Author Topic: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions  (Read 76562 times)

Pudge

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 417
  • Thats Fapable!
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #285 on: July 23, 2012, 05:40:49 AM »
Time to reset our discussions here in this topic.

Since I'm too lazy to browse all the replies on the thread, let me just ask this few questions and then discuss:

1. Armored Fighting Vehicles? Strict tracked or wheeled anti-tank, infantry-support, reconnaissance doctrine only?

2. Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicles? Tracked or wheeled fighting vehicles similar to number one but with troop carrier capabilities?

Cant a mixed force of  Wheeled and Tracked Armored vehicles that functions in the best possible manner (regardful of terrain difficulties)  would do the Job?
This will be a LONG one. :lol: :smoke:
« Last Edit: July 23, 2012, 09:33:46 AM by Pudge »
-Who Dares Wins-
-Mess with the Best , Die like the Rest-
-The Pain you feel today will be the strength you feel tomorrow!-

Ronkills

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31
  • Your words have powers. Use them wisely.
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #286 on: July 23, 2012, 09:27:04 PM »
Ang tagal ko nag hintay sa SONA na tapos na bitin pa ako.............

Mga Sir! noob question lng para madali ko maintindihan. sabi ni PNOY mag "[Armored Personnel Carriers]" ang tanong ko = ang ACV300, LAV300, LAV600 and B1 Centauro ay ma consider na APC?  :bash:

Shorty_1972

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 536
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #287 on: July 23, 2012, 09:57:12 PM »
Ang tagal ko nag hintay sa SONA na tapos na bitin pa ako.............

Mga Sir! noob question lng para madali ko maintindihan. sabi ni PNOY mag "[Armored Personnel Carriers]" ang tanong ko = ang ACV300, LAV300, LAV600 and B1 Centauro ay ma consider na APC?  :bash:

It could be the italian M113s.  Centauro is labeled a "tank destroyer" and cannot carry infantry (space occupied by turret basket).
"To every man upon this earth
Death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."

Ronkills

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31
  • Your words have powers. Use them wisely.
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #288 on: July 23, 2012, 10:04:39 PM »
wala ba tayong balak mag karoon ng tank destroyer or wheeled versions of MBT like B1 centauro.. so that they can start training in these type of armored assets.

shalelord1@tmw

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 402
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #289 on: July 23, 2012, 10:10:47 PM »
@ronkills maybe in the future tank destroyers will be considered.by the millitary planners but currently AFP needs to fill the gap of APC's that can be used in our terrain and have a firepower to support troops without bogging them down, hence at the moment we are strictly limiting ourselves to weight, since most of our roads cant handle.the tonnage modern mbts have, also issues of tracked or wheeled formats are hotly debated too in this forum

Ronkills

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31
  • Your words have powers. Use them wisely.
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #290 on: July 23, 2012, 10:28:00 PM »
@shalelord1@tmw tnx sir.

so when the President said Personnel carriers, is he referring to M113 or it could be other type of APC.

jbongsky30

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #291 on: July 26, 2012, 01:08:13 AM »
Lets try this again. But this time . . . with tighter parameters to keep discussions rational.

Vynncute originally came up with the following opener.

Lets add the following parameters

The following are gems from the original discussion.

An infantryman's view of the need for tanks:

Why MBTs are not always the best solution:

About ground pressure:

Tanks vs attack helicopters and AT weapons:



I will bet for the The Russian Heavy Infantry Transporter BMP-3. This little beast packs a punch 1x100mm main gun with 40 rounds, 1x30mm auto canon with 300 rounds, 3xmachine guns with 2000 rounds each, 6x ATGM guided missiles. My favourite AFV so far. Indonesian Army adopted with similar terrain like the Philippines. All in 1 package, can carry troops, can go to water, rugged terrains. what else... just google it.





redcomet_m

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #292 on: July 26, 2012, 01:38:15 AM »
^a real good platform for the marines. Though i do have to ask, did we ever acquire anything russian for AFP?

arkitek4

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 822
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #293 on: July 26, 2012, 03:49:13 AM »
Yes sir we did buy Russian but recently the RPG-7 I believe.
"Only through space can one exits" D.L.L.M.D.

franning

  • MBAC 21
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1622
  • Ibong Adarna
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #294 on: July 26, 2012, 07:44:05 AM »
Yes sir we did buy Russian but recently the RPG-7 I believe.

