Choose.

File: de maiziere tilich boxer.jpg (26KB, 500x331px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x331px

>>34144900
left

Boxer shills incoming in

>>34144900
Right because its gun has more millimetres which makes it better.

Also BAE have a greater local presence in country which means blah blah local industry blah blah political capital blah blah whatever, they'll probably win the contract

>>34144900

Is that an AMV on the right?

File: 18768293_1928872973992390_5348080509641477870_o.jpg (357KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 2048x1365px

B O X E R
O
X
E
R

File: 18814787_1928872997325721_3755049158789175292_o.jpg (411KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 2048x1365px

>>34145108

The AMV is the better choice but the Boxer will win because the competition was designed to favor it (meaning the decision was already made).

>>34145256
>designed to favor it
Big claim, I'm sure you have proof

>>34145327
The off the shelf requirement was set up to exclude superior designs while allowing a new Boxer model to be offered.

>>34144956
wait, which gun is the AMV carrying for the Landphase 2?

>>34145924
35mm

>>34145997
That's a big caliber

Honestly, whatever 8x8 wins the British Army's competition, I would rather it uses the CT40. They're going to the trouble of re-equipping hundreds of Warrior IFVs with the gun, they should get it on the 8x8 as well.

>>34145997
huh, the Boxer has the 30mm. I thought they gave it the 35mm same as the Lynx.

>>34146054
It can but the demonstrators that they're testing only have the 30mm on them.

File: k-17 vpk-7829 (2).jpg (286KB, 1620x1080px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 1620x1080px

>>34144900
>Random yroshit
No, thanks.

>>34146904
>says euroshit
>posts a slav one
`??????

why is the bushmasher so inaccurate?

File: 3l-Image.jpg (201KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 600x400px

Ez.

>>34147437
Get better optics.

>>34146006
>>34146006
>>34146006
>>34146006

>>34144900
Boxer, but I know fuck all about either of them or the competition they're in.

File: 1471388442063.webm (1MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x720px

>>34147437
Bushmasters are very accurate, are you confusing them with certain floppy dick guns?

>>34147584
don't need accuracy if you saturate the area

>>34147636
>don't need accuracy

Yes you do. Anything above 14.5mm typically doesn't have the fire rate to saturate properly.
https://webmshare.com/m8m6Y

>>34147728
that looked like they didn't hit the second guy at all

>>34147760
Correct. I don't think they hit the third either, but the clip ends.

>>34147776
I wonder what range they shot those guys

File: Frogwheels.jpg (226KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1200x800px

AMX-10 master race here

File: Rxn Clever Girl.jpg (10KB, 548x451px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 548x451px

>>34147487

>>34144900
i really like how the boxer looks.

>>34145256
AMV is worse at literally everything, shills OUT

>>34148511
>The Boxer is better because its German.

Fascinating.

File: SCHLAND.png (17KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x400px

>>34148705

>>34144900

Why no 50mm or 57mm autocannons?

>>34148772
Minimum number of stored kills without reloading.

>>34148772
against what? these things are supposed to kill ifvs. 57mmm against an ifv is generally overkill meanwhile if you go against a bmpt it's not nearly enough.

File: IMG_3833.jpg (68KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x426px

Neither. Why aren't mortars more commonplace? I feel like a AMOS mortar system that can still direct fire is better than "rate of fire". Espescially in urban or high cover enviroments.

>>34148927
never post again

File: reddit tip.png (92KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 400x400px

>>34148927
>low-velocity rounds in a fluid battlespace

>>34149305
>mortars aren't useful
That guy is retarded but mortars are pretty important for urban operations.

>>34144900

left because that gun looks like it is from space

>>34148927
while mortars are good in urban combat, the idea of landphase 2 is to find a new apc

>>34147776
>the clip

>>34149544
>reel of film

FUCK MY BAD

WIPING MY HDD AS WE SPEAK

>>34148772

An IFV has to balance size/weight with; infantry capacity, protection, firepower, and ammunition capacity. One you start sticking on a big gun, that needs a big turret, and has bulky ammunition, you start losing the other priorities, remembering that this is not just a light tank.

