What are the ideal characteristics or requirements for an amphibious

Do you like upotte?

Active protection against missile threats.

File: battle_engine_aquila_illus1[1].jpg (69KB, 1000x562px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1000x562px

>>30066932

>>30066992
Missiles ruined everything

File: 24327265661_8a06a55c7a_o.jpg (2MB, 2500x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2500x1728px

Something like these.

And please. Something that is mass-producible and wont immediately bankrupt us.

>>30066932
test

>>30067004
They really did. Man portable ATGMs really ruin the fun for a lot of the wheeled and tracked boys. I tell you what, when World War 3 China vs India rolls around, we're gonna see a new era of ultra heavy armor introduced to withstand the Missile Threat

>>30067023
That's China right? I love that camo pattern. How many chinamen can you fit into one of those things?

File: zbd04.jpg (107KB, 1000x618px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1000x618px

>>30067071

Light tank (that one armed with the 105mm gun) has some seats for 4 infantrymen, and the IFV variant has for 8.

>>30067091
Neat, seems like it could be good. What are its weaknesses?

>>30067152
Like every other vehicle meant to float, paper thin armor.

File: 1432889827647.jpg (486KB, 1400x1009px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 1400x1009px

>>30067152
smaller than EFV and carry less member. But is much cheaper and actually works.

Dunno about the weaknesses. Venezuela has bought them recently. So far, they like them.

http://www.strategic-bureau.com/en/les-blindes-chinois-pour-le-venezuela/

From the top of my head, I'd say that arming a thin-skinned vehicle with a 105mm gun plus ammo makes is very vulnerable to catastrophic explosions. But the 30mm gun armed IFV variant should be fine.

File: 183703oxbwyja6a7b2wbw5.jpg (2MB, 2000x1241px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1241px

>>30067189
Main strength is that it is quite fast on water - just like how the EFV was designed to be.

40kph on water is very good for an amphibious tank.

And since it is just, like, half the size of the EFV, it would fit in more of our ships.

>>30066932
>What are the ideal characteristics or requirements for an amphibious assault vehicle?
1) Rotors
2) There is no 2

File: maxresdefault.jpg (264KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1600x900px

>>30066932

This thing was pretty much perfect.

You know, except for the price.

>>30067227
That pic is what Bold Alligator should look like. A big, serious exercise with hazards on the beach. I don't think USMC is taking amphibious assault seriously. They're trying to become a smaller shittier air force.

Let the Navy, air force, and army do what they do best. Focus on taking the port or whatever, focus on what USMC is supposed to do and what we need them to do.

What about an AAV that can submerse? Water is a great protection against weapons fire...

>>30068571
What about a landing ship tank submarine? A cargo submarine that can ground ashore and discharge 6 or 10 armored vehicles.

Wouldn't have to be super stealth, just long range and big.

Would also be useful for smuggling critical supplies like rare earths or tooling or computers etc to keep industry going in the face of a blockade or something. Paired with a national strategic stockpile program it would be a strategic asset that could buy allies and turn the tide of foreign wars if used right.

File: vintage-man-confused.jpg (14KB, 948x858px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 948x858px

>>30068793

File: 621russianamphibiousassaultsubmarine.jpg (34KB, 644x153px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 644x153px

>>30068996
Fuck off faggot, better minds than you have taken the idea seriously

>>30067023
Sea BMP's...

The concept of such a limited utility vehicle is fucking retarded and a waste of money.

Why does the USMC insist on landing on a contested beach anyways?

>>30069251
There are no useful landing zones which aren't contested. We won't always be fighting illiterate goatfuckers

File: 29_ekranoplany_76.jpg (31KB, 400x219px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 400x219px

>>30069132
I never knew about this. Neat stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_assault_submarine

The concept is pretty fucking strange, but no more so than the Lun. Speaking of Ekranoplans, the Soviets made some capable of putting vehicles on beaches. I had a picture of one with a bunch of Zil trucks disembarking but I think it's lost on my Pictures folder.

>>30069132
and then rejected it, because it's fucking stupid

>>30070412
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_submarine

Actually cargo subs played crucial roles in both world wars

>>30067045
Or just plain better active protection systems. That would be expensive but probably much more practical than trying to drive an easily 70+ ton AFV through East Asian mud and swamp.

>>30070412
No, and then researched it for a couple of decades producing a legitimate working design that was only rejected for the sole reason that shipyards were too busy with SSBN production.

>>30070256
>its a boat
>its also a plane
>its also amphibious
>its face is a giant door
>better put a 30mm cannon on top of it
soviet aircraft design, ladies.