CGS:upgrading challenger and warrior.

But not firepower
If it really needs it, that is only an upgrade or change of the RWS. Given there are already ATGW versions, the base platform could comfortably manage a wide variety of weapons. Something quite compact like the 30mm M230 off the AH-64. At AUSA 2018 the manufacturer mentioned offering it in the ground role as a harder hitting alternative to the M2.
That being said, being recce its a fine balance between firepower and their primary role. Generally, the bigger the gun, the higher the profile.
 
In the history of recce vehicle development, the trend generally seems to be thus:

(1) Nation X develops small, light recce platforms optimised for stealth
(2) Inevitably - because of either terrain, tempo or tactical need - Nation X’s recce vehicles encounter Nation Y’s combat vehicles and anti-tank screen
(3) Nation X’s recce vehicles get a very bloody nose
(4) Nation X makes their next generation of vehicles bigger, heavier, and with greater armament
(5) Nation X realises these vehicles are now capable of combat, and increasingly uses them as ad-hoc combat teams as the situation requires
(6) Eventually, Nation X realises that it’s recce vehicles are no longer being used for recce, and decides to make a change
(7) Go to step (1)




Now, back to CR2 and WR...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
In the history of recce vehicle development, the trend generally seems to be thus:

(1) Nation X develops small, light recce platforms optimised for stealth
(2) Inevitably - because of either terrain, tempo or tactical need - Nation X’s recce vehicles encounter Nation Y’s combat vehicles and anti-tank screen
(3) Nation X’s recce vehicles get a very bloody nose
(4) Nation X makes their next generation of vehicles bigger, heavier, and with greater armament
(5) Nation X realises these vehicles are now capable of combat, and increasingly uses them as ad-hoc combat teams as the situation requires
(6) Eventually, Nation X realises that it’s recce vehicles are no longer being used for recce, and decides to make a change
(7) Go to step (1)




Now, back to CR2 and WR...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


M3 begat M5 that begat M24 that begat M41

M24 looked like a tank and had a medium tank sized gun, so was sent into bat against proper tanks, NK T34's in Korean War with bad results. The idiots calling AJAX a 'medium tank' might remember that.
 
A Perfect example of why we must is right bellow your post:

M3 begat M5 that begat M24 that begat M41

M24 looked like a tank and had a medium tank sized gun, so was sent into bat against proper tanks, NK T34's in Korean War with bad results. The idiots calling AJAX a 'medium tank' might remember that.
But yes a rambling armour tank thread might be fun to just chat about the entirety of armour history.
 
Pretty damn sure I came across an article saying you can get M1/leo2 turret on chally 2 turret ring.
Leo2 is all leccy, so might work....
 
If it really needs it, that is only an upgrade or change of the RWS. Given there are already ATGW versions, the base platform could comfortably manage a wide variety of weapons. Something quite compact like the 30mm M230 off the AH-64. At AUSA 2018 the manufacturer mentioned offering it in the ground role as a harder hitting alternative to the M2.
That being said, being recce its a fine balance between firepower and their primary role. Generally, the bigger the gun, the higher the profile.
Or even the remake of the mg151 in 20mm the saffers use. Pokey enough HE for the
Getting out of Dodge moments.
 
In the history of recce vehicle development, the trend generally seems to be thus:

(1) Nation X develops small, light recce platforms optimised for stealth
(2) Inevitably - because of either terrain, tempo or tactical need - Nation X’s recce vehicles encounter Nation Y’s combat vehicles and anti-tank screen
(3) Nation X’s recce vehicles get a very bloody nose
(4) Nation X makes their next generation of vehicles bigger, heavier, and with greater armament
(5) Nation X realises these vehicles are now capable of combat, and increasingly uses them as ad-hoc combat teams as the situation requires
(6) Eventually, Nation X realises that it’s recce vehicles are no longer being used for recce, and decides to make a change
(7) Go to step (1)
Two thoughts, a) unless step 4 = replace CVR(T) with CR2 you still get a bloody nose when e.g. Ajax meets MBTs b) this is a theory I've heard before, can you give me a couple of actual examples when a nation went round this cycle, in particular how/why the recce failed to just do their job in step 2/3.
 