File: 1313701321168.jpg (1MB, 3000x2008px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2008px

The Boxer. While the 35mm is nice, the amount of ammo stored in the turret and body is too limited.

It's not just an ASLAV (APC) replacement, these will be used as Recon vehicles that can suppress enemy elements until backup arrives.

>>34149544
ebin :^)

>>34148927
Mortars are awesome; but in high-end war 155s and MLRS have priority, and in low-end war the mechanized component isn't as important.

There's been a lot of progress in recoil compensation, so that now 120s can fit on a jeep. Pre-fragmented shells roughly double the kill radius vs troops (40m effect for a 60mm!). And PGMs and guided/winged shells too.

>>34150846
Both the 30mm and 35mm guns have the required stored kills. When the AMV started getting favored because of the larger gun Rheinmetall quickly threw out the option of going with a 35mm gun on the Boxer as well.

File: 1473485552931.jpg (626KB, 2038x1896px) Image search: [Google]

626KB, 2038x1896px

>>34151460
True, but the requirement is just a minimum. I'm sure while the crews might like the bigger gun, they would prefer the safety and options that come with a higher magazine count.

File: boxpew.jpg (699KB, 2280x1655px) Image search: [Google]

699KB, 2280x1655px

>>34152076

File: IMG_1466.jpg (95KB, 540x566px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 540x566px

>>34151130
>Pre-fragmented shells roughly double the kill radius vs troops (40m effect for a 60mm!)
Yeah I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit. That's like 155mm kill radius.

>>34144900

Even though I think it's going to be the AMV, I want it to be the Boxer

>>34147760
Looks like the second guy got hit in the ass and the third guy definitely got hit in the head or whatever he had sticking around the corner.

>>34147487
4 (you)s

>>34152076
You don't know what stored kills means do you?

File: 1462768313576.jpg (787KB, 3400x1201px) Image search: [Google]

787KB, 3400x1201px

>>34152323
I do actually, but it's combat, rounds miss their targets, rounds can be fired solely to suppress a target, each burst won't get a kill.

It's also quite likely that rounds will be fired at troops. It's great that a 35mm can punch and kill but if you have no rounds left for anything else then that is a great disadvantage.

I'd choose the Boxer 30mm over the AMV35, and that's after I initially preferred the AMV.

>>34146904
>uses an ancient cannon

>>34152426
The argument of needing multiple shots to kill stuff works in the 35mm's favor due to the number of shots required to have the same effect.

>>34150952
So it's not a remote turret?

File: 1489505701804.jpg (201KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1200x900px

>>34152509
Yeah I agree, but as i just said
>rounds miss their targets, rounds can be fired solely to suppress a target, each burst won't get a kill. It's also quite likely that rounds will be fired at troops

You can't suppress infantry with 5 rounds of 35mm but you can with 20 rounds of 30mm

>>34152537
Yep, it's a 2 man turret.

>>34146006
For you

>>34152564
The Boxer does not carry 4x the ammunition the AMV does.

>>34152564
>suppressive fire with 30mm/35mm guns

Uh huh.

File: 1481335113900.jpg (901KB, 3600x2417px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 3600x2417px

>>34152777
My mistake, it's 3x the ammo in the turret. I can't find the info on the amount within the vehicle.

>>34152792
The Bushmaster on the LAV is used constantly for suppression. If you think the rounds fired from the CRV will only be fired at vehicles you'd be silly.

>>34147830
good post. destroy those faggots in OP pic with that beauty.

>>34151130
>precision guided gliding mortar shells launched from a humvee

anon, please, i can only get so aroused

>>34152884
>My mistake, it's 3x the ammo in the turret. I can't find the info on the amount within the vehicle.

