What should the US replace it's aging Bradley fleet with?

Canadian LAV-3's. The firepower of a Bradley and the mobility of a Stryker.

>>28570602
>This needs to stop


yeah, creating jobs and expanding know-how needs to stop
#feelthebern

>>28570620
Couldn't they just use Stryker weapons platforms if they wanted that?

File: 1451636982720.png (105KB, 365x526px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 365x526px

BMP-3's

File: LAV III Kodiak.jpg (39KB, 577x352px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 577x352px

>>28570620
This right here.

>>28570602
CV90s or Pumas

File: LAND_CV90-40_lg.jpg (63KB, 1024x419px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1024x419px

CV90 maybe?

>>28570602
The Gavin of course

>>28570602
There's no point in replacing the Bradley. Anything else currently on the the market is only going to offer a small improvement over the Bradley anyway.

File: puma-apc-ifv-920-0.jpg (118KB, 919x607px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 919x607px

The Puma.

>This needs to stop

Get the fuck out of my country you filthy faggot.

File: bae york.jpg (250KB, 1905x949px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 1905x949px

>>28570602
They make and fix em near me

>>28570711
That sounds like a made up animal

>>28570602
New Bradleys

>>28570740
What's the name of that Mexican lizard, the one that eats all the goats?

>>28570757
Chupathingy

>>28570757
El Chupacabra

>>28570740
Cougar? Catamount? Panther? Mountain lion? Any of those better?

>>28570776
I like it. It's for a nice ring to it.

>>28570740
All words are made up

Needs a heavy IFV on the abrams or next gen tank chassis.
Like the T-15

Then they need to fully mechanize all those useless light infantry brigades.
What the hell is the point of light infantry in 2016

>>28570740
>That sounds like a made up animal
A walrus.

File: Flickr_-_Israel_Defense_Forces_-_13th_Battalion_of_the_Golani_Brigade_Holds_Drill_at_Golan_Heights_(8).jpg (3MB, 3872x2178px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3872x2178px

>>28570827

>>28570620
They're doing this already, sticking a 30mm Kongsberg turret on Stryker.

They've demonstrated the same turret on Bradley too.

>>28570827
Forests and mountains still exist this year if I recall correctly.

>>28570934
but anon, mechs are going to make forests and mountains obselete.

and i've got this idea about modern battleships...

>>28570934
And what stops tanks from going there?

Why would you need anything more than a 25mm? You can store more rounds and still have significant firepower.

>>28570898
Israel has cool looking armored vehicles

>>28570982
>need
Get out, commie faggot

>>28570779
In English it means The Goat Licker.
Not even fucking joking.

Source: I'm an english teacher in spain

>>28570898
Can someone explain to me the rough texture on the armour? Is that a result of an industrial processes or does it serve some purpose? Most AFVs don't appear to have it.

>>28570982

BTR-90 and to side shot Armatas.

>>28571130
Prevents slipping.

>>28570982
Pretty much everything else has at least 30mm. The Brad's not too bad because it has TOW as well, but the 25mm is still pretty anaemic

File: Protector_medium_caliber_Kongsberg_Stryker_AUSA_2014_defense_exhibition_Washington_DC_United_States_001.jpg (34KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x427px

>>28570602

>>28571130
It's so you can walk around without falling off

File: pYqK2VU.jpg (245KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1000x800px

>>28570698
This pretty much.

>>28571130
Ribbed for additional pleasure.

>>28570966
The fact that they weight 65 fuckin tons, and their main armament is a massively overkill cannon with low rate of fire?

>>28571141
BTR-90 do not have the armor to stand up to 25mm APFSDS.

>>28571176
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5ywQPFu7zU

>>28570602
Hi, this is Tim from Military Arms Channel and I think the Bradleys should be replaced by Namers with a 30mm MK44 Bushmaster II chaingun.

File: Funny-Army-Pics-4.jpg (45KB, 700x489px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 700x489px

>>28570602
NEED MOAR STRYKERS

>>28571086
No it doesn't. Chupa means "suck". Cabra means goat. So chupacabra means goat sucker unless the fucker is being an annoying cunt. Then he's called chupacabron.

