CVR(T)

Is it time to produce these again? The era of small armoured vehicles seems to be almost dead, but the need to get small combat teams around the battlefield remains. The armed versions are surely the ideal candidate for remote control/ autonomous technology.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >RARTED cannon

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The cannon was basically copied for Bushmaster 2. The rounds are even interchangeable.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        you can use rarden ammo in a bushmaster but not the other way around iirc

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No. I've had one of these and it was a piece of shit.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I want a remote control mini CVRT
    Why is it not a thing.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Remote control with a .50 RWS, 20mm grenade launcher and a few Brimstones. Give it a pair of fiber-optic tethered quad copters with a thermal camera and you can support infantry and hunt tanks

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I mean like 1:12 or 1:5 scale model but yeah full size is also cool.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Scorpion and Spartan are best. Sultan and Samaritan are also okay, nothing special there but they do the job.
    Swingfire has soul though.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      ahem.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        actually Stormer is a good lad, you're right

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Is this a tankette?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Scorpion with the 75mm gun is considered a light tank

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          CVRT is 76mm, 75mm is from WWII but its not the naval ammo. Its some proprietary case for no reason.

          Its also aluminum. ALU-MIN-UM and steel is better for a second production run

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    These are seriously dated. Better to just use them all up and procure something more modern

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Modern means frick huge. The hull and suspension are just as good now as they were then, just needs new systems and a new engine. It can protect against shell fragments and small arms, stick an APS ontop and you've got missiles and tank rounds covered.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Modern means frick huge. The hull and suspension are just as good now as they were then, just needs new systems and a new engine. It can protect against shell fragments and small arms, stick an APS ontop and you've got missiles and tank rounds covered.
        Why the frick do you think every IFV has gotten bigger since the BMP-1? No reason?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          These aren't IFV's moron.

          They've gotten larger mainly due to the doomed to failure race to produce armour thicker than the latest weapons and secondly due to the increased mass of gear people carry. Not an issue in these vehicles which were deigned from the outset to carry small teams who had lots of gear like ATGM teams.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            yup, exactly as moronic of a response as I expected from a nogunz brit

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              No counter argument detected.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        CVRTs just aren’t very good anymore. No need for vehicular recon.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        > stick an APS ontop and you've got missiles and tank rounds covered
        >tank rounds
        Why are all British shills so stupid?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Does it hurt always knowing less than us?

          APS systems are intercepting kinetic energy rounds now.

          >https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.janes.com/amp/iav-2020-elbits-iron-fist-engages-kinetic-energy-round/ZnlJK3dHVU9mZ28xajRJVkc5dVI5VFp1cVMwPQ2

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            No they aren’t

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Cope and seethe

              >Elbit Systems’ Iron Fist active protection system (APS) has successfully engaged a 120 mm armour-piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot (APFSDS) projectile under test conditions, Adam Griffiths, programmes and engineering director at Elbit Systems UK, told the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) conference in London on 21 January.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                May I see the successful interception. Im not just going to believe some MIC shill

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes you may

                ?t=165

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You said 120mm sabot

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >HowDoSubCalibreRoundsWork.jpg

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                > >Elbit Systems’ Iron Fist active protection system (APS) has successfully engaged a 120 mm armour-piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot (APFSDS) projectile under test conditions
                >prove it
                >uhhhh subcaliber

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >ask for proof
                >get shown video and photo
                >try to say it's not 120mm sabot when it clearly is

                How are you trying to cope your way out of this?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >rocket assisted SABOT

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Holy shit, you're even dumber than I thought. You know that APFSDS rounds can have tracers right?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yea that wasn’t a sabot. Guy says it right in the video. Keep flailing though it’s funny

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This has really backfired when you started by claiming that brits were stupid and went on to humiliate yourself repeatedly.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don’t know if you watched your own video or not but the explosive didn’t have effect on the target. Plus it was a mapped out collision. The system did not detect and engage the target. Pure laboratory conditions

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yea that wasn’t a sabot. Guy says it right in the video. Keep flailing though it’s funny

                It's a test to demonstrate a destabilising effect on a 120mm APFSDS round.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes I know. It wasn’t able to destabilize and was under strict testing conditions. They were not able to detect and engage the target using the APS system. Anon claimed it intercepted a 120mm APFSDS round and that is just not the case. He forgot to mention the system has not been adopted

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This cope is delicious, the video was from 2 years ago and the discussion was about a potential vehicle in the future. The only reason you're here is because brits live rent free in your head, probably because you keep getting owned by them. Just say sorry to starstreak.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Let’s get this straight. The cvrt is viable to put back into reproduction because you saw a marketing video from a system that has never been adopted. are you really the best the crown has

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Gets bullied
                >Cries
                /thread

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You were found out. Deal with it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I wasn't the anon you was talking too you freak not everyone is the same outside of your brain.
                I saw

                > stick an APS ontop and you've got missiles and tank rounds covered
                >tank rounds
                Why are all British shills so stupid?

                then

                Yes you may

                ?t=165

                this and decided to laugh at you being bullied. Get educated imbecile.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Buy the system wasn’t able to intercept a tank round like you claimed? They blew up a charge next to an APFSDS under test conditions. That’s not on the same plane of existence as detecting, tracking, and intercepting a 120mm dart with something small enough to fit on a cvrt

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Again that wasn't my claim but keep up your schizo posts while everyone laughs at you...again and again

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No, it should go back into production because frick huge vehicles don't offer any meaningful level of security against modern weapons and Ukraine is proving that mobility of small drone/ATGM/MANPAD teams is very important. These vehicles mainly lend themselves to the potential of electrification/unmanned roles.

