Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

FRES 2: The Revenge aka MIV

Crows-J Stryker test
DWugcjRXcAAK5d4.jpg:large
 
Crows-J Stryker test
DWugcjRXcAAK5d4.jpg:large

On the one hand, under-armour ATGW, good.

On the other hand, one round before some poor bugger has to climb out and recock? Might be alright for an ambush, but surely if you’re going to go to the bother of integrating it with a RWS, you’d do well to cuff together a multiple-round box while you’re at it?
 
On the one hand, under-armour ATGW, good.

On the other hand, one round before some poor bugger has to climb out and recock? Might be alright for an ambush, but surely if you’re going to go to the bother of integrating it with a RWS, you’d do well to cuff together a multiple-round box while you’re at it?
It's not a dedicted vehicle so has room in back for troops.
Dedicated vehicle
m1134_stryker.jpg
 
On the one hand, under-armour ATGW, good.

On the other hand, one round before some poor bugger has to climb out and recock? Might be alright for an ambush, but surely if you’re going to go to the bother of integrating it with a RWS, you’d do well to cuff together a multiple-round box while you’re at it?
well it’s likely to be bugging out on firing
It's not a dedicted vehicle so has room in back for troops.
Dedicated vehicle
m1134_stryker.jpg
With TOW
 
It's not a dedicted vehicle so has room in back for troops.
Dedicated vehicle
m1134_stryker.jpg
I must confess I’m thinking of it from the UK point of view...a drop-in multi-shot RWS is probably the cheapest way we could restore the overwatch capability. Of course there’s a whole bunch of arguments about range &c.

I just wonder what the point of a single jav would be...if you need protected jav, you’re likely to need more than one, and if you’ve bludged a CLU into the RWS it’s surely not usable with another weapon system any more?
 
I just wonder what the point of a single jav would be...if you need protected jav, you’re likely to need more than one, and if you’ve bludged a CLU into the RWS it’s surely not usable with another weapon system any more?
There's a .5" machine gun on that CROWS-J.
How much CLU do you need when the RWS already has most of the functionality in it?
 
I must confess I’m thinking of it from the UK point of view...a drop-in multi-shot RWS is probably the cheapest way we could restore the overwatch capability. Of course there’s a whole bunch of arguments about range &c.

I just wonder what the point of a single jav would be...if you need protected jav, you’re likely to need more than one, and if you’ve bludged a CLU into the RWS it’s surely not usable with another weapon system any more?
I was thinking the same about how useful this would be for the UK; if you can fit Crows you can fit the Jav version. The Crows has the Jav fully interfaced and the gat is still useable. . Hey, you could put one on Challenger........or maybe not.
 
There's a .5" machine gun on that CROWS-J.
How much CLU do you need when the RWS already has most of the functionality in it?

On the .50, alright, fine, I missed it. Blame the glasses :D

On the other, I have absolutely no idea. Not being an anti-tank type, I have no idea about the division of labour between CLU and missile or how they’re interfaced. But if it’s being trialled, I suppose someone’s already got that covered.

I also have no idea whether the CLU or the normal RWS has more capable optics. I suppose in the long run, you pick the one that does, make it common to both and go with it. Absent any deeper understanding of the engineering, I’m guessing it’s easier to add a ballistic reticule to a CLU than make a “dumb” thermal sight talk to a jav.
 
I must confess I’m thinking of it from the UK point of view...a drop-in multi-shot RWS is probably the cheapest way we could restore the overwatch capability. Of course there’s a whole bunch of arguments about range &c.

I just wonder what the point of a single jav would be...if you need protected jav, you’re likely to need more than one, and if you’ve bludged a CLU into the RWS it’s surely not usable with another weapon system any more?
If you put this on every vehicle rather than just have one dedicated vehicle, you do have more than one shot, just not on the same vehicle. I suspect the main use of something like this would be more to make the other guy more cautious about approaching, rather than to turn it into a tank destroyer. If you ever need to fire this, you probably need to run away right after.
 
The Aussies will have most if not all production domestically and they are pretty clued up when it comes to being largely self sufficient. They know its coming down to a knives edge between them and BAE so I can see them going all in with as much domestic work as possible. The Aussies still have the likes of running small arms production and other elements that could be re-rolled or tied into producing sub systems. I'd say that's why both outfits are trying to get some form of production or input from as many states so its will have the most attractive offer to the Aus Govt. User preference is apparently Boxer but It will most probably go to who ever can pump the most jobs and money onto the most states.

In the next couple months I think.

I didn't realise the UK offer also involved the rights to sell or export domestically produced Boxers and parts. According to the video that's the case.


A very soft interview (as ever at these shows) although you'd think Connors could afford a jacket whose arm wasn't becoming unstitched.

I was about 3m to the left during this interview talking to the design engineers and the Dutch geezer who drove the vehicle (it's a Dutch Pioneer variant, the Union Flags are magnetic, natch). I was very impressed - especially as it satisfies all EU laws for roadworthiness (heated mirrors etc :roll:).

A yard or two away was Saxon - sorry, Bushmaster. Not many folk were looking at that.
 
Notice the exhaust extension box on the Crows-J Stryker? Must have been causing interference with the sight
I've seen the same or similar ones on other late model LAV's. It maybe for that as well as toning down the thermal signature of the vehicle and pumping it side ways and down wards rather than up.
 

New posts

Top