Armoured and Mechanised Infantry

Discussion in 'Infantry' started by The_Groove, Apr 20, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I ask this out of pure curiousity, please forgive my ignorance.
    I understand that the difference between Armoured and Mechanised Infantry is that Armoured are mounted in Warriors and Mech are mounted in Bulldogs/Saxon/Mastiffs, but i don't understand the advantage of Mech infantry.
    Armoured obviously have the advantage of the support of a very intimidating vehicle with a big gun, so what's the advantage of being in a Mastiff ect?
    Do armoured and mechanised have different roles? ie. armoured better for spearhead (afore mentioned intimidating big gun) and Mechanised better for patrolling (i assume the visability in a mastiff/saxon is better than that of a warrior).

    Thanks in advance.

    PS. If i'm asking Journo type questions, i assure you i'm not one of them.
  2. I think these days with our counter insurgency type work there is less of a difference between the two.
  3. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Put simply, each are good at some jobs but not all. Wr is great for kicking arse. It is warfighting tool built to support and live with CR2 in high intensity ops. Cost - v high

    Bulldogs are armd taxis - very well armd taxis but taxis all the same. But they give a high mobility capability to trog people around after the Wrs, it just takes them a little more time (although that may be in doubt if they actually get a workable suspension that doesn't break) Cost - expensive but livable with

    Mastiff are simply armd trucks. They carry a lot of armour for a task which mainly (original use) was for convoy protection but whose use has been spectacularly successful in Iraq and Afghanistan doing other things with lots of offroad activites (although again there were suspension problems). Cost - converted truck.

    Now if the UK could afford all Wr, it still wouldn't buy a complete fleet. Each of the platforms performs very well doing some tasks but not all and each have a different capability. With ops like we have now, we don't really need a veh with full warfighting capability (but it is bloody handy).

    Use the golfbag analogy - you need lots of different clubs in your bag to go round a golf course. You do the same thing with military vehs on ops and you use a selection.
  4. I think roles are really only decided by the ops the Bn is deploying on at that time. But there is not much different between each role,most of the dismounts for Warrior have been backfilled by a light role Bn.