>>28571256
You know its possible to build a tank that doesn't weigh over 70 tons and doesn't have a high velocity cannon meant for killing other tanks?

Big fucking difference between light infantry, and heavy MBT's

>>28571280
Now think what you could do with an air-bursting 35/40mm

>>28571341
Well shit nigga I fucked up, good thing I'm not teaching spanish.
Shieeeet

>>28571343
Only one building light <50T tanks is Russia, and they still ended up building the T-15 as a heavy IFV for urban and rural pillbox fights. Tanks are not a universal solution.

>>28571344
That is the primary reason the US military shifted to 30mm. The smallest caliber that is big enough to do the job so you can pack more ammo.

Remember that Bradleys carry 900 rounds of 25mm, jumping up to 40mm cuts that down to less than 200.

>>28570620
>canadian

Pls no you cuck

File: 30mm Frag vs CT40 frag spread.jpg (564KB, 3022x867px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 3022x867px

>>28571280

And then you see what a Bofors L70 or CT40 can do. (Video is Bof, image is CT40 vs a 30mm, so you can imagine how a 25mm is)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkvPdSITdH4

File: El chupacobra.jpg (519KB, 1075x1073px) Image search: [Google]

519KB, 1075x1073px

>>28570757
El Chupacobra?

>>28571619
see >>28571577

30mm has become the current standard, 35mm and 40mm are special snowflake.

>>28570955

I've also been thinking about how gliders should make a comeback. Something armored, with ejection seats!

Helicopters are flying deathtraps! Our troops deserve better!!!

>>28571724
>40mm
>special snowflake

i dunno, i mean it has been one of the most popular autocannons of all times. look at US WWII warships for example. it was even used by germany aswell. might be a bit obsolete for AA roles today, but it will fuck up anything with armor short of an MBT very quickly

>>28571141
BTR-90 is not in service

>>28570663
i support this. what kind of armor protection are we talking about on that thing though? also you know us, we'd have to put tow missles on it... maybe go full daka and throw a hydra rocket pod on there

>>28570834
now name another animal that has tusks.. a walrus? god damn it simons i told you to stop making up animals

>>28570698
Armor guy here. This. In the grand scheme of things the Bradley does its job fine.

>>28572148
Which job is that?
Being a slow useless turd of an IFV?

>>28572375

>t. Mike Sparks

File: cv9040_isaf_001.jpg (129KB, 1024x685px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1024x685px

>>28571978
I am a 2ic on a Swedish CV9040 platoon, our C models has some seriously beefed up armor and performed well both in Liberia and A-stan.
Bofors made tests with the RB56 BILL missile on it so putting TOWs should be possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9SxsvSxRc4

The biggest advantage we have over the Bradley is mobility though, especially in snow.

>>28571577
>jumping up to 40mm cuts that down to less than 200.

Nah, we have 232 for the CV90.

>>28572497
>The biggest advantage we have over the Bradley is mobility in snow.

File: 1446204697367.jpg (161KB, 800x343px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 800x343px

>>28570602
I'd be totally okay with this :3

>>28570966
You have never worked with, or even seen a tank have you child?

>>28570955
>terrain
>obsolete
watch out kids we got a god here

30mm Stryker

>>28572622
You would expect that given how mechfags are.

File: 30mmstryker.jpg (25KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x360px

>>28572624

>>28572375
>slow
>useless

So much like any IFV in existence given the Bradley performs to nearly the same level. Yea sure, why not. Why not just get rid of IFVs by your logic?

The GCV ifv was going to be a 60+ ton vehicle, like the T-15

This fantasy of light & lighter vehicles is for COIN only.

>>28572648
Imagine if the Iraqi's had working tanks and working ammo
How many hundreds of Brads would have been lost?

>>28572648
>Why not just get rid of IFVs by your logic?

That's what they want though, apparently.

>Muh light tanks and APCs!
>Muh Pentagon Wars!
>Why does anyone NEED multi-role capabilities!?

The "Light Tanks and APCs!" guy is almost certainly the same guy as the battleships, gliders, VLS tank, submarine aircraft carrier and/or LST, and drone guy. I'm also somewhat certain it's Mike Sparks come to troll /k/.

