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.
The cannon was basically copied for Bushmaster 2. The rounds are even interchangeable.
you can use rarden ammo in a bushmaster but not the other way around iirc
No. I've had one of these and it was a piece of shit.
I want a remote control mini CVRT
Why is it not a thing.
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
I mean like 1:12 or 1:5 scale model but yeah full size is also cool.
Scorpion and Spartan are best. Sultan and Samaritan are also okay, nothing special there but they do the job.
Swingfire has soul though.
actually Stormer is a good lad, you're right
Is this a tankette?
Scorpion with the 75mm gun is considered a light tank
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
These are seriously dated. Better to just use them all up and procure something more modern
Modern means fuck 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.
>Modern means fuck 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 fuck do you think every IFV has gotten bigger since the BMP-1? No reason?
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.
yup, exactly as retarded of a response as I expected from a nogunz brit
No counter argument detected.
CVRTs just aren’t very good anymore. No need for vehicular recon.
> stick an APS ontop and you've got missiles and tank rounds covered
Why are all British shills so stupid?
Does it hurt always knowing less than us?
APS systems are intercepting kinetic energy rounds now.
No they aren’t
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.
May I see the successful interception. Im not just going to believe some MIC shill
Yes you may
You said 120mm sabot
> >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
>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?
>rocket assisted SABOT
Holy shit, you're even dumber than I thought. You know that APFSDS rounds can have tracers right?
Yea that wasn’t a sabot. Guy says it right in the video. Keep flailing though it’s funny
This has really backfired when you started by claiming that brits were stupid and went on to humiliate yourself repeatedly.
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
It's a test to demonstrate a destabilising effect on a 120mm APFSDS round.
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
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.
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
You were found out. Deal with it
I wasn't the anon you was talking too you freak not everyone is the same outside of your brain.
this and decided to laugh at you being bullied. Get educated imbecile.
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
Again that wasn't my claim but keep up your schizo posts while everyone laughs at you...again and again
No, it should go back into production because fuck 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.
What are you talking about. I clicked on the thread because putting the CVRT back in to production would be retarded
You have been entirely unable to communicate your point. Do you have a learning disability?
My point that reproducing an old system like cvrt is a waste of resources. Perhaps you should make the case for it
>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.
I’m kneeling so hard out of respect
>the absolute state of British posters
And the rapier was successful in the falklands
That system doesn’t exist. I’m sorry I thought you knew that
You're so mad it's delicious to me
Warriortard rekt in one
Post lol just leave and try again tomorrow autismo
Fucking rekt lmao
>just needs new systems and a new engine
And therefore a big hull, anon
>mainly due to the doomed to failure race to produce armour
>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.
> 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
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 fuckhuge IFV's will? splinter and small arm protection is sufficient for the roles you'd use a CVRT for.
M8 are you retarded. A chally 2 would eat a javelin for breakfast. Google dorchester level 2 armor
weak falseflag bait
Fuck off warriortard
weak falseflag bait #2
Name a better protected tank
Leopard 2a4 and 2a7, abrams sepv2, sepv3, and sepv4
Now do how many times each of those thats been in combat has been destroyed kek
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.
>no need for more space inside
I'm literally telling you the reason why modern AFVs are so fucking 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.
>I'm literally telling you the reason why modern AFVs are so fucking 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.
>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?
>thinks RHA is the standard In modern armour
>thinks composite armour is 24x thicker than steel equivalent
It is indeed, they empty space in composite armour is a key feature.
You're literally retarded.
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.
Mmhmm. And you're saying this provides RHAe equivalent to 0.33 inches of steel?
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.
lowest IQ post of the day
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.
>will never produce an invulnerable tank
But it will produce one that can resist lesser ATGMs.
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)
Which part of
>resist lesser ATGMs
did you not understand?
Which part of that long development cycle weapon being defeated by a short development cycle weapon didn't you get?
>we need to develop lesser ATGMs
>1 minute and 2 seconds apart
I’m sorry CVRT
Still only 8 posters
because we're hanging around to bully you
Randomly posting I’m sorry CVRT isn’t a form of bullying
Make it 9.
There's a modular pod version of cvrt from 2013, similar to what boxer does.
That was the other guy, i'm the one posting facts like
that you're too afraid to engage with because they show you to be the fool you are.
I don’t know why you’re so emotional. No one is going to buy new production CVRTs.
They we doing it as little as 11 years ago.
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.
Why the fuck would someone put a beam rider on a vehicle
Because TOWs are legacy weapons and the Stunga is a much more successful system in Ukraine. Become educated warriortard.
TOWs are more modern and have top attack capabilities.
> Stunga is a much more successful system in Ukraine
I've seen hundreds of stunga kills, even videos where it's killed helicopters. not seen one TOW kill in Ukraine.
There’s only around 25 succesful stugna videos. Please post the hundreds. There’s more TOW video from Syria alone than stugna in Ukraine.
Make a thread about it, get laughed at, leave
>he lacks passive targeting and top attack capabilities
>less than half the range of kornet
stugna sisters stay losing
Kornet is such a cool missile really shows how defunct the TOW is.
Not having an attached thermal, being 130kg and having to expose yourself as a giant glowing target make it the worst
Warriortard false flag
Fuck off warriortard
Challenger 2 is the best protected tank in Ukraine, so no
Make a thread to cope about it, like the others...you'll get bullied again though so I wouldn't bother.
What illness does warriortard have, it seems serious
>wanting the e-bois and shotas of combat vehicles back in action
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?
I hate how vehicles I enjoy are also enjoyed by a dude everyone hates.
I don't talk to people like this.