Capabilities of Armour as seen by the Inexperienced

[a_majoor]

MBTs are proving quite useful in Iraq and Israel currently. God rest their souls, but the lads involved in the roll-overs recently in Afghanistan would have greatly benefited from MBTs as opposed to the LAV-IIIs. Don't get me wrong, I really love the LAV-IIIs and their setups, but I think MBTs would have better served their interest.

Your original post makes the very strong implication that the troops involved in the various incidents in Afghanistan would not have rolled over if they had been in an MBT. MBTs would not have been used for the missions where these accidents happened, so your entire argument is moot.

The rest of these arguments about who can drive what, where and when are simply silly, the commander needs to know the mission and do his battle procedure to determine what resources he can profitably use. There may be a mission which demands the firepower of tanks in close terrain, there may be missions where getting there first is paramount, and everything in between. Certtainly the wise commander would want to know the professional opinion of the tankers, since they will be able to point out areas of difficulty and work arounds.

Since this part of the thread is getting well away from discussing Future Armour, may I request the mods split it?

 

[Unknown C/S]

The only thing a LAVIII can really outperform a MBT per se (imo) is cross-country ability. You can move a wheeled vehicle faster and across terrain types that MBTs would struggle with.

Your original statement "outperform a MBT per se (imo) is cross-country ability"

You have still not backed this statement up with any creditable FACTS.  What are you basing this opinion on?

I have Crew Commanded in Bosnia, Macedonia, and Cyprus (Coyote, Bison, Grizzly, Cougar) I think I know "geography" and the limitations, and strengths, of wheeled armour in various topographical situations. As I have stated, I have personal experience on the m113 family (Lynx, APC) M548 and Leopard. (Canada and Germany)

Perhaps you simply have a problem with accepting constructive criticism, or just being wrong.

Please don't correct peoples spelling as it does nothing to enhance your "perceived" intelligence.

(I agree, let's split this topic..................................so we can throw a lock on this stupitity)

 

[Lehner]

Lehner,
I'm surprised a mod hasn't asked you to fill in your profile yet.
I would really like to know what sort of experience you have to back up your statements.
One thing I've learned from being in the military and reading these forums is that experience always wins against "book learnin'" and pure theory.

Why would a mod ask me to fill in my profile? I don't have any military experience, I just read Janes articles and books as well as strategypage.com. I never questioned anyone's qualfications.

Your original statement "outperform a MBT per se (imo) is cross-country ability"

You have still not backed this statement up with any creditable FACTS.  What are you basing this opinion on?

I have Crew Commanded in Bosnia, Macedonia, and Cyprus (Coyote, Bison, Grizzly, Cougar) I think I know "geography" and the limitations, and strengths, of wheeled armour in various topographical situations. As I have stated, I have personal experience on the m113 family (Lynx, APC) M548 and Leopard. (Canada and Germany)

Perhaps you simply have a problem with accepting constructive criticism, or just being wrong.

Please don't correct peoples spelling as it does nothing to enhance your "perceived" intelligence.

(I agree, let's split this topic..................................so we can throw a lock on this stupitity)

There is very little constructive criticism here, especially from you. Your posts are mostly negative and hostile towards me.

Does your experience tell you that a MBT can traverse narrow pathways on a moutain or narrow roads in Europe? I don't see how credibility based on military experience is really the fundamental concern here. I mean, in WWII, all over Europe and Africa, there were places Tanks couldn't reach, but wheeled AFVs could. The same in Korea and I bet you if you look hard enough, Vietnam too.

I corrected spelling because it actually formed a different word, an entirely different word.

 

[Lehner]

Your original post makes the very strong implication that the troops involved in the various incidents in Afghanistan would not have rolled over if they had been in an MBT. MBTs would not have been used for the missions where these accidents happened, so your entire argument is moot.

The rest of these arguments about who can drive what, where and when are simply silly, the commander needs to know the mission and do his battle procedure to determine what resources he can profitably use. There may be a mission which demands the firepower of tanks in close terrain, there may be missions where getting there first is paramount, and everything in between. Certtainly the wise commander would want to know the professional opinion of the tankers, since they will be able to point out areas of difficulty and work arounds.

Since this part of the thread is getting well away from discussing Future Armour, may I request the mods split it?

They would not have been? Please explain to me why the mission would dictate the LAV-III over an MBT given the choice. I was under the assumption that one of the incidents was a patrol, not a convoy escort. I am interested in knowing.