File: 1411853024800.gif (2MB, 334x235px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 334x235px

>>28572542
Our mobility is better overall but in snow it's not even a contest.

https://youtu.be/HAsR7m1wXM0?t=1m17s

Pretty funny that the US decided to field a IFV that get stuck in snow in the 80s when the Cold War was still on. I guess they forgot that if you are planning a war against Russia you should plan for snow.

>>28572693
Maybe they thought all the nukes would have melted the snow & dried the ground

>>28570602

>aging Bradley fleet

OP confirmed for not knowing shit.

The US's defense department's acquisition policy is fucked, no doubt about that. But one strategy they've started using to get around that is to buy comprehensive upgrade packages spread out across a few versions, so they're only ever "upgrading" rather than acquiring anything "new".

This very damn year they're starting to get the ECP1 upgrade package that changes a bunch of stuff in the hull, and in 2018 they'll start getting the ECP2 upgrades, at which point they will be essentially new hulls retaining the old bradley turret.

And then they'll change the turret, and it will be an entirely new vehicle.
>>2857090

They are doing it right now with the M109s, in the A6 and A7 version, the m109a7 is essentially a completely different version than the m109a5.

>>28572497
>The biggest advantage we have over the Bradley is mobility though, especially in snow.

>Almost every country that fields it is at or above the arctic circle.

Makes sense...

>>28572693

I'm not buying that video.

I'm not necessarily doubting your opinion overall, but that video seems fishy, as with other "x vs US gear" videos I've seen. Especially when it comes to snowy conditions. The HMMWV video comes to mind.

>>28572766
The video clip in question is from trials to decide what new IFV and MBT Sweden would buy to replace our aging PBV302s and Centurions.
The best armorguys we had at that time got to try vehicles to see which performed best.They also tried T-72s and MT-LBs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjkWgek6UXU

I would doubt the trials if BAE/Hägglunds had performed them but it was impartial officers of the Swedish army who had a vested interest in getting the best gear for their job.

>>28572671
Setting aside that Iraq had working tanks and working ammo, you seem to have the mistaken belief that other IFVs would have been more survivable.

>>28570602
>What should the US replace it's aging Bradley fleet with?

More Bradleys.

>>28571724

All the NATO CV90 operators apart from Norway, have 35mm guns. Other US allies that are looking at the vehicle, like Canada and Australia are also looking at the 35mm version
Japan's IFV is a 35mm. Korea's is 40mm.
Brits and French are both going 40mm CTA

Really it's only the Germans (Puma) and Spaniards (Pizarro) on tracks, and all the wheelshits that have a 30mm gun

File: 1451958690360.gif (2MB, 260x237px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 260x237px

>>28570827
Thanks for letting everyone know you are a balls to the wall, tongue to the window retard from the start.

Umm...I mean good bait friend.

>>28570629
>#feelthebern

Kekers

>>28570620
>Strykshit
Fuck off

>>28570629
The US is such a huge market that even if they adopted a Canadian LAV-3 they'd build factories to produce them domestically, as there's no fucking way General Dynamics could build enough of them for the US in London and the US would require domestic production as part of the contract.

>>28570620
doesn't the USMC use LAVs?

File: LAV-25.jpg (217KB, 1024x769px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1024x769px

>>28573367

Yes.

>>28570620
The LAV is a wheeled piece of shit, poorly armored to boot. No thanks.

>>28573447

Thanks for you contribution.

>>28573463
I'm not wrong. Protection against Rifle fire isn't enough nowadays, the Ukraine-Russia war has proven it. Bradley should be replaced with Namer, Puma, or GCV.

Unless there's a major breakthrough in armored combat, replacing. Bradley's would be a huge waste of money

>>28570602
Nothing. Remove mechanized infantry.

>>28573535
This fuck Mech. Bradleys are the fucking devil. Light for life.

>>28572766
>>28572873
Its primarily due to ground clearance, Bradley's sit lower.

IIRC one of the things being done in its ECP is new suspension that raises it up a bit.

>>28573499
Bradley's have been protected against 30mm since the 90's and are capable of mounting heavy ERA.

They are not the thin skinned vehicles that got BTFO in the Ukraine-Russian war.

>>28573630
Sorry if my post was unclear, I was talking about the LAV. I meant that if the Bradley got replaced it should be by something with better armor protection.

>>28573463
LAV driver here. They really are. The main gun jams a lot, the armor feels like paper, and it's so old that it has gaps in the hull that let sunlight in. At least ours smells good because our gunner keeps on bringing fruit aboard and spilling it, so the whole thing smells like mangos and apricots.

>>28573808

Never crewed any, but've ridden in them. They don't seem all that bad.

>>28573207
>All the NATO CV90 operators apart from Norway, have 35mm guns.

Which makes for 144 30mm armed CV90s and 238 35mm armed CV90s.

>Other US allies that are looking at the vehicle, like Canada and Australia are also looking at the 35mm version

Canada and Australia are looking at a number of different vehicles and with both 30mm and 35mm weaponry.

>Japan's IFV is a 35mm. Korea's is 40mm.
>Brits and French are both going 40mm CTA

25mm and Russian 30mm users aside.

Germany, Austria, Poland, Spain, Belgium and Lithuania all use 30mm.

>>28573828
The back is simple enough that you don't notice the faults going on in the front.

>>28573317
They build Stryker hulls in London and the US bought way more of those than Canada ever built LAV-3s for itself

>>28570966

All the forests and mountains.

>>28573923

Heavy vehicles have no problem with forests.
Even mountains are mostly traversable.

>>28573878
>Poland, Belgium and Lithuania all use 30mm

Like I said: wheelshit.

And Austria aren't in NATO so like I said it's pretty much only Germany and Spain going 30mm on tracks.

>>28570620
>stryker
>mobility

Lol.

Wheels are a meme.

>>28572766
>How can a vehicle designed by people who live in snowy conditions work better in the snow than a AMERICAN vehicle?

>>28572714
What kind of upgrades are we seeing in ECP1 and 2?

>>28574053

It really depends on the terrain.
Some areas are going to be all but impassable to vehicles, and this also opens up the problem of limiting your mobility to areas the vehicles can operate it.

But yeah, light infantry are pretty much worthless except for going places where vehicles aren't feasible.

>>28573367
Yeah, old models not the LAV III.

>>28574207
>>28574283
Hello light tank autist from /thg/.

File: the-pentagon-wars[1].png (116KB, 300x327px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 300x327px

What ever it is. It'll cost 17 billion dollars and take 20 years. Yet will still be shit until we upgrade it to the Israeli spec model.

>>28574300
This article gives a simplified list.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=1829

>>28574454
Who?
No, i'm just an anon.

Riddle me this dipshit. Why did they not put wheels on the first tanks ever to grace this earth when they had to cross muddy, crater- filled moonscapes, if wheels are so mobile?

File: 1317777252084.jpg (54KB, 431x415px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 431x415px

>>28574496
>posting Pentagon Wars unironically

How embarrassing you know so little.

>>28574454
Also, you quoted two seperate anons. Lol.

>>28574207
>>28574283 (You)
Hello light tank autist from /thg/.

File: Wanted+to+dump+my+b8+folder+_68cd11_5287271[1].png (93KB, 1198x1200px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1198x1200px

>>28574512
you bit

>>28574511
>comparing vehicles from WW1 to today

Well one of us is a dipshit, and shame on me for responding to him.

File: remove dispray.jpg (175KB, 800x1323px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 800x1323px

>>28574523
>I was only pretending

>>28574532

Because the ability of round shaped rubber to traverse terrain that lacks enough integrity to even form a solid mass changed in the past 100 years.

Do you understand what KG/CM is? Or traction?

File: readabook.jpg (65KB, 566x480px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 566x480px

>>28574545
>Capitalizing kg and cm
UU
UU

>>28574569
>deflecting to personal attacks in face of evidence that suggests i'm right

Every time.

>>28574545
The fact that you think a modern 8x8 is comparable to something from 100 years ago speaks volumes.

