Which IFV will /k/ ride into battle in?
>>64421512give me the bradley I liked it before it was cool
IFVs are a mistake.
>>64421512I'll ride an invisible pink unicorn into battle. It's about as realistic as an T-15, but more effective.
>>64421512Why is the chinese one a 2d model ported from minecraft?
>>64421512>Chink copy of the BMP-3 which is somehow better than the original>RUS vaporware>Chadley>m113 hullI'm choosing Bradley
>>64421512>Which IFV will /k/ ride into battle in?The one that isn't turdworld vaporware
>ZBD-97Why not the ZBD-04A?Also where are the CV90's?
>>64421512T-15, I want to see the myth
>>64421512I choose the T-15 so I don't have to ride into battle.
>>64421544So none of them?
>>64421597>don't have to go to the front because your ifv doesn't existxaxaxaxa)))))>endlessly raped at the barracks blyat((((
>>64421597Good news than, anon. You're walking into battle
>>64421543>Chink copy of the BMP-3 which is somehow better than the originalI wouldn't call it a copy, the only thing that the ZBD-97/04 has that's similar to the BMP-3 is the dual cannon turret.The hull is completely different, the engine is actually in the front and the entrance/exit of troops in the back is actually usable, unlike the BMP-3 which you have to climb over the engine.
>>64421645you may not like it, but this is what peak ergonomics looks like
>>64421619kek
Cobra SKOT
>>64421512>t-15Why not a dragon OP, they're just as fictional.
>>64421512>no BMP-2I know I'll die but if I must ride an IFV I want it to be the sexiest IFV ever made.
>>64421512CV90 gang, where you at?
>>64421512Dardo.I just think it’s neat
>>64421676they have to manually open the flaps?!?
>>64421512>no CV90
>>64421512Seriously?
>>64421787I'm here
>>64421808Imagine replying this to your own thread when you already replied to the OP before.
>>64421827Meds
>>64421810>YFW you will never pound some swedish slags in the CV-90 Rave varientWhy even live?
>>64421842It doesn't work when you use it as your go to response, tard.
>>64421512I'd choose german vaporwareIf I had to choose one of the picrel it'd be the bradley and it isn't even close
CV90
>>64421512Probably this one with how things could possibly shape up.
>>64421512I would ride on top of an MBT into battle
>>64421512a Ford Econoline with a machine gun cupola made from the cabin of a Lada welded to the roof
>>64421808>>64421827>>64421842>>64421857This is just some mentally ill retard replying to himself, isn't it?
>>64421616>>64421619Okay then, I choose the Merkava because it means that my enemies are starving children.
>>64421512I choose T-15 Armata as my exclusive mobile battle wagon. Since it won't enter service or be used I have deftly avoided combat.
>>64421676that's kind of cute in a clown car kind of way
>>64421879Based.>>64421963>inb4 literal JIDF starts derailing the thread to cope about how you must be brown cuz you don't like them>>64421512Gun to my head, Bradley. But only because one is a failed prototype, and the other two are copies of thin-skinned 1960s-era boot cookers. In reality, I'd rather be in an Abrams, and I'd SUPER rather not be fighting a gay war for globalist in the era of Dem Dronez. But that's neither here nor there.
>>64421795yes anon, real men who aren't weak trannies open flaps manually. both to egress from the vehicle and on their pants for corrective non-homosexual rape.
>>64421512Serious answer: Bradley.Meme answer: Turk IFV because I's kind of chubby and cute..
>>64421952>never seen warriortard post his dumb token shit, then get called out for it only to then react in a predictable manner since he has to do it so often
>>64421787Reporting in regards :DDDD psj
>>64421543>copyRetard. The Abrams is more of a Leopard 2 copy than this thing is one of the BMP-3.
>>64422118God I hate Americans
This stupid thing. Not because I think it's objectively a good IFV or anything, but simply because when I played BF4 back in the day I did better in this than I did the LAV or BTR.
>>64421512Of those 4? The Bradley, mainly because the t-15 doesn't exist. But I'd rather be in an XM-30.
>>64421613>No. built: 6,724
Everyone who likes the Bradley is Warriortard!
>>64421512Brads for chads
Next time just make a single post.
>>64421952most of this site is
>>64421512The SUPER Bradley.
>>64423251The what?
>>64423146They should replace the 25mm with a flamethrower that'd be tuff as hell
this combo because I genuinely think the frogs are onto something with separating the F from the IV
>>64423251>>64423252>50 seconds betweenSomeone take warriortards phone away.
