Infantry Vehicles

[Colin Parkinson]

I think you’re hung up on trying to relate back to vehicles of yore. I don’t think anyone is trying to replicate Saracen and Saladin. We’re giving soldiers who’d previously be driven in Saracen substantially better protection, fire power, speed, and frankly comfort in getting them to the fight, and allowing them to be supported in that fight.

French enter Chat

 

[KevinB]

French enter Chat

Quite frankly the French have been organizing their Military for Africa and Afghan type events, they haven’t seemed to do any post UKR type reorganizing...

 

[markppcli]

Quite frankly the French have been organizing their Military for Africa and Afghan type events, they haven’t seemed to do any post UKR type reorganizing...

Well the jaguar is designed for the armoured recce role, it’s replacing the AMX 10-RC so it suspect it’s a dual purpose. I guess this is all because I mentioned that I didn’t get the reference to Saladin and Saracen in terms of RWS. I’m not sure what the actual discussed topic is now.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

French armour replicates very much the way the old British armour tree looked like. The Damilar/Ferret was the recce, the Saladin/Fox was to fight for information, They also worked exceptional well in the Colonial aspect, something that France cannot ignore as it's influence on Africa is dependent on it's abilty to fight there. The French like everyone else lost sight of the Cold War model and I suspect is scrambling to figure out what to do and how much to do.

 

[KevinB]

French armour replicates very much the way the old British armour tree looked like. The Damilar/Ferret was the recce, the Saladin/Fox was to fight for information, They also worked exceptional well in the Colonial aspect, something that France cannot ignore as it's influence on Africa is dependent on it's abilty to fight there. The French like everyone else lost sight of the Cold War model and I suspect is scrambling to figure out what to do and how much to do.

The issue is an Army (Navy and Air Force too) setup for Peer/Near-Peer conflict can do any mission below that requirement, by simply removing some assets , an Army setup for Policing Actions cannot fight a Peer/Near-Peer Conventional war.

It’s a more expensive option, but it’s a complete option, which is generally why nations have Militaries…

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The French did have a sizeable peer to peer army for a long time, including Force de Frappe. But like everyone but the US and Russia let it wither and has less than 340 MBT's in service (corrected by population to Canada, that would be 170 vs our 82 gun tanks) so still almost double what we have.)

 

[KevinB]

The French did have a sizeable peer to peer army for a long time, including Force de Frappe. But like everyone but the US and Russia let it wither and has less than 340 MBT's in service (corrected by population to Canada, that would be 170 vs our 82 gun tanks) so still almost double what we have.)

Admittedly the Leclerc isn't much of a modern MBT, somewhere above a Leo 1, but well below the other NATO MBT's.

 

[Spencer100]

Admittedly the Leclerc isn't much of a modern MBT, somewhere above a Leo 1, but well below the other NATO MBT's.

Not to be argumentative just would like your reasons. You have way more knowledge in this area. I like to learn stuff. And what about the Ariete?

 

[KevinB]

Not to be argumentative just would like your reasons. You have way more knowledge in this area. I like to learn stuff.

It's armor is less effective, compared to the others, which I put a a major strike, and the FCS on the Block 9/10 wasn't nearly as impressive resolution for target acquisition as the M1A2 (I'm not a tanker though - and just got a to sit in one when doing an unrelated thing with the French MoD). France knows it's indeed of a new one.
I'm also never thrilled by Autoloader MBT guns as they have never been known for endurance.

And what about the Ariete?

My only interaction with the Italians is with their SOF, and haven't seen that tank in the flesh.

 

[Kirkhill]

@KevinB

Just to be argumentative....

Why did Shinseki find it necessary to sign off on the Strykers? Because he couldn't get enough Abrams and Bradleys to the fight fast enough.
Why did the US build multi-fleets of MRAPs which have all been trashed, donated or turned over to the Taliban? Because the Abrams and the Bradleys were the wrong kit for the job.
Why did the US find it necessary to turn Gunners into MPs? Because they didn't have enough infantry for the job.