>>28574986

So you're saying that modern wheeled vehicles equal or exceed capability of tracked vehicles under adverse conditions, despite the fact that Tracked vehicles have drastically less ground pressure, which is essential for crossing compromised terrain with any traction? Not to mention modern tracked vehicles also have improvements over the tracks of yesteryear.

File: WHEELS.jpg (36KB, 250x188px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 250x188px

>>28574986

>>28570602
Refurbished Gavins with turrets on them

>>28570740

I'm telling you, it's a real animal.

File: 1437237105770.jpg (69KB, 395x450px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 395x450px

>>28571341
>chupacabron

I laughed a lot more than i should have.

>>28573808
LAV Gunner/Crew Commander here, your turret crews sucks. The 25 is chain driven with a 1HP electric motor, if it's jamming they haven't done their inspections / preventative maintenance.

Source: the gun I was responsible for in 09 never failed to remove kebab when asked to do so in Pansheer.

RCR or PAT?

>>28575021
I like how you are completely reliant on a strawman as well as pretending normal offroad conditions equate deep mud.

File: NO MUD HERE JUST DESERT.jpg (72KB, 660x495px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 660x495px

>>28575643

What if weather and locale dictates the normal offroad condition is in fact, Deep mud?

File: IS THIS EVEN MUD OR IS IT A DESERT.jpg (92KB, 677x476px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 677x476px

>>28575643

File: 1452451205045.jpg (13KB, 540x489px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 540x489px

>actually defending memewheels

just a gentle reminder that wheeled vehicles have never been used in any serious capacity in a conflict that actually matters

they are little better than a drawing board concept at this point, not a proven vehicle.

File: UN.jpg (125KB, 800x599px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 800x599px

>TFW you have to bail out your dumb friends who brought trucks

#justtrackedthings

>>28570630
>No one wants to admit that the Stryker was a failure as a weapon platform.

Brigade Strength
r
i
g
a
d
e

S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

Just strap a TOW on an MRAP and call it good.

>>28575710
All actual combat experience has shown us that going all tracked would be the ideal thing.

>>28575831
Its funny because that is not true in the slightest.

>>28575796
>Sparky followers don't want to admit that the Stryker was a successful weapon platform

File: this.jpg (7KB, 126x126px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 126x126px

>>28575767
>he doesn't know that M113 is stuck

>>28575972
>Its funny because that is not true in the slightest.

>no refutation
>no citations
>absolutely nothing of any substance
>just a barely-formed "nuh uh"

is this autism?

>>28576007
You have been exemplifying autism for us, even if it wasn't your intent.

>>28570602
Strap a Javelin or Spike launcher onto a Puma, go snack on some T-72s.

>>28576033
>You have been exemplifying autism for us

where?

>>28575767
Bruh that thing is just as stuck as those trucks.

>>28576052
>WHEELS REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: hotline build wall.gif (3MB, 341x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 341x270px

>>28570757
el chapo or sum shit

>>28576054
>>28576006

1) stop samefagging

2) just prove what you're saying instead of doing this shit

>>28576069

when did I say that?

drop the memes for ten seconds and just quote my post

>>28576006
It was a red herring, stupid. Obviously they are both stuck, but it's also clear to see that tracks would be far more suitable.

>>28576101
>falling for b8

wew lad

File: 1432958080436.jpg (35KB, 351x351px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 351x351px

>>28571341
>chupacabron

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8Q2DqB8b2Q

I don't see the Brad going anywhere any time soon. It works great in Combine Arms Battalions and can keep up with our tanks off road where the shitty Strykers can't.

It does it's job and it does just as well, if not better than almost every IFV out there.

>>28570602
They're making a new vehicle entirely for it. The FFV. They're actually looking into the possibility of a railgun armament.

>>28572497
> performed well both in Liberia and A-stan.

Neither saw any combat involving the CV90.

>>28576088
Your entire string of posts in this thread. This is getting into Poe's law territory, I cant tell if you are a retard or are faking it.

>>28576393
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgHNtzxO0y8

Replace it with the shit ass striker Canada sold use and replace the striker with an m8 thunderbolt

File: 1287295990959.jpg (71KB, 310x206px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 310x206px

>>28576689

>>28570907
Those Kongsberg turrets are shit. I have not in my 10years in the military met a piece of equipment that malfunctions so often as this POS. Granted it is a complicated POS but start up problems, thermal mode not functioning, can't shoot at specific angles for no reason is not acceptable when you depend upon it.