 

[George Wallace]

They would not have been? Please explain to me why the mission would dictate the LAV-III over an MBT given the choice. I was under the assumption that one of the incidents was a patrol, not a convoy escort. I am interested in knowing.

I notice, that we are not permitted to assume anything in this discussion, but you can all you want.  Rather one sided, don't you think?

Where do you get the assumption that one of the incidents was a patrol and not a convoy escort?  That statement seems to have been pulled right out of thin air. 

I also find it amusing that you can't figure out why "the mission would dictate the LAV III over a MBT"?  If you read these forums, and all the Journals you claim, you would readily realize why this is the case.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Well, I'm not sure if I want to lock this thing, or just sit back and watch.

Lehner, I guess there's no need for you to fill in your profile, it's all right here:

Why would a mod ask me to fill in my profile? I don't have any military experience, I just read Janes articles and books as well as strategypage.com. I never questioned anyone's qualfications.

If you are the "student" of military matters that you claim to be, then perhaps you would be starting to understand that not all knowledge comes from such sources.  The aspect they cannot provide is that gained through practical experience.  Also, such sources usually discuss single items of equipment, seldom offering solid comparison data, except between vehicles of like design and purpose.

You are trying to argue a comparative case between tanks and armoured personnel carriers (or infantry fighting vehicles, if you prefer the term in this case). These two vehicle types have different roles, different designs and different purposes.  They are each optimized for different situations (your reading should have made this clear) and they are employed differently in various tactical situations (your reading, basic extrapolation of that knowledge, and the information provided to you here should make that clear).

Your fellow correspondents on this thread have laid out much of their own experience for you - in both tanks, and APCs (M113 family and LAV family).  Is their actual experience to be discounted in comparison to information you have read?  Has reading made you more of an expert in the capabilities and tactical employment of armoured vehicles than their collective experience?

I would suggest that you reverse into cover, assess your tactical situation, and perhaps select a different line of advance.  Continuing to charge forward on your current course could easily find such threads locked (with increasing speed as they develop) and you may even find yourself introduced to the warning System which was described in the Conduct Guidelines you agreed to on registering with the site.

 

[Unknown C/S]

Why would a mod ask me to fill in my profile? I don't have any military experience, I just read Janes articles and books as well as strategypage.com. I never questioned anyone's qualfications.

Now it makes sense. I think I am finished with this thread.

I have some books on space flight that I have been reading. Must get on the NASA website and tell them how to fix the space shuttle tiles ...................after all I've been reading about it  :

have a nice day Lehner

(I would be remiss if I fail to point out to you the nature of this website. Unlike most sites on the internet, Army.ca contains members that for the most part know each other and probably worked side by side at one time. Even if the soldiers on this site have not met, they maintain a soldiers bond, - a brotherhood.
If someone is taking certain tones or goes on the attack then expect to be called on it. From my experience members are generally polite, helpfull and courteous but will stick together if pushed into it. Jumping into a thread, taking a shot and jumping out, will not be tolerated by many here.
Having said this it is refreshing and welcome to hear new ideas and/or opinions.
The guidlines cover all this)

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

You know, every once in a while I will read military or other fiction and come across some absolute rubbish, that turns out to be well research based on the claims of performance in Janes or various industry publications.  The theory is sound, but irrelevant.  In the real world, things are not as neat and pretty as the storybooks claim, and often the truths that we all accept about the capabilities and performance of our hardware bear little resemblance to the published performance characteristics of the same equipment.  When one of us states that a given piece of kit can do thus and so, it is because we have used said piece of kit to do thus and so, usually a great many times.  When one of us states that a given piece of kit can't do thus and so, we have reasons, usually the kind that involve a recovery vehicle and a screaming RSM.

 

[couchcommander]

Lehner,

To directly address what I perceive to be your point:

Tracks offer overall greater mobility cross country, while wheeled vehicles excel on roads and other prepared surfaces. Yes, there are certain instances where this may be reversed, but overall in the grand scheme of things... This point is backed up by research, notably a report by the Federation of American Scientists, the link below:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/2wheels98.pdf

Some notable excerpts:

From a mobility perspective, tracked vehicles offer the best solution for a versatile platform that is required to operate over diverse terrain, including extremely difficult ground....When operations were conducted on roads, wheeled vehicles demonstrated excellent mobility and speed; but when off-road usage was required, and wet or snow conditions prevailed, mobility suffered.

Take a look at the references, they provide a number of links to other documents on the topic.

As has been pointed out at as well, a LAV III and an MBT are different weapon systems, utilized for different purposes.

