Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Scout Succeeds Scimitar
SYSOP    9/18/2014 5:51:07 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
keffler25       9/18/2014 9:44:16 AM
Some idiots actually went ahead and did this? 
 
FCS lives!
 
 
Quote    Reply

vahitkanig       9/18/2014 1:09:16 PM
I quess  turet  rings  is  the  one  of the  most sensitive  parts  of tanks ,armorud  vehicles .Any  gap  and  angular  gap  of  turrets  and  tank hull is  the   target of first  shoot  of  fire.
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack       9/18/2014 4:28:20 PM
Just impressed.. even the scoundrels at GD can get away with calling a 34 ton vehicle a "scout"..
 
And from their own web page: "The SCOUT SV family of vehicles has growth inherently built in. With an upper design limit of 42 tonnes."   The Japanese have an MBT in that weight. 
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       9/19/2014 1:52:32 AM
Just impressed.. even the scoundrels at GD can get away with calling a 34 ton vehicle a "scout"..
GD didn’t write the specification requiring all that armor, so they aren’t the ones that decided it was a scout, the Army is.
 
But I agree, it is more than a bit ridiculous.
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       9/19/2014 9:32:14 AM
The English term is SHOT-TRAP. And yes that is an aimpoint.
I quess  turet  rings  is  the  one  of the  most sensitive  parts  of tanks ,armorud  vehicles .Any  gap  and  angular  gap  of  turrets  and  tank hull is  the   target of first  shoot  of  fire.

 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack    Whats in a name..   9/19/2014 2:10:33 PM
Hmm.. maybe this why the army is calling them "scouts".. trying to get something past the politicians..
 
 "After the Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2010, some regiments are seeing their Challenger 2 tanks replaced with CVR(T) Scimitars "
 
Can't imagine too many people in uniform would be happy about that trade down..  and the number of Challengers being cut by 40% or so..
 
And the number on order is far greater than the number of scimitars currently owned.. and in the face of a considerably reduced ground force.
 
Quote    Reply

Blacktail       9/20/2014 5:09:51 AM
Looks like M3 Bradley Syndrome has spread to the UK. The prognosis for the patient is poor, as permanent brain damage has likely already occurred.
 
Quote    Reply

Blacktail       9/20/2014 5:24:32 AM
Also, the article doesn't say whether the ASCOD SV "Scout" weighs 34 short tons or 34 metric tons, but there's a big difference in size between them, with the latter being greater. It likely weighs 34 metric tons.
 
I bring this up, because the ponderous M3A3 CFV weighs 33 *short* tons.
 
Someone has finally managed to make a worse "Scout" than the Bradley!
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       9/21/2014 3:17:26 PM
I don't post much here, but do read the forum on occasion.
 
With regards to this armour contract, and considering the finances of the MoD, I think it fairly clear that this basic vehicle will be in service for a long time to come.  
 
At the moment, the British Army combat vehicle fleet comprises Cold War legacy designs, and urgent operational requirements, foremost for Iraq and Afghanistan.  Warrior is being upgraded with the new 40mm CTAS etc (which is nothing like the 30mm RARDEN), which will extend the vehicle's life.  However, in the future this new system of vehicles will likely replace Warrior and Challenger II, in addition to Scimitar.
 
Given the technological capabilities et al of this new system, it is rather a philosophical perspective whether its weight makes it unsuitable as a recce vehicle.  However, in any case, the British Army uses boots and light vehicles such as the Landrover and Jackel WMIKs for real recce tasks anyway.
 
Whether this vehicle will one day replace Challenger II may become a bit of a drama in some circles.  But then, if you look at tanks such as the Matilda of World War II (while perhaps an inappropriate comparison)- this vehicle won't fair badly.  Whether it would ever be pitched against T90's in isolation is something of a mute, scientific experiment, issue.
 
Considering the money issue, and the lack of priority the Army will suffer post-Afghanistan, I think it is fairly lucky that this system is on order.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Blacktail       9/23/2014 8:45:14 PM
"Given the technological capabilities et al of this new system, it is rather a philosophical perspective whether its weight makes it unsuitable as a recce vehicle."
Um... no. A typical Scout vehicle is three times lighter, half as tall, can swim across water obstacles with no preparations, and can be sling-loaded by Cargo Helicopter (e.g., the Mi-26) and/or transported by Tactical Airlifter (e.g., the An-26). This is what represent the most likely Recce elements of future enemies, and by extension, the type of vehicles the ASCOD SV must fight most often. As we can see by examining the mobility and stealth characteristics of several such vehicles already in service, they're holding all the cards;
 
 
"However, in any case, the British Army uses boots and light vehicles such as the Landrover and Jackel WMIKs for real recce tasks anyway."
Those are Scout vehicles, not Reconnaissance vehicles (the missions and configurations for them aren't the same thing), and not even *armored* Scouts like the old BRDM-2. Relying on these in place of armored Scouts during any conventional conflict  --- especially one involving NBC weapons --- would be a war-losing mistake. This is why Scouts like the BRDM-2 and Recce vehicles like the FV107 Scimitar were developed in the first place. Moreover, increasingly more numerous, better-trained, better-armed, and larger guerrilla armies in this era are making the "jeep patrol" mindset increasingly more fatal. In fact, that very mindset has already caused a number of military disasters, including this one;
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics