The Armoured Personnel Carrier APC / Infantry Fighting Vehicle IFV

Scratch said:

I think a vehicle with something bigger than a 40mm cannon would loose it's ability to be an IFV due to space and weight restraints. Armament probably won't increase much.
What I can think of is perhaps a fire support version of an IFV (lackig proper wording). Like the M3 is compared to the M2. This support vehicle could perhaps accompany the IFVs and be armd with 40-50mm cannons, coax. 7.62mm MG, independently targeted cal.50MG and/or ATGMs. Depending on the mission maybe laser guided Hydra rockets. Much of the "crew space" could be used for ammo.

Click to expand...

*cough* MMEV *cough*



Already been attempted... too ungainly.

The Swedish Combat Vehicle 90 is equipped with a 40mm Bofors gun. There's also a light tank version with a 105mm main gun and a 120mm main gun as well, on top of a motar variant.

A 40mm like CTWS would be a very nice piece of kit to put on an IFV, if it, its fire control systems, its ammo bins, the turret basket, and all the rest didn't affect its ability to carry a full-size infantry squad/section. I'd even give up roof hatches over the troop compartment for the infantry to fight out of while mounted, and I'd even give up an ATGM, if the 40mm doesn't reduce the size of the infantry squad/section carried.

But the 40mm would have to meet the following specifications:

1. Capable of destroying anything short of an MBT from any angle out to not less than 2,500m.

2. Destroying enemy ATGM out to not less than 4,000m.

3. The IFV so armed would have to carry not less than 200 rounds of 40mm ammo while carrying a full-strength, fully-equipped infantry squad/section.

Ideally, the IFV would carry an ATGM launcher, reloadable from inside the vehicle, with a range of not less than 4,000m (I would really prefer at least 5,000m).

As I doubt that this is possible (but someone would be most welcome to demonstrate otherwise), I suspect that an HMG and an ATGM slaved to a surveillance system is the heaviest armament practical for an IFV. The HMG can take out soft targets to at least 2,000m (around 3,000m for big guns like 14.5mm KPV and 15.5mm BRG-15), and can destroy (when dug-in during defensive operations and firing into the sides of enemy IFVs) attacking enemy IFVs. Many IFVs are now armoured on the sides against 14.5mm KPV to as close as 200m (attacking infantry dismounting from IFV have to do so within about 300m of defender's positions, as the infantry will probably not survive longer distances in full view of the defender's guns), whereas they used to be armoured against only 12.7mm/.50" or even just 7.62mm. Still, a 15.5mm HMG will probably open up any IFV like a can of tuna at typical infantry dismount ranges.

The S. Korean XK21 carries the 40mm /L70 Bofors with 200 rounds + 2x ATGM launchers, and it carries 3 crew + 9 passengers:


However I doubt the gun could effectively intercept incoming ATGM's...

I like the IDF Achzarit & Namera concept. It's nice and roomy inside with a rear hatch, and it's well protected. However the overhead weapon station is only equipped with MG.

adeptitus said:

The S. Korean XK21 carries the 40mm /L70 Bofors with 200 rounds + 2x ATGM launchers, and it carries 3 crew + 9 passengers:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

However I doubt the gun could effectively intercept incoming ATGM's...

I like the IDF Achzarit & Namera concept. It's nice and roomy inside with a rear hatch, and it's well protected. However the overhead weapon station is only equipped with MG.

Click to expand...

The problem then becomes strategic mobility as these things are as big and as heavy as a tank... which means moving them into theatre will be problematic. You will need a tank transporter, and in any army, there aren't enough tank transporters around to carry tracked vehicles around.

adeptitus said:

The S. Korean XK21 carries the 40mm /L70 Bofors with 200 rounds + 2x ATGM launchers, and it carries 3 crew + 9 passengers:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

However I doubt the gun could effectively intercept incoming ATGM's...

I like the IDF Achzarit & Namera concept. It's nice and roomy inside with a rear hatch, and it's well protected. However the overhead weapon station is only equipped with MG.

Click to expand...

I should clarify myself: I meant that a 40mm cannon should be capable of suppressing or destroying an ATGM launcher up to ranges of not less than 4,000m.

I have yet to learn of any purpose-built, land vehicle-mounted, antiaircraft gun that can intercept an ATGM in flight, let alone an IFV capable of the same remarkable feat. Sorry about that that oversight.

LOL
Well, the XK-21 is too light for Mr. Norfolk's taste , but I am sure a Namera will have more than enough the space needed for a full squad and a 40mm turret. But no top hatch? You can fit it with sliders, but they give no protection unlike flip ups.

Achzarit roomy? It's a T-55, hard to imagine....

sumdud said:

LOL
Well, the XK-21 is too light for Mr. Norfolk's taste , but I am sure a Namera will have more than enough the space needed for a full squad and a 40mm turret. But no top hatch? You can fit it with sliders, but they give no protection unlike flip ups.

Achzarit roomy? It's a T-55, hard to imagine....

Click to expand...