>>64423374I feel bad for your parents. It must be rough having a mentally ill child.
>>64423374>when a schizoid campaign of retardation and misinformation is so persistent, it creates schizos to oppose themYing and yang
>>64423492>>64423518Put done your phones.
>>64421676it's so funny watchin this after seeing countless clips showing the full chaos of an IFV dismount in a combat situation. >"guys lets get out and kneel in formation"yeah right, more like AAAAAAAAAHHHH RUN THE DRONES ARE COMING GET TO THE TRENCH/TREES
>>64421512
>>64424130
>>64421512ZBD is a tinderbox that will explode the moment it gets tagged by a 20mmT-15 is a literal box that will break down on the way to the battlefieldBradley is probably the best IFV on the field now in terms of balance between firepower, mobility, and protection, comparable to an early generation MBT like the AMX-30 or Leopard 1ACV-15 is a Sprey contraption that is probably the second best on this list but will fold when tagged by modern HMG ammo, let alone anything heavier
>>64421512namer
>>64421645>>64422840The ZBD97 and later ZBD04 variant are based on prototypes of a front engined variant of the BMP3 from the 90s. The Chinese ran with it and improved it a lot. The Russians offered their own derivative of it in the 2000s called the Dragun but no one bought it.
>>64421512I really like the Hunter. Very well protected for it's size and full of fancy licensed German & Israeli tech. It's basically like a scaled down Namer but more mobile, or like a Puma but a Puma that actually works.
>>64421512The ACV is just a modernized M113 with an autocannon turret. It's more of an APC++ which can carry 8 soldiers and give some useful fire support while the soldiers disembark. It's not really meant to fight other vehicles.
>>64423593you don't get to run, there's plenty of footage from early days of invasion with VDV corpses over those flaps
>>64423325The only IFV I've seen employing it's gun effectively during the Ukraine cluster fuck is the bradley. I've watched so many videos of both bradley and bmps dying without firing a shot in piles. I know the mtlb isn't a IFV, but it does have that little machine gun turret, but I've never seen anyone actually use it in combat. Has anyone seen an mtlb using that turret?
>>64423325It's just apc and tank again.
From what I've seen (on video) and read (from the guys both operating the vehicles and fighting against them) my pics would be the cv90 and chadley
Why they need a canon? It's a troop carrier
>>64421787>perfect camo netting and color, could quite feasibly blend in if someone wasn't looking carefully>adds a bright red flag on top
>>64423276This guy gets it.
>>64421512Bradley, but only because it looks like a tank.Shouldn't it be easier to design an APC from the ground up these days? You've basically got a century of designs and doctrines to lean back on and pick what seems fitting for today along with adjusting for drones. I'm leaning towards American-style tanks, of course.
>>64425658>Bradley, but only because it looks like a tank.But that's the problem, if the enemy sees it they're gonna think it's a tank and unload on it with everything we've got.I mean WE know it's not a tank, but do they know?
>>64425924I don't think they give a fuck what it is, they'll just light up the damn thing. Might as well put armor on it best you can. Electric motors could help in making IFV's harder to spot than shaving off meters in height, but speed and protection is likely your best bet.
>>64425924Did he think otherwise the enemy would be like, "Oh, it's merely a troop carrier, it would be unsportsmanlike to blow that up?"
>>64425954It's. A. Troop. Carrier.
>>64425945>Might as well put armor on it best you can.Thicker armor's a reactive measure. Let's think proactive here. I say equip the thing with anti-tank missiles, then it can blast those enemy tanks before they get a chance to fire.
>>64425658Western nations generally do a shitload of testing and validation on every single aspect of APC/IFV design, from landmine resistance to post penetration survivability for various threats. These things combined with the fact that you have to tool up an entire new factory for it makes it extremely expensive to actually build new vehicles. That's why most modern designs are either derivations of proven existing designs, which shortens the testing and redesign phases significantly, or they are new designs but provide a significant enough leap in capability for it to be worth it like the Puma IFV
>>64426007Thanks anon, never thought of it like that.
>>64424345>shittiest of all of them
>>64426045What makes you say that? It has NERA arrays and spikes in a pop-up launcher.
>>64423374> muh warriortardI came to the conclusion that the same schizo who does ‘warriortard’ posting is also whoever is randomly accusing people of being ‘warriortard.’ Furthermore, I’m convinced it’s a quintessentially British psyop to immediately well-poison any discussion about the Warrior and how it matches up to other similar IFVs.Imagine if every time you wanted to discuss the Brad, some schizo started reeing how about he’s the Bradchad and no one else is allowed to discuss the topic.
>>64426048compared to the puma, it is undergunned, underarmoured, and underpowered. it's only upside is it's smaller size which singapore most likely chose due to the most likely very urban battlefield it will see. but in combination with it sizeable infantry squat, it is likely way less useable for long combat missions, which is fine when you only plan to fight in one city. the namer on the other hand has an entirely other usecase. it share the hull of the merkava, is intended to be uses alongside it, and has about the same wheight – 60ish tons, double the wheight of the hunter – most of which goes into armour. It is perfectly adapted to urban warfare against insurgents level threats in the middle east (read no bridges).so it suffers on all fronts compared to namer and puma and from the ugly samson turretalso nera and spikes as upsides when comparing to namer and puma is laughable
>>64426156The thread is full of positive posts about the Bradley and dont get called Warriortard, you dumb cunt. Warriortard has been doing his thing for long enough and repeated so often even the denses motherfuckers gets what he does. I'm sorry it went right past you empty head, i truely am.How you fail to realize Warriortard loves to false flag when he's gets called out too often or too hard is also quite telling. All you need to know or see is right there, but you manage to put it together the wrongest way possible.
>>64426156>, I’m convinced it’s a quintessentially British psyop to immediately well-poison any discussion about the Warrior and how it matches up to other similar IFVs.And there it is.So, you are either warriortard or some troll. How can everyone tell? Because no normal person would write shit like this or be this butthurt about some known schizo getting called out. This is also how one can distinguish if it is you or if you false flag attack posters and call them warriortard yourself, it's the reaction. You always act so butthurt and personally invested.
>>64423146The Bradley really is the Stacy of AFV's
>>64426415Makes me wonder what is the Karen of AFV's?
>>64421512>T15 Armata Only 5 of those exist after 10 years of production
>>64425971tanks dont mean shit in modern war. And if the enemy has effective antitank they know what a fucking tank looks like
>>64426448>pawn shop episode in the year 2078>"So what i'm looking at here?">"This is some sort of obscure tank i found in a barn of my grandfahter's farm, he was collecting farm and military vehicles, and i want to sell it now after he passed away.">"Okay, pal, i don't know much about tanks, let me call a friend of mine, he's an expert on antique tanks, and we'll figure it out what it is and what it is worth">commercial brake "BUY BRANDO! IT GOT ELECTROLYTES!!!">"Where did you find this? This is such a rare sight. But lets get back to topic, most people nowadays dont know it, but the euroasian northern wasteland occupied by various warlord nations used be a nation called Russia, before the country collapsed it was the largest country by size in the world and their ego was even bigger. They had this weird cycle of producing military equipment where they would hype up the things they would build, on a sidenote a lot of nice models where built during that time, they even fed false information to various fake news sides about its capabilities. Then they were built, they were a lot worse than said and also in lower numbers than promised, a lot of the money of the project was stolen, but don't you worry they had more new projects ready that would everyone make forget the old promises. Anyways, what you got here is a T-15 IFV, so technically not a tank, thousands were supposed be build in the end only 5 left the factory, because Russia attacked a small nation directly at its border and then the whole country collapsed after it failed to win that war over the next 5 years. A normal country would have built a lot of those in a war, but not Russia, they knew it wasn't that good and the project was actually just made to steal money, so hard any were ever produced. I know of two more that exist, god only knows what happened to the rest, but you got some true rarity here. People pay top bitcoins for something like this, even for me it is hard to estimate such a rare item"
>>64421512The Ratel
>>64422213Who are you quoting.
>>64425658Would be cool to command one of these irl
Why it's the Namer so fucking heavy for a vehicle that carries only 9 guys? Just 12 I'd get it, and yes I know it's basically a turretless Merkava, but still.
>>64427024This is what you get when you work with thick steel structure and era(steel sandwiches.
>>64426313>>64426409You deserve to be trolled you fucking dorks.
>>64427762Is Warriortard in the room with us right now?Trick question; Warriortard is ALWAYS in the room with us, right now.
Is everyone Warriortard except the person complaining about him?
>>64421676the actual room in the back is insanely smallliterally sardines
>>64426192It can mount a 30mm or a 40mm gun. The Puma has the same 30mm gun and can't mount the 40mm. It also has the same Spike ATGM as the Puma. It manages to have similar protection to the Puma despite lighter weight because it's significantly smaller. It still maintains a similar power to weight ratio and similar mobility. It can be upgraded to a 1,000hp engine which would make it faster than the Puma but it lacks the fancy transmission from the Puma that allows for reverse max speed the the Hunter has an HMX transmission which in theory also allows the same. The Hunter is also pretty damn heavy after those Mexas armor modules are added but total weight with them is unknown. It's not public. The 30 ton weight is in its form without the armor blocks. This is what it looks like without them.
>>64427822No, even that is warriortard.
>>64427822No, why would that be the case?
>Surprises your rear
I wanna go into battle in a BMP-2MD for the raw /k/ino, but CV90 would be so much comfier.
>>64423094I always liked the WZ-551/ZSL-92 because of BF2 and War Thunder
>his IFV can't swim
>>64421808Melty
>>64425924anything on the frontline is going to get hit, and hit hardyou obviously cant just armor the M2 bradley to the same degree as an MBT and still carry enough dismounts, but you can give it a really big gun to shoot the enemy before they can shoot you
I am Warriortard
>>64421512What is that retarded roachmobile?No, putting a gun on an M113 does not make it an IFV. It's more like a can of roaches with a cope tube on top.
>>64421795manually or orally
>>64428979badger badger what's your status
>>64426415It routinely has 9 sweaty men stuffed inside it at the same time?
>>64430032But only 6 would routinely coming in and out
>>64421645Does it retain the BMP3 capability to act as a BangBus set where conscripts have to give their NCOs the sloppy on their way to getting blown in half on a 4k livestream?
who needs a real IFV when you got a barely armored car with some extra wood strapped to it to make extra sure the RPG fuse ignites properly?
>>64430186Extra inch won't do shit
>>64430356it means the difference of life and death because if you didn't put on that wood plank the driver would have refused to drive down that street where that squad desperately needed that machine gun in the turret and smoke grenades
>>64429226mushroom sir!
>>64421879>a Ford Econoline with a machine gun cupola made from the cabin of a Lada welded to the roof>>64421998
>>64421879
>>64421512>Russia>ArmataIf you are going to post Russian vaporware, at least post something that gets vaporized in real life like BMD-4.
>>64430356an extra inch makes all the difference
>>64431229Free wi-fi makes even more difference.
>>64431219It needs at least 3 wheels to turn the cupola asshole.
>>64430356that's what she said
>>64421532Not a entirely invalid opinion. Given that modern IFVs are as expensive as tanks and are for all practical purposes used as light infantry support tanks they might as well just be classed as tanks. For anti infantry usage the Norks twin KPV fetish turns 323s and other light armor into something that for most purposes serves as a IFV at a fraction of the cost yet clearly has more firepower than a standard APC. Given that they seem to really like 30mm AGLs lately i am surprised they haven't modified that turret to swap one of the KPV's for a long barreled AGS-30, that would push them into light IFV territory especially the converted light tank carriers.
>>64431703>Not a entirely invalid opinionits an incredibly invalid opinion>Given that modern IFVs are as expensive as tanks and are for all practical purposes used as light infantry support tanks they might as well just be classed as tanksIFVs need firepower to be able to actually support their dismounts in combatdo you just not understand the purpose of an IFV?
>>64431710>IFVs need firepower to be able to actually support their dismounts in combatAnd a twin KPV or a KPV/AGL turret does that. On light IFV/APCs the difference in firepower between a Marder(1x20 mm) vs something like a 323/Chunma (2x14.5mm) is minor, there is a strong argument to be made that for anti infantry work the twin KPVs are superior due to rate of fire and ammo capacity. I do not discount the utility of heavier 'IFVs' just the classification; in Ukraine we don't see Bradleys' used to support infantry as much as we see them as the primary weapon i.e as a light tank/ATGM carrier which has been going on since the first Gulf war. If there is no 'dismounting' then it isn't a IFV it's a light tank, do the Ukrainians even have dismounts in half the footage we see?
