Discussion in 'Officers' started by Outstanding, Jun 10, 2010.

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. When a vehicle patrol heads out for another task in Afghanistan, the vehicle crew and it's mounted occupants rarely know when and where the next threat will come from. Will the next contact be a pressure plate or remote controlled IED? Will the enemy use shaped charges such as RPGs or will the threat be hidden in the form of a legacy mine?
    Then there are the complexities of vehicle requirements. Much has been made about vehicle protection but what about a holistic approach to survivability and how will manoeuvrability be affected?

    The dilemma: Can we develop a vehicle with both IED level and traditional protection combined with cold war manoeuvrability?
  2. I doubt it but im no expert
  3. From the outside looking in...

    This may well have been dredged up before but why not adapt an armoured vehicle to fullfil the role of the WWII "flail tank" like those mounted on the Sherman Crab tank?
  4. Im no expert but the issue you have with IED is that their purpose is to placed in areas that are inconspicuous to say the least, and their destructive force is manipulated for different tasks. Therein lies the problem, shaped charges like RPG are already being considered in future combat vehicle design both from the armour to repel these attacks and through systems added onto the vehicle to make sure they never reach the target.
    However as RPG's are propelled similar to a missile, they give away the attackers position and they have a heat source which can be traced etc,etc. Thats where the good side to that ends because in comparison RPG's for modern technology are easier to cater for when involved in the design aspect. IED's will remain a problem/constant threat for a while to come because although the comment of a "flail tank" design would work with pressure plate designed IED's the remote IED's tend to be placed closer to buildings or structures so that the cables needed to use the remote device (that is when not detonated by cell phone remote) wont give away the IED's position therefore enabling our forces to see it in advance and de-activate it hopefully before the armer has a chance to connect his remote and detonate. Plus the whole aspect of them being improvised means that there will always be new and different ways to both arm/detonate them, there will also always be new and different ways to conceal them and make them harder to find prior to their activation. Due to the difficulties that IED's possess, these explosives are always going to be hard to incorporate into future combat vehicle design asides from the obvious shaped hull, better armour, and modular design so that when an IED is encountered and it detonates, the occupants are safe from the explosion, and although the vehicle may be damaged it can be taken back to base and swap out the damaged modules or bring the parts to the field and hope for a quick turn around (which doubtfully youd want to do after having just been attacked and face possible further insurgent activity).
  5. MOBILITY - FIREPOWER - PROTECTION - Increase one reduce another - Simples!
  6. Precisely, the iron triangle. You've answered your own question. :roll:
    Do you have alzeimers?
  7. I forget.
  8. Been done Flail is a waste of time as its easily defeated
  9. Any chance you could forget to breathe?
  10. You see that's where you go and spoil it all. Just when you were playing like a nice boy you have to just go that little bit too far and offend - for no particular reason, Perhaps you need your medicine or a push around the garden. In any case I am sure you will feel better after a lie down.

    Have a super weekend.
  11. Oh the irony.