Thanks,

P.S. IMHO, the LAV III is an excellent vehicle well suited to the task at hand in Afghanistan. However, like it has been pointed out many a time before, it has it's issues like any vehicle. Don't get hung up on them. I would suggest researching the fate of Soviet armour in Afghanistan on this point (and the vaunted t-80 in chechnya). But, this is all IMHO, as I am hardly qualified to be considered an authoritative source on this... the mobility though, don't believe me, believe the report.

 

[Franko]

Well I've read every bit of this thread and I can't believe the arguments.

Lehner-  You are arguing with people who have practical experience on every type of armoured vehicle in the CF, used in every theater for the past 20+ years.

I include myself in that group as well...as I have just gotten done serving on tour in Afghanistan...in a LAV III as a part of an armour crew.

The only thing a LAVIII can really outperform a MBT per se (imo) is cross-country ability. You can move a wheeled vehicle faster and across terrain types that MBTs would struggle with.

Wrong plain and simple...then you try this beauty...

Seeing as how you know it all, tell me how you move Heavy Armour across narrow mountain passes?

Nice change of topic...seeing as it wasn't even brought up in previous posts...

Ironic you seem all knowing but have to question why you would have to traverse a narrow pass. These terrain types exist worldwide, I am confident you know geography?

There are narrow roadways in Europe that a tank cannot traverse but a LAV can, just as an example.

Again...they have been in Europe in tanks and in LAVs. Nice backpeddling BTW.   

I am not attacking anyone and I am certainly not assuming. I am not arguing against any truth put forth, alas you make a very weak rebuttal to what I have said. Btw, it's lose, not loose. It's a rather loose footing you have to lie when you claim I am assuming.

Yes you are plain and simple. Again, they've served in them overseas you haven't.....and lose the high and mighty attitude.

Why would a mod ask me to fill in my profile? I don't have any military experience, I just read Janes articles and books as well as strategypage.com.

I liken it to walking into a doctors office and there being no diplomas on the wall. We like to know some background....not every intricate detail. You're a civvie....fine, declare it.

I never questioned anyone's qualifications.

Not openly....but you have implied through your ramblings that they are irrelevant.





Here's some friendly advice......take it or your on the ramp without a chute.

1. Fill out your profile...for the above mentioned reasons.

2. Back up your research with some practical experience...if you can't say so.

3. Quite trolling. You have implied that the members qualifications are irrelevant and (inadvertently) began a personal attack...which I'll ignore.

4. If you're caught in a corner and are swinging for no reason....admit that you're wrong and bow out gracefully. I've done it on many occasions...people make mistakes.



Oh...my qualifications

*digs into wallet*

http://forums.army.ca/forums/members/2402

Coyote stuck in 2 feet of mud...after me being ordered to take a position there...which I argued against,  but lost.

The LAVs and Coyotes were spinning their tires in the parking lot on ice and snow, whereas ze panzer.....

 

[Unknown C/S]

Franko

Well said

I am guilty of being drawn into this. I should have recognized from the start where it was going......

Well I guess it kept me busy for a few posts and in the process taught me that time on tanks, and the "art" of manouvering one, is something the public does not fully understand. And since very few have taken almost 50 tons of metal and driven it like a BMW it is impossible to relate.

I was there when we took delivery of the first Leo C1 in Lahr and then watched two decades later as they were "mothballed"  My career started on tanks and I will always have an issue with negative comments about them, especially from people who base their opinion on facts gleaned from "the military channel" or magazines like "Lay Z Boy Commando" 

 

[scoutfinch]

I was there when we took delivery of the first Leo C1 in Lahr and then watched two decades later as they were "mothballed" 

I remember praying that my ticket would be drawn for the 8CH Car Crush lottery out at the marg in Lahr.  Sadly, I never won.... ever.  No matter how many DM I put down range.  Sigh.  :crybaby:

 

[couchcommander]

Well I guess it kept me busy for a few posts and in the process taught me that time on tanks, and the "art" of manouvering one, is something the public does not fully understand. And since very few have taken almost 50 tons of metal and driven it like a BMW it is impossible to relate.

well maybe you guys should offer "public relations days"... you could... if you wanted to that is... let some civvies ride around in said "ze panzers".... say a tuesday or thursday... somewhere in or near Edmonton, perhaps? ... just a thought... you know...  ;D

On a more serious note... don't dis the research...it backs up what you guys are saying. I think the problem is that he got caught up at the "Tank Babe" in last months "Lazy Z Boy Commando" when he should have been reading the articles....