The Dutch did a study of both 30mm and 35mm KETF rounds and found that targets (dug in infantry, recon vehicle frontal armor, MBT optics, helicopters) which might require 1-2 35mm rounds for a 90% pk takes 6-7 30mm rounds to get a 90% pk.

>The Bushmaster on the LAV is used constantly for suppression. If you think the rounds fired from the CRV will only be fired at vehicles you'd be silly.

The 25mm Bushmaster is also a significantly smaller gun.

File: 20110912_WN_S1015650_0030.jpg_-_Flickr_-_NZ_Defence_Force.jpg (261KB, 1200x799px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1200x799px

LAV III

get on my level

>>34144900
Whats the purpose of the frame around the barrel

File: Sentinel.jpg (3MB, 3960x2692px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3960x2692px

>>34153152
Unfortunately I can't find the exact numbers but with the requirement to destroy 40 targets, with 200 rounds of 30mm there's 5 rounds per target.

With 70 rounds of 35mm that only leaves 1.75 per target.

>>34153285
Programmer for KETF air burst.

>>34153342
Does the amv not have that ability?

File: CJdJuvY.jpg (101KB, 2000x971px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 2000x971px

>>34152186
>triple barreled MG3
oh lawdy

>>34153518
I am sexually attracted to this

File: boxerp.jpg (431KB, 1600x1071px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1600x1071px

>>34153518
AMVfags on suicide watch

>>34153393
I misunderstood your question, I thought you meant the rig on the end of the barrel. The frame around the Mk30-2 on the Boxer is to stabilize the barrel, the sleeve around the 35mm Bushmaster on the AMV performs the same function.

>>34153571
Look at all that in service, off the shelf equipment whose requirement invalidated newer competitors like the Terrex 3, Piranha 5 and AMV-XP.

File: reedd.jpg (47KB, 621x502px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 621x502px

>>34153600
yeah, look at it

File: amos_patria_amv_8x8_amos_2.jpg (242KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1600x1200px

>>34153600
Not the guy you're responding too but it's clear the only advantage of the AMV was it's 35mm gun, which the Boxer can upgrade too.

Also need to factor in Phase 3 for the IFV procurement. With Boxer the Army could easily acquire the Lynx.

Though I would love it if we could have a few dozen of these:

>>34147584
Bushmaster actually very accurate It's just easier to hose but on few occasions the need for nice tight bursts present and it delivers.

Tween two buildings down a alley at comes to mind and not a single round did not hit target with some M792 a Km away.

File: 1468206155964.png (469KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 800x450px

>>34153695
Perhaps not only advantage but I'm pretty sure the Boxer has turret ammo stored outside crew compartment and will come with ATGM's being easier to install, and APS, as apposed to the AMV which won't have those from the start

>>34148772
It's not out to kill tanks just enough to do the job it's designed for. Anything past that you and your infantry start using the AT stuff you have.

>>34148927
Mortars are good but realize urban is not where you typically use them. IFVs typically need direct fire and AT missiles. Mortars are kinda a specialty vehicle weapon.

>>34153152
But really don't need better on a IFV they killed lots of T55s and a few t-72s with Bushmasters using the M919 rounds

I'm thinking they are gonna overbuild it into a light tank

>>34147728
how do they not kill all of them like wtf i couldve done a better job

>>34147805
someone do the math on how long it takes for the bullets to hit

>>34153695
The AMV's other advantage is price.

File: 41e376593f1a787989469809de4f1b21.jpg (126KB, 1024x782px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1024x782px

>>34149624
>An IFV has to balance size/weight with; infantry capacity, protection, firepower, and ammunition capacity
reminds me of the bradley
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA

>>34153695
wouldn't too difficult with the boxer, you can take off the container and put one with a mortar on if you need it.

>>34154015
I don't even have to open the video to know it is someone unironically posting a comedy that pretends to be a documentary.

>>34153710
Unless you are only carrying 200 rounds there is ammo in the crew compartment.

