APC Development and related topics.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

To the French SCORPION PROJECT like any such program, there are winners and in this case a loser. Nexter/Renault/Thales were the winners with their JAGUAR (Recon) and GRIFFON (APC) vehicles respectively. The loser was Panhard marketing the SPHINX (Recon) and CRAB (Recon) vehicles. The bids I believe were announced in mid-2009. The contract was awarded to the winners in late 2014. I should point out this is a French land vehicle modernization program, so it's about more than these vehicles. Going to my APC Folder I still have the following going back to 2010 and more, hey it's that "T" word thing ...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/frenc...ations_uk.html
http://www.janes360.com/images/asset...ernisation.pdf
http://www.armyrecognition.com/euros..._11306166.html

The following for FYI...
http://www.military-today.com/apc/panhard_sphinx.htm
http://www.military-today.com/apc/panhard_crab.htm

The winners...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/frenc...fications.html
http://www.janes.com/article/61243/e...akes-its-debut

Finally...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/frenc..._pictures.html
http://www.janes.com/article/60172/f...on-jaguar-ebrc

Panhard is seeking export orders for their two vehicles.

I hope this clears up any confusion on the matter. And be careful I just might "T"ing" you and have a folder on you as well!?! & (Right spy's do wear "shades"?)

Suhiir's point is well taken, it's bad enough we have to carry them all over the world just so we can land them somewhere to play with their toys and take out their aggression on someone because we might've kept them cooped up onboard ship for a handful of months or longer. We're not the "White Star Line" so luggage is limited to what you carry and the
"bigger stuff" better be multi-functional, tasked, operational and any such other word associated with these that I can't think of at the moment!! Bottom-line those factors are important and space is really limited on the ships. By date available...
http://www.military-today.com/navy/tarawa_class.htm
(The above are all decommissioned, however they demonstrate the USMC landing capabilities from the mid 70's on.
http://www.military-today.com/navy/w...land_class.htm
http://www.military-today.com/navy/wasp_class.htm
http://www.military-today.com/navy/s...onio_class.htm

The AMERICA Class is excluded as it's only a helo assault vessel.

Someone has to go to work later this afternoon, so good night and have a great weekend!!

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

And just when you thought it was safe to get back in the water Pat ... may I introduce the L-ATV.
https://oshkoshdefense.com/vehicles/l-atv/

Apparently the replacement for the armored HMMWV starting around 2019-2020.
Major features: HMMWV speed/mobility with MRAP protection.

[sabresandy]

I have a question on the new Stryker Dragoon and the way it's implemented in v11.

Namely, why was it hived off into an entirely new formation? From what I've read, the intention is that there are meant to be one or two per platoon (with the other vehicles being Strykers with Javelins bolted to the RWS). Logically they'd fit better into the one-per-platoon Light Support APC category, as an option in place of the grenade launcher Strykers, and the as-of-yet-nonexistent Javelin Strykers as a regular APC option.

We can probably phase out the "M113A4 IFV" for that role. They're not in service in the US, are they?

[DRG]

It's in two formations and players can use them as they please. We still don't know for certain how they are to be integrated and when we do we will write a formation for them.

[sabresandy]

Oh. I didn't see the "Stryker Platoon +" formation. That does help, although manually assembling mechanized squads isn't going to be fun.

Incidentally, I went and did a bit of Googling, and found:
* Starting around 2007, Strykers should gain laser rangefinding and at least some stabilization. That was when the M151E2 Protector was introduced.

https://www.dvidshub.net/news/12057/...ystems-stryker

* The M240 AAMG should be removed, unless it's meant to approximate a field mount or something similar?

[DRG]

Originally Posted by sabresandy

Oh. I didn't see the "Stryker Platoon +" formation. That does help, although manually assembling mechanized squads isn't going to be fun.

Well the problem is there is only sketchy info on how they are actually going to be used so I decided to get them in some kind of basic formation ( there are two ) and players can build how they like until better info is available as "the intention is that there are meant to be one or two per platoon (with the other vehicles being Strykers with Javelins bolted to the RWS" means there is an entirely new kind of Stryker I;m just learning about today

"intentions" isn't hard info....and as interesting as "Strykers with Javelins bolted to the RWS" sounds it's totally new to me so maybe we need to give this a year to gather better info and in the meantime players can easily buy a basic Stryker coy and tack on a Dragoon Spt Sec

[sabresandy]

Here's the best source I can find on it, from Breaking Defense:

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/02/a...30-mm-javelin/

"Upgunning the Europe-based Second Cavalry Regiment against the Russians is just the first of a “lethality upgrade” for the entire Stryker force. The 30mm quick-firing cannon for 2CR’s Strykers may ultimately go on half the Army’s fleet of the 8×8 armored vehicles (not counting specialist variants). The other half would get the a vehicular version of the Javelin, the military’s standard shoulder-fired anti-tank missile. Just as important, the Army wants to upgrade sights and sensors across the fleet — and it’s throwing the doors open to ideas from industry."

Any intent on adding Rangefinder 22/Stabilization, or removing the AAMG?
----

Other IFV news:

* Australia's LAND 400 program is proceeding apace, with the choices being a Boxer vehicle with the Puma's Lance turret (only with 35mm instead of 30mm), or a Patria AMV with 35mm.

http://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2016...?spt=sec&or=bn

* Canada's LAV 6.0 upgrade seems all but confirmed; I saw chatter about it last year. How this will show up in-game, I'm not sure...

http://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2017...l&utm_medium=1

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

You'll find the Posts concerning the LAV 6.0 on Pages 34 & 35 to include an email from the Canadian MOD to mine concerning it. Also posted on down select from Australia in here-that I've been tracking for years now as it kind've falls in line with the HAWKEI which I believe will finally be ready for the game next year. Ask Don or some of the "old hands" how many years I've been watching that one. THE MOST IMPORTANT issue beyond the pooling of information is the Patience to track this stuff for years at a time to monitor the evolution of a particular piece of equipment to the final choosen variant of it once accepted into service IF it makes it that far.

Back to vacation mode.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Looks like the ACV 1.1 is official (if not yet accepted/deployed) as is a probable 1.2 (larger more amphibious capable variant) that is intended to replace the LVT/AAV.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...o-marine-corps
https://www.defensetech.org/2016/12/...-marine-corps/
http://breakingdefense.com/2017/03/s...ests-to-begin/

[DRG]

I guess we just have to wait and see how this develops