*edited to make more amusing... for me at least*

 

[TCBF]

well, at the Strathcona Family Day in Feb 04 - which I helped organize - you could have lined up to ride in one, at least.  Failing that - get one of your profs to ask the Strats for a 'Dog and Pony' one day.

Easier than you think.

 

[Unknown C/S]

The problem with Dog & Ponies at the local University is the potential cold welcome

All the tree hugging, birkenstock wear'n, wine cooler drink'n, non tax paying coddled youths find it a handy place to vent misguided anti war rhetoric so they can sip latte's the following monday and have a good giggle. (while either mummy & daddy and/or the govt subsidizes their studies )

Claiming the Charter of Rights gives them permission to do what they want

And while this is happening the open minded Students that are interested (or just curious) are intimidated enough to stay away.

(I spent 4 years recruiting in Toronto  and have seen it happen)

 

[couchcommander]

The problem with Dog & Ponies at the local University is the potential cold welcome

He has a point with this (I've actually seen it happen as well)....plus there's nowhere to ride around! (the most important bit, IMO)....my tuesdays and thursdays (except this thursday) are still open....

 

[Kat Stevens]

Quick trivia question: What is the maximum speed of LAV variants cross country?













A:  As fast as an AEV winch can pull it.

 

[ZipperHead]

The only thing a LAVIII can really outperform a MBT per se (imo) is cross-country ability. You can move a wheeled vehicle faster and across terrain types that MBTs would struggle with.

The fact that you haven't editted this post yet is either: A) A testament to your unswavering belief that you are right, or B) the fact that Jane's has too many pictures of vehicles on parade squares and in trade show's and not enough in "real world" settings.

Get some turret or hull time before you take on people who have more time in pivot than you have glancing over photos from Janes or Strategyforwankers.com or wherever you get your "info".

BTW, you are WRONG in stating that a LAVIII can outperform a MBT in cross-country ability. As Kat stated, a LAV variant in "true" cross country conditions can only go as fast as the recovery vehicle towing it. When I say "true" cross country, I mean the area's that we, you know, soldiers, would be expected to take the vehicle. Like low ground to avoid being seen (and "seen's" buddy, "shot"). Quick physics question: does water travel up or down? Down. What is in low ground. Water. Add dirt and water. You get mud. Mud and wheeled vehicles aren't too friendly. Ask Franko if a tank would have got stuck where he got his veh (in the picture) stuck. Probably not.

Don't even pretend to understand why certain vehicles are used where another isn't. IF we had tanks in Afghanistan, they would be used for an altogether reason that the LAV III is. I might point out that the LAVIII is a personnel carrier (the PC in APC). The only tank that I am aware of that is capable is the Merkava, but Israel doesn't want to give theirs up. To say that the soldiers who died in the LAVIII wouldn't have if they were in a Leopard is like saying that the astronauts on the Space Shuttle wouldn't have died if they were in a canoe floating down a river.

I don't think Lehner should bother to fill in his (or her) profile, as it is pretty unneccesary as he (or she) has qualified his (her) responses with enough BS to show that they are an armchair general who deigns to cast us who have unnecesary things like real world experience and common sense as the one's who are misinformed.

But his grammar sure is goodly!!!

Al

 

[George Wallace]

Allan

Remember this about our expert.

Why would a mod ask me to fill in my profile? I don't have any military experience, I just read Janes articles and books as well as strategypage.com.

Now, Allan, I would also like to point out a major fault with your statements about "Quick physics question: does water travel up or down? Down. What is in low ground. Water. Add dirt and water. You get mud. Mud and wheeled vehicles aren't too friendly."  You work in Gagetown.  You have been in the Lawfield Corridor.  You know darn well that God put the swamps at the tops of the hills there.

 

[ZipperHead]

And I have been stuck in them (wheeled and tracked, natch).

One thing to keep in mind is that the law's of physics (and common sense) take a detour before entering the Gagetown training area (including....actually, ESPECIALLY J7).

Maybe we can bring in Lehner as a guest lecturer on the employment of armour assets in the CF. He IS uniquely qualified (by unique, I actually mean unique: nobody here is as qualified as he is in the dark art of choosing which vehicle is best employed in a given theater...... "Hmmmmmm...... if there's the possibility of a vehicle rollover, I'd choose the Leopard........ mobility cross-country... gotta go with the LAVIII!!"). There's a job in the MND's office just for him, methinks.

Welcome to our little fanclub, Lehner. You'lll likely enjoy your stay.

Al