>>34154037
nobody claims it's a documentary

>>34154073
yet you are citing it as though it were one

>>34154049
There is only 200 30mm rounds ready in the Boxer, and 70 35mm rounds ready in the AMV before both need to reload

>>34154139
Try rereading the post chain.

>>34153695
Why would you want the Lynx over the Puma, CV90 or Ascod?

File: 1462792653317.jpg (2MB, 3000x2008px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2008px

>>34154161
Try getting some reading comprehension.
Advantages listed + 200 rounds before reload vs only advantage listed (price) + 70 rounds before reload.

>>34154200
Doubling down on your mistake does not make you look smarter, the topic was the location of the Boxer's ammunition storage.

File: 1482697044539.jpg (102KB, 1120x468px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1120x468px

>>34154175
Honestly I'd prefer the CV9040 with the 40mm gun plus ATGM's seeing as it'll be an IFV.

Or I'd even go the new Bradley replacement

>>34154212
As I've already stated. Both have ammo in crew compartment but only the AMV has it inside the turret.

>>34154200
>Advantages listed

ATGM's and APS that both vehicles can have, but only the former is being taken by the Australians?

>>34146006
U U
U U

>>34147970
Hownew.ru

>>34154226
Both vehicles ready ammunition is in the turret, both vehicles additional ammunition is in the crew compartment.

>>34149336
on infantry operated, sure

vehicle integrated? lol no

>>34154231
Yeah the ATGM's are wanted but as I understand it only Rheinmetal was ready to offer both while Patria initially did not

>>34152564
Part of the idea of the 35 is that you use programmable airburst munitions. So instead of 20 30mm HE to suppress enemy troops in a trench, you fire 1 35mm MPHE and kill them outright. Or if you're not sure exactly where they are you fire a string, but the point remains: replacing suppressive fire with destructive.

>>34154132
you may have a point, although I posted it after rewatching it for a smile in the morning.

>>34154252
I see the confusion here. I read that the Boxer stores ammo separate to the crew compartment where it can detonate without harm to crew. Though there still may be some within the body of the vehicle

File: 1462780321286.jpg (2MB, 2250x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2250x1500px

>>34154271
I guess it comes down to 200 v 70 and what types of ammo it carries and their amounts of.

The US is doing a study into the benefits of a 50mm cannon on the Bradley replacement

>>34154300
the bumerang and bmp variants have for them in the works a 50mm as well.
does anyone else find it funny that vehicles like the bumerang and dingo get their names from things not of their own country?

>>34154300
>The US is doing a study into the benefits of a 50mm cannon on the Bradley replacement
Larger calibers for IFVs have 2 main advantages:
1. Better AP performance. What with the Russians not being idle, 30mm is insufficient for the destruction of future IFVs, and 35mm is marginal.
2. More bang per fuze.
If you accept the idea of smart/programmable fuzes, it's fairly straightforward to see that for any given weight of precision HE delivered to target, larger calibers do it with less rounds and therefore cheaper (the fuze being more expensive than the rest of the round combined). It also gives you new and interesting options- a 50mm round will reach farther, penetrate light cover better, and so forth. You could set a point detonating delay to penetrate light bunkers which would be immune to 30mm and so forth.
Of course it comes at a cost of greater weight, lower capacity and so forth, but such is the nature of engineering tradeoffs.

>>34154273
To be fair, Pentagon Wars and Down Periscope always makes me chuckle

File: 1344218389566.jpg (1MB, 2056x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2056x1536px

Out of curiosity, would there be any advantage of having 600 Boxer/AMV instead of the planned 300ish and some IFV's through ditching the 60 tanks we have?

I mean 60 tanks + 300 Boxers + a quantity of IFV's or,
No tanks but with 600 Boxers + quantity of IFV's

>>34154382
25mm AP should still zip right though frontal bumerang and Kurganets based on their weight.

The T-15 won't be penned frontally by anything short of very hot 105 DU (and that's a huge stretch) , most likely 120mm.