                Lets get it straight, you're only here because Brits upset you. you clicked on this thread because we live rent free in your head.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What are you talking about. I clicked on the thread because putting the CVRT back in to production would be moronic

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You have been entirely unable to communicate your point. Do you have a learning disability?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                My point that reproducing an old system like cvrt is a waste of resources. Perhaps you should make the case for it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >My point that reproducing an old system like cvrt is a waste of resources.

                They have already done it... twice before, Once for the mk2 and again for export orders. They have also gone back and done a major upgrade of the initial vehicles that pretty much only kept the hull and tracks.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I’m kneeling so hard out of respect

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >the absolute state of British posters
                Capped

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And the rapier was successful in the falklands

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            That system doesn’t exist. I’m sorry I thought you knew that

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              May I see the successful interception. Im not just going to believe some MIC shill

              And the rapier was successful in the falklands

              You're so mad it's delicious to me

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              May I see the successful interception. Im not just going to believe some MIC shill

              And the rapier was successful in the falklands

              Warriortard rekt in one

              [...]
              [...]
              You're so mad it's delicious to me

              Post lol just leave and try again tomorrow autismo

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Yes you may

            ?t=165

            Implessive

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Cope and seethe

            >Elbit Systems’ Iron Fist active protection system (APS) has successfully engaged a 120 mm armour-piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot (APFSDS) projectile under test conditions, Adam Griffiths, programmes and engineering director at Elbit Systems UK, told the International Armoured Vehicles (IAV) conference in London on 21 January.

            Yes you may

            ?t=165

            Fricking rekt lmao
            Well done

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >just needs new systems and a new engine
        And therefore a big hull, anon

        These aren't IFV's moron.

        They've gotten larger mainly due to the doomed to failure race to produce armour thicker than the latest weapons and secondly due to the increased mass of gear people carry. Not an issue in these vehicles which were deigned from the outset to carry small teams who had lots of gear like ATGM teams.

        >mainly due to the doomed to failure race to produce armour
        Wrong

        Is it time to produce these again? The era of small armoured vehicles seems to be almost dead, but the need to get small combat teams around the battlefield remains. The armed versions are surely the ideal candidate for remote control/ autonomous technology.

        >need to get small combat teams around the battlefield
        Ares will do that

        The British Army has plenty of MRAPs it can use to get personnel around. They have decent offroad capability and excellent onroad capability. What it doesn't have are modern tanks, IFVs, and artillery systems. Those have far greater priority than CVRT 2.0.

        What the CVRT doesn't have which the Ajax family have is a modern electronics fit. You're talking of the armour equivalent of bringing back WW2 Flower class corvettes for convoy escort in an era of radar-guided antiship missiles.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          > What it doesn't have are modern tanks, IFVs, and artillery systems
          This is horseshit. The British have one of the best armored corps in the world

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Modern engines produce more power, more efficiently with less volume, no need for more space inside. ditch the clutch and add electric motors and a battery.

          There also isn't an MBT in production that will survive a javelin hit, so what makes you think an of the frickhuge IFV's will? splinter and small arm protection is sufficient for the roles you'd use a CVRT for.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            M8 are you moronic. A chally 2 would eat a javelin for breakfast. Google dorchester level 2 armor

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              weak falseflag bait

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Frick off warriortard

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                weak falseflag bait #2

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Name a better protected tank

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Leopard 2a4 and 2a7, abrams sepv2, sepv3, and sepv4

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Now do how many times each of those thats been in combat has been destroyed kek

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                From the front there is no better protected tank in the world, but as much as i love Challenger it's not stopping a diving top attack weapon.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >no need for more space inside
            I'm literally telling you the reason why modern AFVs are so fricking big and you're just saying "no it can't be"
            >splinter and small arm protection is sufficient for the roles you'd use a CVRT for
            What role did you have in mind?
            If you're talking about the roles depicted in OP pic, lol no.