Please post your source or link it. salamat.

Cygnus

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
  • "in Peace we prepare for War"
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #295 on: July 26, 2012, 12:50:55 PM »
I use to support the BMP3 IFV for the AFP, after the action in Chechnya with all the smoke in them i doubt it could fire on the move. Why not just invest in the ACV-S of Turkey a stretched version of the ACV based on AIFV something we are more familiar with and will be easier to maintain. Just add a turret armed with 90mm gun for commonality with the Marines V-300 / LAV-300
EE-T4 Ogum RECCON VEHICLE
 


The EE-T4 Reccon Vehicle is a brilliant vehicle. Quick, light armored and have it armed with a RCWS equipted with a 0.50 cal HMG and 40mm AGL combo i'm ganna be happy with it. Better yet install a 20-25mm RCWS with a co-axial 7.62mm MG to it, Hell… just perfect for the Philippine Army.

Weisel is cute but the EE-T4, makes you go Wow!!! Send a pack of them and they could drive fast and deep into the Philippine Jungle and we could clear the rebels alot sooner. Hopefully the GA or PA R&D looks into this vehicle and craft our own version of the EE-T4, calling our version "Daga" would be fitting.

Ever see a pack of rats converge on unattended meal, a sight of the EE-T4 RP version moving in would give any rebel LBM.

Ronkills

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31
  • Your words have powers. Use them wisely.
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #296 on: July 26, 2012, 06:40:55 PM »
I use to support the BMP3 IFV for the AFP, after the action in Chechnya with all the smoke in them i doubt it could fire on the move. Why not just invest in the ACV-S of Turkey a stretched version of the ACV based on AIFV something we are more familiar with and will be easier to maintain. Just add a turret armed with 90mm gun for commonality with the Marines V-300 / LAV-300


Yeah! buy more turkish made ACV300 AIFV instead of M113 there are lots of variant in ACV's. its like a bradley... AIFV...

dallas101

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1206
  • we do not run... we fallback
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #297 on: July 26, 2012, 07:12:43 PM »
I use to support the BMP3 IFV for the AFP, after the action in Chechnya with all the smoke in them i doubt it could fire on the move. Why not just invest in the ACV-S of Turkey a stretched version of the ACV based on AIFV something we are more familiar with and will be easier to maintain. Just add a turret armed with 90mm gun for commonality with the Marines V-300 / LAV-300

  I think It have been discussed before that there are certain problems fitting a turret w/o extensive structural changes on the Vehicle. 

 Much better option is to have ACV-S With Grenade launchers Or Mortars (for Fire support)
and TOW missile mount (for anti armor).

 Better Option is to Just get more V-300 / LAV-300 with 90mm gun (for fire support) then TOW mount (for anti armor)

 No need for extensive training since we are already familiar with the Vehicle. Will not Strain logistics and maintenance chain since there is already an existing chain for it.

 For Added protection, additional Metal/Ceramic plate armor or RPG cage  against  RPG's and anti materiel weapons.

 Or just Install  Trophy active protection system from Israel.

phichanad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1927
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #298 on: July 26, 2012, 08:37:17 PM »
I remember asking here in Timawa before if the PMC looked at the BMP-3 as a possible future AFV as it is capable of limited sea crossing. The PMC did look at it, but it did not fit PMC doctrines. It still appears that AAV-7 is still the way to go for them.

http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=30003.msg296520#msg296520

Pudge

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 417
  • Thats Fapable!
Re: Take 2: Armored fighting vehicles that suit Philippine conditions
« Reply #299 on: July 26, 2012, 08:44:51 PM »

 Better Option is to Just get more V-300 / LAV-300 with 90mm gun (for fire support) then TOW mount (for anti armor)
Where we will get those? V300 production was halted by Textron decades ago, confiscated ex-panamian LAV300s from US stocks maybe?
-Who Dares Wins-
-Mess with the Best , Die like the Rest-
-The Pain you feel today will be the strength you feel tomorrow!-