But sumdud, the Namer looks just like a Lamborghini - sleek, streamlined profile, hugs the road (okay, it doesn't have those cool side-doors and it doesn't have a sunroof), and you can load up the beers and the camping gear Friday morning before going to work, and then come punch-out time, you just hop in your Namer and you don't have to worry about any traffic jams ; if you're driving a Namer, those sorts of things just don't matter:nono: - can't do that with a Lamborghini. Besides, a Namer is much cheaper than a Lamborghini, seats 11 rather than just 2, parts and labour are a whole lot cheaper, and Namer is just about as fuel efficient. So, assuming you're already married, the Namer is a clear winner over the Lamborghini.

Here are some nice pics of the Namer:



Compare them to this dreadfully boring lineup from Lamborghini:



See, no contest!

Back to the tactical side of things, one way to stick a 40mm on the Namer (can't do that on a Lamborghini either, not unless you give up the sunroof) is to mount a 40mm GMG in place of the HMG. Certainly not the same thing as a 40mm CTWS, but a 40mm grenade launcher gives you light anti-armour capability out to 1,500 m, and anything soft out ot 2,200 m, including down enemy infantry's trenches (indirect fire - can't do that with an auto-cannon - never mind the Lamborghini, but I imagine that if you preceded your attack by driving a Lamborghini out in front of the enemy positions, their troops might leave their trenches to take a look - then you let 'em have it).

Typically, infantry pair an HMG and a GMG together in the defence (after dismounting them from their vehicles and digging them in of course), and that pair is in turn paired with one another pair of an HMG and a GMG. They are normally sited across from and more or less facing each other so that they not only hit enemy troops and vehicles more or less from the sides, but also so that if one of the pairs is overrun by the enemy, the other pair may turn its fire on the enemy troops who just overran the lost pair. The HMGs provides fires directly across, and almost right up to, the friendly front lines, killing enemy infantry and vehicles up-close. The GMGs range further out, taking out enemy vehicles at range as well as groups of enemy infantry.

In the offence, once the infantry have dismounted from the APCs/IFVs as close as possible to the enemy positions - either to the front or to the rear of those enemy positions (ideally no more than 100 m, and absolutely no more than 200-300m), the APCs/IFVs take up firing positions from behind cover and provide covering fires for the attacking infantry. Given that each infantry platoon is normally transported in 4 APCs/IFVs, 2 armed with HMGs and 2 armed with GMGs would constitute an ideal mix of heavy weapons - the GMGs lobbing grenades into the enemy trenches, and the HMGs cutting down anyone who sticks their head above those trenches.

Can't do that with a Lamborghini.

hahaha, Norfolk, but you can't outrun me.....in the strip.

n the offence, once the infantry have dismounted from the APCs/IFVs as close as possible to the enemy positions - either to the front or to the rear of those enemy positions (ideally no more than 100 m, and absolutely no more than 200-300m), the APCs/IFVs take up firing positions from behind cover and provide covering fires for the attacking infantry.

Click to expand...

But 100m? Where are you fighting? In the forest? That's awfully close to not be shot at by a RPG. Are you going to go in spraying lead?

sumdud said:

hahaha, Norfolk, but you can't outrun me.....in the strip.
But 100m? Where are you fighting? In the forest? That's awfully close to not be shot at by a RPG. Are you going to go in spraying lead?

Click to expand...

Yep, pretty much. You manoeuvre as close as possible to the best firing position, the vehicles suppressing all the way, then the infantry dismount - and if you dismount too far away, the infantry is done like dinner - 100 m is optimal, any more than 200 or at most 300 m is almost suicide. RPG has a very tough time penetrating MBT-level protection, and any RPG gunner that stick his head up while the APCs/IFVs are suppressing, never mind after the infantry dismount and then suppress themselves, is very unlikely to live long enough to get off a shot, let alone get a hit (which won't do much more than scratch the paint except on the weakest areas).

As long as the attacking infantry and their APCs/IFVs use at least 2/3 rds (more is better) of their force to suppress the enemy position by fire, and use no more than 1/3rd of their force to assault, things will probably go all right.

And a Lamborghini can't outrun an HMG round on the strip.

The Russians and Ukrainians are really getting into the Heavy IFV (HIFV) concept. Besides the Russian BTR-T (based on the T-55) and the BMP-T, the Ukrainians are building upgraded T-72s and T-84s as HIFVs (as the BMT-72 and BTMP-84 HIFVs respectively), complete with 125 mm main guns, 3-man crews, and room for 5 infantrymen entering and exiting out through a rear door.

BMT-72 HIFV:



The BMT-72 weighs 50 tonnes and carries 30 125 mm main gun rounds.

BTMP-84 HIFV:



Likewise, the BTMP-84 weighs 48.6 tonnes and carries 36 125 mm main gun rounds.

Both the BMT-72 and the BTMP-84 HIFVs carry gun-launched ATGMs. These are powerful vehicles, and able to take a real beating. But when they carry only 5 infantrymen each, all that firepower seems somehow wasteful. It takes two HIFVs to carry a single Russian or Ukrainian Army 10-man Infantry Section; consequently at least 7 such HIFVs would be required to carry an Infantry Platoon rather than the usual 4. It seems that the Russians and the Ukrainians may have taken the lessons of the Battle of Grozny a little too far. Nevertheless, intriguing vehicles.