Best part is only fat Norwegian guys are certified to repair it.

Kongsberg can fuck off

>>28576657
Liberia no
A-stan yes on many occasions

>>28576785
The only Scandinavian armor to have seen any real action were the Danish tanks. Swedes just hung back as they always do, and falsified contacts.

>>28576677
but he's establishing (or claiming, either way) that he has hands-on experience with AFVs

for once I disagree.

>>28576790
Sweden wasn't alone to field them in A-stan.
Nice bait. Not even swe

>>28576800
Norwegians falsified their contacts as well. Norwegians and Swedes did fucking nothing like the Germans other than sit in their FOBs

>>28570827
>Needs a heavy IFV on the abrams or next gen tank chassis

Enjoy fighting next expeditionary war with mostly light infantry. Tank weight IFV or APC will require tank like amounts of fuel and will be much more expensive to airlift into shitholes like Afghanistan.

>>28572708

They could have built a road for off road testing.

>>28572873
>The video clip in question is from trials to decide what new IFV and MBT Sweden would buy to replace our aging PBV302s and Centurions.

It's from Norwegian IFV trials.

>>28576814
This kills the actuall discussion about IFV:s

>>28576756
Stryker fag loved them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O6_qrgA-eQ

>>28570638
Fuck that.

There's a reason why the russians would rather ride on top of that shit than inside it

>>28576253
I will never understand why people like this so much, the one we have break ALL the time and can't drive in terrain for shit.
I have literally never seen one of them drive in terrain other than flat grassland since they get stuck as soon as there is a bit of mud.

>>28576790
Not true, Swedish and Norwegian CV90s were in combat several times in A-stan.

I suspect whatever platform that will replace bradley would have the same footprints (roughly similar in weight, dimensions, maintenance cost, etc) while having sufficient increase in capability to justify the replacement.

Right now the only logical choices are K21 (Worst Korea) and CV-90.

>>28576677
Thanks, I needed that.
>>28576756
How much have you dealt with them? I've been curious about them. I had a friend who really liked the Bradley ones. It already has a better FCS than what is in the Brad now from what I understand.

>>28577076
I would bet on something entirely new or just based off of those rather than importing them. Either way I think they are going to milk the Brad for years to come. That's just the way the Army is going right now.

>>28576814
i was there as a norwegian but ok senpai

>>28570663

I know that other coalition forces in Afghanistan loved it when the Swedes rolled up with their CV90's. That 40mm Bofors is beast.

>>28577076
>Right now the only logical choices are K21 (Worst Korea) and CV-90.

I feel the General Dynamics ASCOD with a CTA 40 turret (like the Brits are using for their Ajax cavalry vehicles) would be more likely than K21 or CV90

>>28576814
I know for a fact the Swedes saw plenty of combat, especially given how few were there.

>>28572686
>VLS tank

>hey guys, tanks are obsolete and so are guns, lets take the guns off the tank, fill the hull with VLS vells then put the guns from the tank on an IFV hull
>hey, why are you all calling me an idiot

>>28570602
>>Muh American made American developed
>This needs to stop.

fuck off. its only pork when its not your district. there should be massively strict tariffs on anything imported made of steel right now.

A tracked version of the Fennek to replace the M3 CFV.

God I'm so fucking mad jelly of the Dutch and Germans.

File: 1414677286817.jpg (1MB, 3000x2008px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2008px

Why are people saying to buy the LAV III when you guys already have the Stryker, isn't it basically the same vehicle?

>>28572766
OMG NOT AMERIFAT SUPREACY ITS FAKEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: bmt72-01l.gif (69KB, 1800x875px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1800x875px

With the BMT-72.

File: bmt72-04l.jpg (183KB, 1600x1050px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1600x1050px

>>28578054

>>28571821
I hope those threads have all been saved.

File: bmt72.jpg (151KB, 1600x678px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1600x678px

>>28578054

>>28573447
>implying the Bradley doesn't melt down to a 6 inch blob with one efp.

