles and armament of the land forces and also the information concerning other army subjects - Serval VBMR Leger, Wheeled armoured personnel carrier, Armoured Vehicles

www.army-guide.com

Serval will replace the 4 tonne VBL and the 14 tonne VAB