Two thoughts, a) unless step 4 = replace CVR(T) with CR2 you still get a bloody nose when e.g. Ajax meets MBTs b) this is a theory I've heard before, can you give me a couple of actual examples when a nation went round this cycle, in particular how/why the recce failed to just do their job in step 2/3.
Take a look at the history of formation recce in the British Army 1939-1945, or more recently, the evolution of US recce at unit and formation level.

There’s a good paper on it somewhere, which I’ll try to find later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
One of the problems with the Russian concept of using tank units for reconnaiisance In force as the Germans found out in 1944-45, is it’s very hard to ascertain wether you are dealing with a probe, or the main attack.

If it’s a probe, moving your main forces to engage what you think is a main force attack gives away the information the Russians are trying to find.
If you sit back and assume it’s a probe, it might be the main attack and you get caught flat footed.
 
Reconnaissance. Fennek is small, quick and has a mast-mounted sight. It's not supposed to mix it. It's definitely not supposed to pretend to be a 'medium tank'.
If it really needs it, that is only an upgrade or change of the RWS. Given there are already ATGW versions, the base platform could comfortably manage a wide variety of weapons. Something quite compact like the 30mm M230 off the AH-64. At AUSA 2018 the manufacturer mentioned offering it in the ground role as a harder hitting alternative to the M2.
That being said, being recce its a fine balance between firepower and their primary role. Generally, the bigger the gun, the higher the profile.
My point being as is, it will be very good at Recce but not other tasks
 
One of the problems with the Russian concept of using tank units for reconnaiisance In force as the Germans found out in 1944-45, is it’s very hard to ascertain wether you are dealing with a probe, or the main attack.

If it’s a probe, moving your main forces to engage what you think is a main force attack gives away the information the Russians are trying to find.
If you sit back and assume it’s a probe, it might be the main attack and you get caught flat footed.
Remind me of you background in G2 covering Russian land warfare.
 
Heavy recce is all very well until you hit the bridge a BMP could go over but you can't.
I suppose you could always strap a bicycle to the side of the tank.


...I'll get me coat...
 
Heavy recce is all very well until you hit the bridge a BMP could go over but you can't.
I suppose you could always strap a bicycle to the side of the tank.


...I'll get me coat...

If your tanks can’t get over it, neither probably can the other guys.
Of course, they could just drive through the river and ignore the bridge...


1539971418149.jpeg
 
Mate, its not as simple. Recce is a craft and practioners have unmpteen factors to consider. Trust me, and if not me some of the b*ggers on here. Theres those who have seriously got boots, knees and elbows muddy doing this shit.
 
My point being as is, it will be very good at Recce but not other tasks
Perhaps consideration should be given to using it for just that.
Attempts to make things into Jacks of all trades almost inevitably lead to the second part of the same truism & with recce being a somewhat risky endeavour, it's perhaps something for which specialist tools ought to be used.
 
If your tanks can’t get over it, neither probably can the other guys.
Of course, they could just drive through the river and ignore the bridge...


View attachment 358199
Its not something they're able to do on the march is it though. Crossings like that take a lot of time, prep and is resource intensive. It will attract a lot of attention and in a peer level enemy environment a crossing like that would be a very distant last resort.
 
Its not something they're able to do on the march is it though. Crossings like that take a lot of time, prep and is resource intensive. It will attract a lot of attention and in a peer level enemy environment a crossing like that would be a very distant last resort.

We’re not talking about major river crossing operations, we’re talking about unsuitable for tanks bridges over minor rivers and streams. There are a couple of bridges over minor streams near me with quite low limits, but I could drive across the water in my 4x4.

But we digress, we can’t assume the opposition will decline from their traditional habit of fighting for information using proper tanks because it doesn’t fit with our PPT presentations.

CVR(T) was very small, and very quiet and could sneak about in the bushes, AJAX is as big and as noisy or noisier as a proper full sized MBT so will attract the attention of the people it’s trying to find. Then it’s trading 125mm sabot vs 40mm sabot time, and I know which one my monies on - abd it’s not the one with armour resistant at best to 30mm AP rounds
 

Latest Threads

Top