            I repeat, armour is not what makes modern AFVs fat. You can just put 20mm composite plate all over a CVRT to bump it up to Ajax levels.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >I'm literally telling you the reason why modern AFVs are so fricking big and you're just saying "no it can't be"

              You, i've already told you they are that size due to armour and space, the engines are that big to deal with 40 ton IFV's lmao. CVRT is fast (50mph) and is only 7 tons and 235hp. Bradley is 30 tons, slow (32mph) and produces 600hp. Puma is 40 tons, 40mph and is like 1000hp.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >they are that size due to armour
                NO IT'S NOT
                How much armour do you think they're slapping on, idiot
                Ajax is about 65% bigger than Scimitar all around
                Do you think less than an inch of plate all around makes Scimitar 65% fatter?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >thinks RHA is the standard In modern armour

                Big lol.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >thinks composite armour is 24x thicker than steel equivalent

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It is indeed, they empty space in composite armour is a key feature.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >It is
                You're literally moronic.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                As usual, I'm right and you're not sufficiently educated to be able to debate with me.

                >pic related, that's air you see making up the majority of a Chobham pack.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >8" pack
                Mmhmm. And you're saying this provides RHAe equivalent to 0.33 inches of steel?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No, the RHA equivalent of the same level of chemical penetration protection is vastly heavier and obviously thicker. Which is why everyone is using more bulky but lighter composites armour.

                It is impossible to build a usable vehicle with 2000mm - two meters - of HEAT protection from the front using RHA.

                Chasing extra protection adds weight, increasing internal volume increases the external area that requires protection. Extra weight requires a larger engine. It's a never ending cycle that will never produce an invulnerable tank.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                lowest IQ post of the day

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry have you just figured out that 2000mm of RHA is thicker and heavier than 2000mm of HEAT protection from composite? I'm really struggling to see how you're going to get yourself out of this corner.

                BTW, a 2m cube of steel is about 62 metric tons.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >will never produce an invulnerable tank
                But it will produce one that can resist lesser ATGMs.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Which is utterly worthless when you look at development times/cost. We could spend 200bn and 15 years building a tank that's protected against all modern atgms and someone will spend £500m and 18 months building the weapon that can penetrate it. Your vehicle will also no longer fit in a transport or be supported by a bridge (we're already there)

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Which part of
                >resist lesser ATGMs
                >lesser ATGMs
                >LESSER
                did you not understand?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Which part of that long development cycle weapon being defeated by a short development cycle weapon didn't you get?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >we need to develop lesser ATGMs

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Warriortard cope

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    58020534
    58020545
    >1 minute and 2 seconds apart
    >8 posters
    Cringe thread

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I’m sorry CVRT

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Still only 8 posters

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        because we're hanging around to bully you

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Randomly posting I’m sorry CVRT isn’t a form of bullying

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Make it 9.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    There's a modular pod version of cvrt from 2013, similar to what boxer does.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      guts

      Randomly posting I’m sorry CVRT isn’t a form of bullying

      That was the other guy, i'm the one posting facts like

      >My point that reproducing an old system like cvrt is a waste of resources.

      They have already done it... twice before, Once for the mk2 and again for export orders. They have also gone back and done a major upgrade of the initial vehicles that pretty much only kept the hull and tracks.

      that you're too afraid to engage with because they show you to be the fool you are.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I don’t know why you’re so emotional. No one is going to buy new production CVRTs.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They we doing it as little as 11 years ago.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine makes a turret for the Jordanian CVRT. I can't belive it hasn't been posted yet, it's got a 30mm and 2 stungas Kasket turret irrc
    Would love to see these dropped in the FV103s in Ukraine.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Why the frick would someone put a beam rider on a vehicle

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Because TOWs are legacy weapons and the Stunga is a much more successful system in Ukraine. Become educated warriortard.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          TOWs are more modern and have top attack capabilities.
          > Stunga is a much more successful system in Ukraine
          Source

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I've seen hundreds of stunga kills, even videos where it's killed helicopters. not seen one TOW kill in Ukraine.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              There’s only around 25 succesful stugna videos. Please post the hundreds. There’s more TOW video from Syria alone than stugna in Ukraine.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Make a thread about it, get laughed at, leave

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Make a thread to cope about it, like the others...you'll get bullied again though so I wouldn't bother.

              >he lacks passive targeting and top attack capabilities
              >less than half the range of kornet
              stugna sisters stay losing

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Kornet is such a cool missile really shows how defunct the TOW is.
                1. Kornet
                2. Stunga
                Gap
                3. TOW
                Not having an attached thermal, being 130kg and having to expose yourself as a giant glowing target make it the worst

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Warriortard false flag

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Frick off warriortard

              Leopard 2a4 and 2a7, abrams sepv2, sepv3, and sepv4

              Challenger 2 is the best protected tank in Ukraine, so no

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Make a thread to cope about it, like the others...you'll get bullied again though so I wouldn't bother.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What illness does warriortard have, it seems serious

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >wanting the e-girls and shotas of combat vehicles back in action
    Questionable.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Just so we are clear, there is a guy here trying to say that more modern engines are bigger with worse power to weight than older engines?

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I hate how vehicles I enjoy are also enjoyed by a dude everyone hates.

    I don't talk to people like this.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *