Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best APC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Best APC

    In a recent thread about what the best modern Main Battle Tank was it was noted the Bradley is NOT a tank. So here is the question, what is the best APC? I would open it to both tracked and wheeled technologies.
    Lance W.

    Peace through superior firepower.

  • #2
    The Bradley's not a tank? The newspaper and picture descriptions say otherwise I even saw a Paladin Heavy Main Battle Tank once

    Is this to include APC 'Battlefield Taxis' (ie. M113, MTLBs, Fuchs, early BTRs, etc.) and AFV's (LAVs, M2s, BMP/Ds, later BTRs, Marder,s Warriors, etc.) or just APCs?

    It's a little difficult to put an M113 (with only .50s) in the same category as the M2 (25mm and TOWs) seeing as how the firepower isn't even in the same category. An M2 CAN take on armor whereas the M113 can barely take on other APCs (using standard models, not TOW, mortar, or Cav variants).
    If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm merely using the militaries categories. I would agree that the Bradley is realy a light tank. Despite the fact it carries armament that can defeat a MBT, it is still relatively lighted armored.

      So the amended question is what is the best light tank/tank destroyer currently used. Use approximately 30 tons as the weight cut off.
      Lance W.

      Peace through superior firepower.

      Comment


      • #4
        In the book "Boyd", there were several references to skewed test procedures for the Bradley during procurement.

        For example, in one survivability test in which a Bradley was fired at by AP rounds, it was alleged the vehicles fuel cells and ammo storage compartments were actually filled with water.

        Does anyone have any input on this? A lot of people seem to sing the praises of the Bradley but I've also seen several hints that the procurement process was, well, "political".

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by DingBat
          In the book "Boyd", there were several references to skewed test procedures for the Bradley during procurement.

          For example, in one survivability test in which a Bradley was fired at by AP rounds, it was alleged the vehicles fuel cells and ammo storage compartments were actually filled with water.

          Does anyone have any input on this? A lot of people seem to sing the praises of the Bradley but I've also seen several hints that the procurement process was, well, "political".
          I don’t know of any procurement that isn’t political. The question is does the equipment do the job despite the politics? I have heard good things about the M2 and anything has to be better then the M113.
          Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

          Comment


          • #6
            Just for clarity:

            There are two versions of Bradley, the M2 (AFV) and the M3 (Cavalry vehicle).

            The purpose of the M2 is take infantry into battle and provide a firing platform when it gets there.

            The purpose of the M3 is to zip around locating the enemy and forcing them to deploy for combat.

            Neither is a tank and neither is designed to fight tanks (unless they can get the drop on them), but I guess if forced, the M3 is more of a "tank" than the M2 is.
            Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
            Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


            "Never pet a burning dog."

            RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
            http://www.mormon.org
            http://www.sca.org
            http://www.scv.org/
            http://www.scouting.org/

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by chrisvalla
              Is this to include APC 'Battlefield Taxis' (ie. M113, MTLBs, Fuchs, early BTRs, etc.) and AFV's (LAVs, M2s, BMP/Ds, later BTRs, Marder,s Warriors, etc.) or just APCs?
              You didn't list Stryker, which is one of my favorites having watched them over here.
              Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
              Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


              "Never pet a burning dog."

              RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
              http://www.mormon.org
              http://www.sca.org
              http://www.scv.org/
              http://www.scouting.org/

              Comment


              • #8
                The boys over a geocities have made a career of hyping the upgrades that can be done to M113's. Kinda of like what a arsenal in GA was doing when they rebuilt M48's into the M-48A5's. The only original equipment left is the vehicle shell...

                I think right now there are probably more M113's still serving active than any other single APC.

                The Stryker does look nice, but to deal with the practicallity of airloading... too much has to be removed for a C130. The M113 just backs up into the hold... I don't believe anything has to be removed or taken down.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Best Light Tank/Tank Destroyer

                  Originally posted by Lance Williams
                  In a recent thread about what the best modern Main Battle Tank was it was noted the Bradley is NOT a tank. So here is the question, what is the best APC? I would open it to both tracked and wheeled technologies.
                  The BMP 2 and 3. Though the BMP-1 was underarmored and under powered, this rectified in the BMP-2 and continued in the BMP-3. The Bradley is an also-ran at best.
                  Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                  (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Janos
                    You didn't list Stryker, which is one of my favorites having watched them over here.
                    I didn't specifically list any particular vehicles, but I did say both wheeled and tracked vehicles are included.

                    As for the Stryker I think its a great piece of equipment, especially for our airbourne forces. As the requirements change for the military (ie, urban peace keeping missions) wheeled armor vehicles have an increasing place in the inventory.
                    Lance W.

                    Peace through superior firepower.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Does anyone have any input on this? A lot of people seem to sing the praises of the Bradley but I've also seen several hints that the procurement process was, well, "political".
                      Find a movie called the "Pentegon Wars" It covers the whole story.
                      Delegate, MN GOP.

                      PATRIA SI, COMUNISMO NO

                      http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/p...?id=1156276727

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Lance Williams
                        I'm merely using the militaries categories. I would agree that the Bradley is realy a light tank. Despite the fact it carries armament that can defeat a MBT, it is still relatively lighted armored.

                        So the amended question is what is the best light tank/tank destroyer currently used. Use approximately 30 tons as the weight cut off.
                        Centauro of Italy.

                        http://www.army-technology.com/proje...uro/index.html


                        Cheers!



                        Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

                        "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

                        What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Re: Best Light Tank/Tank Destroyer

                          Originally posted by hogdriver
                          The BMP 2 and 3. Though the BMP-1 was underarmored and under powered, this rectified in the BMP-2 and continued in the BMP-3. The Bradley is an also-ran at best.
                          Did you know that South Korea has BMP-3s acquired under a tank for debt type deal?

                          Cheers!



                          Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

                          "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

                          What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Janos
                            Just for clarity:

                            There are two versions of Bradley, the M2 (AFV) and the M3 (Cavalry vehicle).

                            The purpose of the M2 is take infantry into battle and provide a firing platform when it gets there.

                            The purpose of the M3 is to zip around locating the enemy and forcing them to deploy for combat.

                            Neither is a tank and neither is designed to fight tanks (unless they can get the drop on them), but I guess if forced, the M3 is more of a "tank" than the M2 is.
                            I would say that the M3 version is the modern day equivalent of a light tank in that both primarily perform scouting missions.
                            Lance W.

                            Peace through superior firepower.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by RStory
                              Centauro of Italy.

                              http://www.army-technology.com/proje...uro/index.html


                              Cheers!



                              The link didn't want to load on my computer. I have not heard of this particular vehicle. Do you have any general specs on it?
                              Lance W.

                              Peace through superior firepower.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X