>>34154428
it's just good to have tanks. by the time you up-arm and up-armour an IFV to fill the role of the tank you end up with a tank anyway so better to have something designed to do the job.

>Being surprised that an acquisition program is designed to the army gets the vehicle it wants instead of bean counters deciding.

Considering the Navy wanted Arleigh Burke Evolved Flight IIs for the AWDs and ended up with Spanish design because it would be "quicker and easier and cheaper to build" (kek) the only way for the ADF to get the equipment it wants is to set other competitors to fail.

>>34144900
Australia better pick left or Imma be REAL MAD

>>34154509
it's basically already won along with the lynx, the lynx being pretty much an updated puma

>>34154529
Lynx is a poor man's Puma, curious to see what it's actually like desu

File: australianspaceprogramme.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>34154428
no, read up on plan Beersheba

>>34154669
how is the Lynx a poor man's Puma?
please explain, seriously I thought the Lynx is a beefed up Puma with more modular components

>>34154677
Care to be more specific? I'm not sure what your vague comment is referring to

File: 1472763730315.jpg (245KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1024x683px

>>34154680
Yeah I'm not sure either, Lynx is newer yes? Not sure which is better protected or armed.

Pretty sure Lynx carries more troops though

>>34154710
>>34154680
As far as I understand they are repurchased and updated Marder chassis ,or at least derived from it, with a new Lance turret. They are the cheaper alternativ to the Puma.

>>34154677
>That perfect execution of a beer and roll in the end
Glorious

>>34154669
what the hell is a Puma
stop making up animals

>>34154760
>The cougar (Puma concolor), also commonly known as the mountain lion, puma, panther, or catamount, is a large felid of the subfamily Felinae native to the Americas.
Cunt

>>34154786
Anyone could tell that was bait you newfag.

>>34154760
Chupathingy. I like that.

>>34154786
Get raped

>>34148927
AMOS is dead in the water due to Swedish cuckoldry. Patria only focuses on NEMO now because of the former.

File: page0000031.jpg (445KB, 1443x2040px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 1443x2040px

Found the ammo information
200 ready + 350 for Boxer, only 70 ready + 140 for AMV

File: page0000030.jpg (709KB, 1443x2040px) Image search: [Google]

709KB, 1443x2040px

"The vehicle main weapon shall not fire less than 200 rounds without requiring a reload"

>>34144900
load the up with a full load of fuel and ammo. send them into the desert 500km apart and make them hunt each other, who ever doesn't get destroyed gets the contract

File: My_face_when_I_have_no_face.jpg (47KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x500px

>The Pentagon Wars is a 1998 dark comedy film from HBO... The film describes the dishonesty associated with the 17-year development of the M2 Bradley fighting vehicle.

Wait, what? Why would someone make a movie like this?

File: IMG_3910.png (299KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 640x1136px

>>34153695
>patria amos

My goy

File: IMG_3292.jpg (121KB, 722x1280px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 722x1280px

>>34153742
Must be why im attracted to them.
My /specialsnowflake/ inside me just wants to Multiple round Simultaneous impact kebabs.

>>34154020
Amos is much more than just a bed with a mortar.

>>34155376
i'd fucking pay subscription to see episodes of that shit

>>34154680
The Lynx is an updated Marder offered by Rhienmetall because KMW owns the Puma.

File: k-17 vpk-7829 (11).jpg (684KB, 2560x1707px) Image search: [Google]

684KB, 2560x1707px

>>34152472
>2A72
>Ancient
Nigger, you what?

>>34155423
Using ignorance to create the appearance of scandal because scandal sells newspapers.

>>34156409
oh I see, Lynx is a Rheinmetall only and Puma is a joint KMW&RM.
That explains a shit ton of stuff. Always boondoggled me why Puma and Lynx are sitting next to eachother, despite Rheinmetall working on both

>>34156435
>2A72
>not an ancient inaccurate piece of shit of a gun

>>34154529
AMV35/CV90 are a better combo