>>64431756>there is a strong argument to be made that for anti infantry work the twin KPVs are superior due to rate of fire and ammo capacity.the 25mm cannon is superior to twin KPVs in both anti-infantry and anti-armor roles> we don't see Bradleys' used to support infantry as much as we see them as the primary weaponbradleys do not "support" infantry, they are considered an integral part of the infantry squad they carryand you see bradleys carrying dismounts in them all the time, and they are organized as mech infantry by the ukranians, so they are not being deployed without infantrycalling them light tanks is silly when they are acting exactly according to their intended purpose of fighting alongside their dismounts
>>64431768I'm being a bit pedantic about it, i'm talking battlefield roles not technical specs mostly. I'm also deliberately using the Marder and Nork designs as examples 'the lightest armed IFV and heaviest armed APCs' as most would classify them via firepower. >the 25mm cannon is superior to twin KPVs in both anti-infantry and anti-armor rolesAnti armor yes, however against infantry in the majority of cases the human body and most cover doesn't really care much if it was 14.5, 20, 23 or 25mm since obliterated is obliterated. Assuming equal amounts of ammo it is correct that bigger is better but that is not the case; smaller rounds mean more ammo. A 323 carries more than twice the rounds as a M2 does and in many situations (urban combat or AA) is superior due to turret elevation: If you can't hit it size is meaningless. >they are not being deployed without infantrycalling them light tanks is silly when they are acting exactly according to their intended purpose of fighting alongside their dismountsIn many cases that may be true however doctrinally there are many cases where that is clearly not the case; the first gulf war there was very little opportunity to dismount in many of the mobile battles and we have seen many instances of footage from Ukraine where they are unsupported including going head to head with MBTs. What i am getting at is that the definition should be primarily one of use doctrine instead of technical classification, pic related and a Marder are going to be used in almost exactly the same way besides amphibious operations. Not that use doctrine is entirely accurate either: Does a Merkava stop being a MBT and magically become a IFV the instant you kick a squad section out of the back?Neither method of classification is satisfactory but i feel use doctrine is the better one. If you disagree than that is fine, i'm not sure myself.
>>64424318Why did they go with the rear engine layout?
>>64431859>however against infantry in the majority of cases the human body and most cover doesn't really care much if it was 14.5, 20, 23 or 25mmthe 25mm round can carry an HE load and it can penetrate thicker cover, so it matters>What i am getting at is that the definition should be primarily one of use doctrine instead of technical classificationand in doctrine, the M2 bradley is a textbook IFV, since it carries dismounts and supports them in battlethey are not light tanks, except for the M3 variant, and they are not used as light tanksthey are organized under mech infantry and all their combat roles have been in close coordination with infantrythe M2 bradley is an IFV in design, in classification, and in battlefield usethe IFV has totally eclipsed the APC in direct combat and there is no signs of that ever changingthe IFV is and for the forseeable future will be the best possible thing you can equip mech infantry with>Does a Merkava stop being a MBT and magically become a IFV the instant you kick a squad section out of the back?thats a non-existant hypothethical because the merkava does not carry dismounts and has never carried dismountsonly the combat ambulance merkava is designed to carry anyone other than crew, and it is classified a combat ambulance because it lacks the necessary ammo storage to act as an MBT
>>64431129Soulless>>64431219SOVL
>>64431873No one knows why the BMP-3 has a rear engine, it is a significant downgrade in crew and troop survivability as well as the ability to quickly dismount and troop comfort. Not that these were all that great in the BMP-1/2 mind you.>>64431905>the 25mm round can carry an HE load and it can penetrate thicker cover, so it mattersOn the HE aspect i'll grant that, however just like 25mm has ammo capacity advantages so do smaller rounds. On the cover angle does it really matter all that much? Stopping either involves solid concrete or stone either way.Everything else you wrote is great but it gets back to my main point: It is a matter of use doctrine not the design itself. >the IFV has totally eclipsed the APC in direct combat and there is no signs of that ever changingDefine a IFV in a way that separates their role differently than a reasonably/heavily armed APC. >the IFV is and for the forseeable future will be the best possible thing you can equip mech infantry withAs above, define a IFV. Is it supporting dismounted infantry? Doctrine for base model M113s was that the infantry dismounts and the M113 supports them with the .50 as they advance, is the M113 a IFV? Does that Chunma-D i posted suddenly become a IFV if it is used in exactly the same way as intended but they swap out the KPVs for a 23mm?My point is the definition between APC/IFV isn't properly defined in a manner that is satisfactory.You are right about Merkavas, i concede that however technically then the ambulance isn't a MBT it is a APC which reinforces my point about the unsatisfactory and imprecise nature of the current classification system .
