FRES 2: The Revenge aka MIV

Just to clarify; the British army is doing what it's doing and I have little understanding of the rational behind it so please don't read what I'm writing as a defence of current UK actions. I do however feel that upgunning APCs and expecting them to play some sort of 'tankish' role is both a waste of an APC and most of the men in it and a recipe for getting royally rodded by some real MBTs.

I agree that using an APC as a tank is a bad idea. But I don't agree that having a lightly armed battlefield taxi is going to be very useful anymore either. But one has to be able to bring enough a$$ to properly support the infantry, firepower light tends to result in some bad times.
 
I agree that using an APC as a tank is a bad idea. But I don't agree that having a lightly armed battlefield taxi is going to be very useful anymore either. But one has to be able to bring enough a$$ to properly support the infantry, firepower light tends to result in some bad times.
Agreed but I'd rather that firepower came from an MBT with a proper HE round and/or SPA because I'm not convinced the up gunned APC will live long enough to use it.
 
Agreed but I'd rather that firepower came from an MBT with a proper HE round and/or SPA because I'm not convinced the up gunned APC will live long enough to use it.
Well that won't be happening. Your military is going to cut the MBT numbers to maybe fund upgrades to the rest of the fleet. The RAF and RN seem to do well with their money and at least get as much bang for the buck as they can. The Army seems to be struggling a bit.
 
The reason why the US Army decided to upgun the Strykers very quickly was because the powers that be realized showing up to a near peer fight with spit wads is a great way to lose quickly. When the "Light" forces have vehicles that have more firepower then the tier above them, one has problems.
I was under the impression it was only Cavalry Div (or role) strykers being up gunned and the standard APC was remaining as is
 
I was under the impression it was only Cavalry Div (or role) strykers being up gunned and the standard APC was remaining as is
No, funding is being made to upgrade almost half the Stryker brigades we have.We are also working on equipping them with Javelins, but that was taking a bit longer to sort out.
 
Well that won't be happening. Your military is going to cut the MBT numbers to maybe fund upgrades to the rest of the fleet. The RAF and RN seem to do well with their money and at least get as much bang for the buck as they can. The Army seems to be struggling a bit.
Agreed, the army is more interested in job creation for VSOs and cap badge retention [You can't possibly disband my regiment] than delivering a fighting force that just might make Putin think 'No maybe not'. We're back where we were in 1914 and 1939 and look at how well that worked out.
 
Agreed, the army is more interested in job creation for VSOs and cap badge retention [You can't possibly disband my regiment] than delivering a fighting force that just might make Putin think 'No maybe not'. We're back where we were in 1914 and 1939 and look at how well that worked out.
Well it doesn't seem like you folks are alone in that trend, but being British naturally means you are expected to carry more than your own weight with the European crowd.
 
I met some guys from the RSDG in Glasgow (they were doing a publicity thing next to the Opera House) a couple of years ago, with their Jackal vehicle, and I could feel myself freeze at the very thought of being in one of them blasting down the road at high speed.

I don't think that they were built for the Scottish climate, so giving them to a Scottish regiment smacks of a war crime.
You cant beat it for situational awareness though....you become very aware there is no protection from small arms, not that you can react as your arms are frozen.
there is precious little shade when its too hot, which again is cruel to pale skinned types
 
Last edited:

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I should have worded my description of the CVRTs tracks better ie steel with noise reduction rubber inserts. I knew that tracked farm equipment and plant used rubber bias tracks. I delivered them, I've questioned this for years.
I've seen the abuse these tracks received over the years and have only ever seen one track break.
My brothers an agricultural engineer, he looks after a lot of farmers tracked tractors using hi speed rubber tracks. He tells me, the only thing that let's them down is the idler/running gear. He's also never seen a track part.
Apologies, I wasn't setting out to teach you to suck eggs.

He may never have seen a track part, but then he's never seen one run over a mine (I note that a later post than yours asks about mine damage.)

On the other hand, if a 'conventional' track runs over a mine and it's a mobility kill, then it's still a mobility kill. Whether you're having to replace a few links or a whole track is probably a moot point.

I'd be very interested to see the whole-life running costs of a rubber track versus a metal one. That'll be the clincher. If a vehicle runs over a mine and survives, then a rubber track should just be seen as a 'perishable'.
 
Actually the early cruisers were every bit as good as the Mk IIIs opposite them in 1940, we just had hardly any and the French were in run mode before they could get into action.
Hmmm...

"According to Heinz Guderian, the Wehrmacht invaded France with 523 Panzer Is, 955 Panzer IIs, 349 Panzer IIIs, 278 Panzer IVs, 106 Panzer 35(t)s and 228 Panzer 38(t)s"

While the majority of those are 20mm or 37mm armed there are nearly 300 75mm armed Mk IVs in there plus those pesky 88mm AT guns. Remind me of a comparable British tank with a 75mm at that stage of the war (and I don't mean CS variants)?
 