The notion that one heavy weight force is capable of tackling all jobs is just plain wrong. It is made worse when one platform is used for all tasks.

The French, and it pains me to speak well of them, split up capabilities so that they only have to deploy what they need. That makes deployment easier as well as logistics and sustainment. Meanwhile, on the peer battlefield they can team up capabilities to achieve the desired effect - for example teaming a Griphon section with a Jaguar. This is absolutely no different than my old man in a Bedford being escorted by a Staghound. Or mixing Staghounds with White's Armoured Cars.

 

[Kirkhill]

I was think more like VBL and Sandcat sized vehicles. The British Fox was a remarkably small vehicle, I agree a tad to small for what they wanted. If you want a 25-30mm gun on a small chassis is a belt fed RWS or a clip fed gun a more doable for that size gun?

Going back in time a bit.

Since we got to the 30x113 Bushmaster I found myself wondering about an earlier 30x113 autocannon. The ASP 30. Unlike the Bushmaster it does not need an electric motor and a battery. It is recoil operated like an M2 or Mk19.

I know it has been panned previously but it seems to me that a bit more engineering work might be in order just to reduce the weight and logistics tail.

Boeing ASP-30

The ASP Automatic Cannon (ASP short for "Automatic Self-Powered"), also known as the ASP-30 Combat Support Weapon, was an American 30mm autocannon developed as a crew-served and vehicle-mounted weapon intended for use against enemy APCs and infantry vehicles, as well as ground fire suppression...

guns.fandom.com

 

[KevinB]

@KevinB

Just to be argumentative....

Why did Shinseki find it necessary to sign off on the Strykers?

I'd argue because he bought into the concept of a medium force to deal with small conflicts that where not nearly like Near Pear threats, as they didn't pursue enablers for the medium weight force to deal with much more than a Somalia like situation...

Because he couldn't get enough Abrams and Bradleys to the fight fast enough.

See my above -- we have 3 Corps worth of POMCUS depots in Europe - getting troops to them takes more time than anything else.

Why did the US build multi-fleets of MRAPs which have all been trashed, donated or turned over to the Taliban? Because the Abrams and the Bradleys were the wrong kit for the job.

Well the MRAPS where not really better than Bradley's, but the insurgency didn't NEED TOW or 25mm cannon for 99% of Iraq issues.
The Abrams wasn't needed at all other than the initial invasion, and the retaking of Fallujah

Why did the US find it necessary to turn Gunners into MPs? Because they didn't have enough infantry for the job.

Because some bright light though that De-Baath'ification was a solid plan, and effectively created a robust insurgency overnight when every soldier and member of government, LE etc was all of a sudden out of a job.

The notion that one heavy weight force is capable of tackling all jobs is just plain wrong. It is made worse when one platform is used for all tasks.

You misunderstood me.
I said Peer/Near Peer Conflict force -- not one heavy weight force. But ones other weight (medium and light) need to be equipped for war fighting as well.

You can use Medium and Light weight forces for certain missions in a Near Peer/Peer conflict - you just need to properly enable them, and not use them in place of missing Heavy forces when needed.

 

[Kirkhill]

French enter Chat

There was some discussion about a new Northrop munition called Hatchet. It is a 6 lb munition designed to scatter shrapnel broadly and touted as being as lethal as a 105mm round in that role. Some doubt was expressed.

Northrop Completes Air-Launched Miniature Munition Drop Testing

Northrop Grumman wrapped up live testing of the Hatchet miniature precision strike weapon, moving closer to deployment.

www.thedefensepost.com

What has got me wondering is the effect of clouds of shrapnel on all the neat gadgets found on that Jaguar and other armoured vehicles of the current time.

And how much more the effect could be enhanced by adding liquid latex paint to the mix of shrapnel.

 

[KevinB]

Going back in time a bit.

Since we got to the 30x113 Bushmaster I found myself wondering about an earlier 30x113 autocannon. The ASP 30. Unlike the Bushmaster it does not need an electric motor and a battery. It is recoil operated like an M2 or Mk19.

I know it has been panned previously but it seems to me that a bit more engineering work might be in order just to reduce the weight and logistics tail.

Boeing ASP-30

The ASP Automatic Cannon (ASP short for "Automatic Self-Powered"), also known as the ASP-30 Combat Support Weapon, was an American 30mm autocannon developed as a crew-served and vehicle-mounted weapon intended for use against enemy APCs and infantry vehicles, as well as ground fire suppression...

guns.fandom.com

View attachment 76394View attachment 76395

That reduce weight is a fallacy - the recoil on them is crazy (and they broke parts all the time) - so your mount needs to be designed of the additional recoil - adding mass, and generally won't be as stable firing platform anyway.

 

[KevinB]

There was some discussion about a new Northrop munition called Hatchet. It is a 6 lb munition designed to scatter shrapnel broadly and touted as being as lethal as a 105mm round in that role. Some doubt was expressed.

Northrop Completes Air-Launched Miniature Munition Drop Testing

Northrop Grumman wrapped up live testing of the Hatchet miniature precision strike weapon, moving closer to deployment.

www.thedefensepost.com

What has got me wondering is the effect of clouds of shrapnel on all the neat gadgets found on that Jaguar and other armoured vehicles of the current time.

And how much more the effect could be enhanced by adding liquid latex paint to the mix of shrapnel.

Paint will generally burn off in an explosion - or rapidly dry to a useless powder in nanoseconds without a significant load of it.

Shrapnel ruins a lot of older antennae, newer directional ones are generally somewhat protected - most FCS are fairly shielded and have armored glass in the exposed areas, making them hard to damage without a very near impact - however any Gerry cans and soft external stores will be shredded.


A Big Blast really really close is generally good way to damage stuff, but I've been hit with an IED in an MRAP - and we didn't even know it other than the vehicle behind reported we'd been hit -- sure enough when we got to where we where going, there was some damage - mostly to the RPG Fence - but some minor burn marks on the armor, and some damage to the tires.

I've also seen a Abrams flipped over by a super big blast - the enemy can always build a bigger bomb - the trick is to kill them first.

 

[markppcli]

The French did have a sizeable peer to peer army for a long time, including Force de Frappe. But like everyone but the US and Russia let it wither and has less than 340 MBT's in service (corrected by population to Canada, that would be 170 vs our 82 gun tanks) so still almost double what we have.)

Part of the French conventional reduction was the end of conscription, with conscripts unable to serve overseas they defective formed the force in Europe. They were never going to be able to maintain that in an all volunteer construct.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Part of the French conventional reduction was the end of conscription, with conscripts unable to serve overseas they defective formed the force in Europe. They were never going to be able to maintain that in an all volunteer construct.

You made me look up the status of conscription in the country that invented it:


In 2019, President Emmanuel Macron introduced Service national universel (SNU), a national service currently on a voluntary basis, for a period of 4 weeks. It will become a compulsory service in the future. Conscripts will spend two weeks in training and two weeks performing community service. The system has been described as "more scout camp than military service".

Conscription in France - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[markppcli]

You made me look up the status of conscription in the country that invented it:


In 2019, President Emmanuel Macron introduced Service national universel (SNU), a national service currently on a voluntary basis, for a period of 4 weeks. It will become a compulsory service in the future. Conscripts will spend two weeks in training and two weeks performing community service. The system has been described as "more scout camp than military service".

Conscription in France - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Would you say the invented it ? I’m pretty sure compulsory defence of the community was a thing since the invention of the spear

 

[FJAG]

Would you say the invented it ? I’m pretty sure compulsory defence of the community was a thing since the invention of the spear

The French at the time of the Revolution are generally considered the originator of the modern conscription/universal service system model.

Compulsory military service goes well back in history.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Would you say the invented it ? I’m pretty sure compulsory defence of the community was a thing since the invention of the spear

The Levee en Masse was a unique innovation of Revolutionary France. That, and taxes of course

Levée en masse - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org