>>64431235For almost twenty years i have been saying something: The ideal UN Peacekeeping force for Africa or Haiti would be the DPRK. They are as close as you can get to being neutral, they cannot be bribed as they are more corrupt than you can begin to imagine and attempts to scare them with criminal tactics would result in extermination or even worse terror. If the UN hired the DPRK to fix Haiti or almost any African conflict it would result in peace within a few months as long as the US paid for the deployment of a divisions worth of Nork 'peace keepers' to fix the problem. All you would have to do is let them land, secure all the places of power, kill anyone in their way, establish a military government then let them relinquish control to whoever wasn't stupid enough to be murdered by them in the first place. UN moves in, establishes hospitals and rebuilding efforts based on the good deeds the DPRK did under a year or three of DPRK Occupation. If the local population rejects the UN the DPRK comes back to 'help' a second or third time. The fourth time there probably isn't much left and we are calling Haiti 'Really Far South East Korea'.
>>64421512This is probably a dumb question, but in practice are IFVs *actually* used to transport troops and provide fire support? Or do they end up just using them like light tanks when the war actually starts going?
>>64431873The BMP3 was originally a light tank very early in it's conceptual phase which was then later reworked into a BMP2 replacement.
>>64426415This woman is fucking hideous
>>64432261Holy christ shut the fuck up you asperger
>>64432265>but in practice are IFVs *actually* used to transport troops and provide fire support?that is the only thing they dofire support is maybe not quite accurate, the vehicle is the base of fire for its dismounts
>>64421676Two of the infantry are seated up front on either side of the driver and they have to make it past the turret before they can dismount.
>>64421860It was 2021 before the Germans had an IFV with an anti-tank weapon that could be fired from under armor.
>>64432444No.
>>64432261You must be 18 to post here
>>64428979She used to, but then she put on some weight and didn't want to be seen in a swimsuit anymore.
>>64432537wrongalso russia has been at war for 10 years now and still hasnt one that can do that.>inb4muh BMPyou said under armour
>>64432571I'm older than you and 95% of the people here, it would be a nice fishing attempt if my age wasn't common knowledge.
>>64431873It was adapted from a prototype amphibious light tank meant to replace the PT-76. The problem was it was an adaption, when it should have been a complete redesign.
>>64432575>wrongHow so?
>>64432588>Common knowledgeNo one gives a fuck about you
>>64421676I've been inside a BMP-3 before. Significantly worse than the BMP-1 and 2, somehow they put a toilet in it, which just sounds like it would be awful if used.
>>64423084Rent free
>>64432650>somehow they put a toilet in it, which just sounds like it would be awful if used.Is it worse than the Bradley's toilet (i.e. a trash bag in an empty ammo can)?
>>64432662Just hold it in and take a shit when we dismount retard. You just know in the BMP that toilet has faulty seals and hasn't been properly serviced since the thing rolled off the assembly line. At least with shitting in a bag or ammo can is that it's separate from the vehicle, worse case scenario if it spills you can just mop/hose out the mess. With a toilet built into the vehicle that shit has to literally permeate everything in it. Not to mention how unbelievably cramped it is in there.
>>64432640I'd be offended if you weren't the guy assigned to try and bait me, i know it is just a job. Please have a nice day, i wish you well although i doubt you wish the same of me.
>>64425954You can't shoot at the infantry before they have a chance to dismount, that's spawncamping.
>>64432805I'll make sure that the next time i speak with Kim Jong Un that he knows he isn't allowed to let the KPA to shoot at disembarking infantry with KPVs for at least 60 seconds after they disembark.
>>64421512that's some nice anti-shrapnel platingshame if something were to happen to it
>>64426424Stryker
>>64432588>Mentally ill tripfag has a delusional lore he's made up about himselfI'd like to unsubscribe from your fag blog
>>64421512Anything that doesn’t have barrel wobbling
>>64423325French Mechanized forces do have an IFV: the VBCIThe Griffon is a motorised infantry battle taxi apcThe Jaguar does indeed do the cavalry recon most other countries employ the IFV for
>>64433090The fact that i'm old isn't a secret, besides that what is your problem?
>>64421512>Which IFV will /k/ ride into battle in?If we die in a shitbox, we die historic.
>>64433121This isn't your blog
>>64433325Yes it is and fuck you for saying otherwise you rancid pile of human dung released from the bowls of a incontinent child.