Neither are these, that's tank warfare for you. Note from image 2 that the biggest gun doesn't always win.
That Tiger II wasn't 'tank warfare' either - it was destroyed by a 2" mortar bomb (see another Arrse thread of antiquity).
 
Was he by himself or did 20 other vehicles safely go round the same corner.
Regt was split up into War footing, ie as Recce Regt, working with our different Regts and working in Troops down in the Black Forest over a large area.
with regard to rubber tracks, have the manufacturers looked back at the combat history of the M3 with regard to mine damage or are they testing these new tracks against sample mines and IEDs to test their survivability and ease of repair? is there such a thing as a repair patch for these tracks or does the entire track have to be rpelaced as one unit?
I've just spoken to my brother and he confirmed there's no permanent repair, as the wire cord is continuous. He has said, he's seen them so stretched, the rubber had split with the cord showing.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Hmmm...

"According to Heinz Guderian, the Wehrmacht invaded France with 523 Panzer Is, 955 Panzer IIs, 349 Panzer IIIs, 278 Panzer IVs, 106 Panzer 35(t)s and 228 Panzer 38(t)s"

While the majority of those are 20mm or 37mm armed there are nearly 300 75mm armed Mk IVs in there plus those pesky 88mm AT guns. Remind me of a comparable British tank with a 75mm at that stage of the war (and I don't mean CS variants)?
Yes, but those would be short-barrelled 75mm guns at that stage in the war - the Mk IV was originally designed to be an infantry support tank... so also effectively a CS variant.
 
Why doesn't the British army have artillery anymore? It seems that the political and military (lack of) leadership think it's cheating to blast the enemy, preferring instead to scare them off (?) with bayonets and handheld A/T rockets. If there aren't any mobile artillery, how about investing in big, fat, multi-barrelled, self-propelled mortars at every level? The things exist and are (relatively) cheap. On top of all that, there aren't even enough people to deploy anyway. At some point things will have to go to a part-time home-defence force, plus RM and Para -- then it won't matter what vehicles anyone has because all four thousand bods will get hammered regardless.

Not optimistic today. The generation that went through WW2 designed the systems and kit for the cold war, and the couple of generations after WW2 inherited the plans achieving good results with them. Since then British defence power has been dribbling out of holes in a leaky bucket.
 
Just to add he also said, that the majority of the weight in one of those rubber tracks is taken up by the steel construction wire.
I just wonder, should a track set off a mine. Would all the wire inside be parted by the charge.
 
Yes, but those would be short-barrelled 75mm guns at that stage in the war - the Mk IV was originally designed to be an infantry support tank... so also effectively a CS variant.
There were more of them and with any of their 75mm natures (many of which were AT) they could defeat a 1940 British Cruiser at any range up to 2500m...

So despite short barrel, much more effective....
 
RUSI sort of agrees:
  • A command MIV with a heavy machine gun (HMG) remote weapon station (RWS)
  • A MIV with a 25-mm Gau-22 or BK-27 RWS
  • Two MIVs with HMG RWS
  • Two MIVs with turreted 40-mm cased telescoped cannons and twin ATGMs
  • A MIV with 120-mm mortar
  • An engineering MIV with dozer blade and HMG
  • Four Javelin teams among the combat team’s dismounts.
I’m at a loss as to what the GAU-22 or Bk-27 armed vehicle is going to contribute, or what a 120mm mortar is supposed to be doing attached to a platoon.
 
I’m at a loss as to what the GAU-22 or Bk-27 armed vehicle is going to contribute, or what a 120mm mortar is supposed to be doing attached to a platoon.
Short range air defence and intimate fires.
Look at the assumptions on where the 155mm is going to be (also understand there is a lot of frontage to be covered), having on call 120mm in the 4km x 4km area your combat team is dispersed in, with the ability to shoot & scoot is important.

The most dangerous threats to the brigade are massed enemy armour, massed fires,
and enemy air attack. In the face of massed enemy artillery, the brigade will need to be
able to fight dispersed. Against massed armour, the brigade will need to be able to call
down effective indirect fires. Most 155-mm artillery solutions are not compatible with
the brigade’s mobility requirements and given the risk of operational penetration of
dispersed sub-units, would be difficult to protect.
MLRS will need to be reserved for concentrated targets. Each sub-unit will therefore
need to have sufficient lethality to attrit company-sized enemy groups, supported by
armour and aviation.

Hence, the SHORAD, 120mm and ATGW (inc JAV) mix
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
C Army Reserve 3
TheIronDuke The NAAFI Bar 84
schweik The NAAFI Bar 45

Latest Threads

Top