How does the Bronco fare in terms of its job as an APC ?
Also, the Terrex exists, probably get it cheap because SG is begging to export.

>>28573535
>>28573573
>clearly never seen the killing power of a Bradley

>>28570982
Programmable rounds.

File: IED.jpg (100KB, 972x628px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 972x628px

>>28576790
lol?
falsify this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGKyxwbFQsw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR0ie9QoXIw

>>28577917
Yep. Same hull different mission fit. They're even made in the same factory.

Strykers have some improvements over LAV III (better suspension and armour and some with a double-V hull) but they're heavier and slower IIRC

>>28578208
>How does the Bronco fare in terms of its job as an APC ?

ST Kinetics Bronco? The ones we had (Brits - Warthog) was plagued with problems early on. They weren't very reliable.

File: GCV 01.jpg (802KB, 3246x2500px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 3246x2500px

There actually was a Bradley replacement called the GCV (Ground Combat Vehicle) but they cancelled it in 2014.

Now Bradleys are in limbo until a decision is made later this year to proceed on FFV (Future Fighting Vehicle) by either BAE Systems or General Dynmics or upgrade the Bradleys further.

Those are the only options.

File: Hoping_He_Actually_Did.jpg (36KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x480px

>>28578230
>Be me.
> Crammed into the back of a Bradley with the dismounts for 13 hours, 115° outside.
>Javelins behind the benches, can't sit up straight.
>NBC hose shoved into shirt, pumping in blow drier air.
>Turtle into body armor because 6'2" and no head room, even without helmet on.
>Have to reload for crew because I'm by the hell hole.
>Busted screen mount, constantly fending off bludgeonings.

You start to look forward to dismounts after one day, after two you crave a TIC so you can feel fresh air again.

Eventually you become a homicidal maniac.

Dat cannon is Priddy cool though.

File: CV90specieltprojekt.jpg (76KB, 547x410px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 547x410px

>>28570663
>>28577792
How about a CV90 with a 120mm canon?

>>28578479
cv90 is such a hyper effective piece of killing machine you shouldn't sell them to untermensch outside northern european borders

>>28578594
come on /pol/, we are talking IFVs here

>>28570602
I want Weasels.
Tons of them.

>>28578643
i want to see what happens if they are fitted with engines in the 800-1000hp class

>W-WRC
>wiesel world rally championship

>>28570602
can you name IFV better than Bradley at anything, enough to justify replacement cost?

Only Bradey's issue is weight mostly due to all that armor, and the only comparable IFV, Puma, hit pretty much same weight when uparmored to Brad level,

>>28570602
It shouldn't be replaced. The U.S. military has decided to fight sandniggers like a mercenary army instead of being a force to be reckoned with against first world armies. Last I checked the Bradley fights sandniggers fine.

The M113 Gavin IFV can easily replace the Bradley and be a versatile multi-role platform, with better armor against IEDs a new v-shape hull, lower profile over the Bradley it can actually function as a scout vehicle like it was intended too, and they can have multiple variants that do the work of the Bradley but cost much much less.

It can also be airdropped.

>inb4 t. Mike Sparks

File: https%3A%2F%2F40.media.tumblr.com%2Fe065ad010b3138d0b31d37ac6f52e1f9%2Ftumblr_nrr63hZrh71r9es8wo1_500.jpg (37KB, 500x366px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x366px

>>28570602
My dad was actually in acquisition corps as the project manager on trying to replace the Bradley not too long ago (2012-2013ish). The one we almost went with was the CV90, but the project got defunded. Thank you lobbyists for not letting us have nice things.

>mfw

>>28578479
No infantry.

File: 1439665989864.jpg (72KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 499x499px

>>28578785
>The U.S. military has decided to fight sandniggers like a mercenary army instead of being a force to be reckoned with against first world armies.
>implying any of those first world armies you are thinking of want to tangle with the U.S. military

>>28579459
Assuming your not full of shit, it got defunded because it would literally be a gigantic waste of money.1

>>28579459
Replacing Bradleys with CV90s would provide no real benefit, especially now with the use of Bradley based hulls on every tracked vehicle lighter than an Abrams/Hercules.