>>64431873>Why did they go with the rear engine layout?>>64431982>No one knows why the BMP-3 has a rear engine,It needs to be amphibious that means that vehicle needs to be balanced. It has 100mm and 30mm gun in turret and presumably some armor as well. It means turret is heavy. What is also heavy? Engine and frontal armor. To keep center of gravity near center of vehicle, It can't have engine at front and that turret somewhere in the middle of vehicle. So they came up with solution that is retarded for vehicle carrying infantry to keep all those guns and ammo, push the turret towards front of vehicle and put the engine in rear. Due to that they can't have proper exit doors or ramp at rear.Soviets and Russian never cared that much about ergonomics or practical use of their vehicle designs. Case and point Soviet BTR's also with rear engine and no rear door. If you take a look at western or at least western-ish APC/IFV's with rear engine. Two examples are Israeli Achzarit APC conversion of T-55 and South African Ratel, both of those have their rear engines offset to one side and other side of rear of vehicle has exit door that comes with somewhat cramped exit tunnel.
Why hasn’t Britain sent his aging Warriors to Ukraine?
>>64431982>Stopping either involves solid concrete or stone either way.stone and concrete come in different thicknesses, buildings can have widely different thickness of walls more penetration always translates into better performance, because theres always going to be a building with thicker walls or more walls or because the defenders have added additional protection to a building that could be the wafer thin mint that stops penetrationas it stands, even 25mm is already being seen as too small a round30, 40, and 50mm cannons are all being considered as future rounds because they are large enough to carry programmable fuzes for building clearing while also being able to penetrate next-gen IFVs that are armored against current cannon rounds
>>64434457Fuck off, you obnoxious pinko chink worshipping tripnigger
>>64435693Because they have no idea what they are going to do about IFVs and they are better off holding onto them until they unfuck themselves.>we are going to retire them>we are going to replace them with the boxer>we can't afford the boxer>we are going to retire them and have no IFVs>that is retarded, lets just not retire them
>>64421512I'll never set foot in an armoured vehicle. I've heard people burning to death in one first hand and seen what remained. I'd an hero before I set foot in one.
>>64432588>I'm older than you and 95% of the people hereAre you now commie lover? Are ye?
>>64421512>Which IFV will /k/ ride into battle in?None.They are obsolete on a modern battlefield patrolled by $80 drones.>what one learns from modern wars...If you're not 120km behind the front lines in a comfy chair holding a PS3 controller, you're a corpse within hours.
>>64432261You revolting commie piece of shit. How the fuck did you get let into the US?
>>64437344They were always garbage, when I saw people burning in them it was the 90s. Infantry always ensurced their own best channce by disbursing as widly as possible within visiual and shouting distance. Packing soldiers into sardine cans and bunching up was always ducking dumb and the theory was never really tested throughout the cold war..soldiers should walk to contact well disbursed or don't go at all. Any concentration that happens should happen at response to contact. Don't bunch up ever on foot or in a vehicle if you are about to take fire. Hear my words of hard won wisdom. Shut the fuck up and use your ears and eyes and keep your head on a swivel, stay out of tin cansAll fucking commies must fucking die.
>>64435693>>64437263They might still be useful for running over nignogs and pakis and, the removed turrets mounted over stretches of beaches, might be able to gun down invading jeets running up the beach from an inflatable unicorn they clung to to reach our promised lands of non-shittinginthestreets-dom.
>>64437356Thank you, fren.That sounds like hard-won advice.Thank You.
>>64437362You see shit from ISAF footage of a response to contact being a platoon running to one point behind a fucking vehicle and they were fucking lucky they were dealing with retarded illiterates because that's exactly what you want your enemy to do bbecause it makes suppression and flanking way easier and is just what you want them to do if you are initiating contact to destroy them in any three step basic infantry manouvre to destroy, disbursed soldiers are vastly more flexible to respond to contact and flank and provide a blocking elements. Same with retarded shit liek stacking scraped from police crap. You don;t need to sdtack if you have an enemy fixed ina building, you just need to get HE into that building and bring it down, burn them out or encircle it not act like cops responding to a domestic violence incident. Room clearing? For fuck sake grenades exist.
>>64422213See a psychiatrist
>>64437521>still malding he got called outNever change.Who am i fooling, not like you could.
>>64437380>your soldiers should trickle into battle over the course of hoursUhhhhh, can somebody please find this tard's wrangler? I don't like the way he's eyeing the crayons...
