> What are its weak points
The giant windows > what can we do to cover them up?
Literally cover them up and use modern technology to look outside. Have you never heard of 360 degree situational awareness system?
The problem with the BTR-4 is it can still fundamentally trace it's lineage to the Soviet BTR series which started in the late 50s. That's why the Ukrainian military rejected the BTR-4MV1 a few years ago. Handling and off-road performance was just inadequate.
I guess the upgrades have taken their toll on the old BTR chassis
The problem with the BTR-4 is it can still fundamentally trace it's lineage to the Soviet BTR series which started in the late 50s. That's why the Ukrainian military rejected the BTR-4MV1 a few years ago. Handling and off-road performance was just inadequate.
Strikers are rated frontally to withstand 30mm. There’s a reason most armored vehicles don’t have frickhuge windows on them.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Strikers only withstand 30mm with add on armour.
Without it, it's only rated vs 50 cal from the front and 7.62mm from the sides.
The armored glass windows can be covered by those plates you see hanging in front of them
2 years ago
Anonymous
Sure they can be covered but they don’t have the situational awareness of the Stryker without the windows
I’m sure when you’re driving down the road these will not be covered. Kind of stupid to think they would be. It’s be good for buttoning up and going hull down in the defensive but it’s not feasible to cover the windshield and try to drive around. Could you? Sure the VC could guide the driver or a small periscope could be installed but it’s impractical
it's good enough for it's price
but personally it's my favorite bangbus of this war, i have a strong emotions to this cute fricker after mariupol footage
I still jizz to that video where its 30mm shred the Russians in Mariupol. With them hiding behin BMP2 but rounds go thru BMP2 and or under tracks hitting them in shins. 30mm vs shins
Not that anon but yes they did. I don't think the tank was moving. The video was thermal footage of a Ukrainian raid on a Russian position, it unloaded into the rear-side of a T-72. I don't have it but some other anon might.
2 years ago
Anonymous
They didn't, they ruptured the fuel tanks and ignited the fuel on the outside of the hull, then fricking noguns homosexuals like you claim a 30mm ammo racked a fricking tank.
It's not even an excuse to be ignorant, since in every god damn thread about that incident, people pointed out exactly what happened.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Proof?
2 years ago
Anonymous
2 years ago
Anonymous
Pic related is the T-72 fuel system
?t=197
Video is the live fire trials of Strv103, timestamp is where the external fuel tank is hit. The tank itself is not damaged
>weaker cannon
If that's a 30 mm, it's pretty strong for a vehicle like that.
Hell, the 14.5x114 MG in some BTRs can be quite effective against anything that isn't an MBT or a heavy IFV.
>For a 30mm it’s weak is what I mean
it was and is knocking out Russian tanks so it's as strong as it needs to be. Hell weren't there multiple video clips of some Ukrainian nutjobs taking on multiple tanks and coming out on top
There's video from Mariupol where it ambushes two tanks and pounds them. Vatniks claimed that black smoke that came out of those tanks were merely smoke cover released by tanks
I think the fascination more comes from a basically aluminum wrapped truck weak to anything more than HMG fire taking on MBTs and IFVs in a city that was under siege for months.
Makes sense. Guess they're just using what they've got.
14.5mm protection has been the minimum protection level for every western IFV since the Marder, and even the M113A3 has that level of protection (on the front).
STANAG 4 is not hard to achieve.
Yeah, said "heavy" IFV because Russian deathtraps don't qualify but they're called IFVs anyway.
At this point I'm starting to suspect they explode if bonked with an empty NLAW tube.
14.5mm protection has been the minimum protection level for every western IFV since the Marder, and even the M113A3 has that level of protection (on the front).
STANAG 4 is not hard to achieve.
Vehicle autocannons usually isn't standard zeroed to 50m.
It's quicker to adjust visualy than to adjust zeroing unless the system has automatic laser rangefinder adjusted ranging.
No you said that autocannons aren’t typically zeroed to 50m. You implies that modern Cannons need to be zeroed for a specific range when in actuality you just point the crosshairs at what you want to hit, get it’s range, and the computer automatically makes the fine adjustments so you can aim with the crosshairs at any range. The btr-4 doesn’t seem to have that or atleast the gunner wasn’t using it in the videos
2 years ago
Anonymous
And what do you think i meant with the use of the word "system" in my post if not FCS? >You implies that modern Cannons need to be zeroed for a specific range
The canon mount offset to the optic in terms of elevation and parallax is what i am talking about, whatever else you read into it is on you.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Fricking LMAO. I didn’t read past the 50m zero bit. It does seem that I said the same thing you did
IF, many countries don't have such money and when you have tighter budget having 100 okay IFVs is better than having 25 excellent IFVs, or god forbid, trying to buy something from G*rmans
Dude. Patria exists. There is not a single country on this earth that cannot afford to have a bespoke IFV fleet of the exact right size and proportion.
Dragoon also has 3rd gen FLIR, a true 30mm autocannon (not Russian 30mm) spall liners everywhere, commander's optics, and a whole lot more.
the ICV version is also getting a Javelin
>UAF budget is 1% of the US annual budget
>their shit isn't as nice
incredible!
What are its weak points and what can we do to cover them up?
> What are its weak points
The giant windows
> what can we do to cover them up?
Literally cover them up and use modern technology to look outside. Have you never heard of 360 degree situational awareness system?
they were working on it but invasion happened
It's actually funny how they turned BTR-60 into Fuchs clone, and then further into BTR-4MV1, which is conventional modern APC.
>It's actually funny how they turned BTR-60 into Fuchs clone
You mean Luchs (Lynx). Fuchs (Fox) has 6 wheels.
Luchs looks nothing like BTR-4.
BTR-4 is Fuchs with extra pair of wheels.
It's battle tested design by this point. It is Kherson now
https://mil.in.ua/uk/articles/hronika-boyiv-btr-4mv1-u-hodi-zvilnennya-harkivshhyny/
nice
I guess the upgrades have taken their toll on the old BTR chassis
The problem with the BTR-4 is it can still fundamentally trace it's lineage to the Soviet BTR series which started in the late 50s. That's why the Ukrainian military rejected the BTR-4MV1 a few years ago. Handling and off-road performance was just inadequate.
>The giant windows
it's not like the hull is substantially stronger
Yes the hull is substantially stronger.
anything above 50 cal will turn it into swiss cheese so what difference does it make
Strikers are rated frontally to withstand 30mm. There’s a reason most armored vehicles don’t have frickhuge windows on them.
Strikers only withstand 30mm with add on armour.
Without it, it's only rated vs 50 cal from the front and 7.62mm from the sides.
The armored glass windows can be covered by those plates you see hanging in front of them
Sure they can be covered but they don’t have the situational awareness of the Stryker without the windows
>Literally cover them up
You mean like with pic relevant?
I’m sure when you’re driving down the road these will not be covered. Kind of stupid to think they would be. It’s be good for buttoning up and going hull down in the defensive but it’s not feasible to cover the windshield and try to drive around. Could you? Sure the VC could guide the driver or a small periscope could be installed but it’s impractical
south african ratel also has those but you rarely see them up
here was one that used them
Where and when did Ratels see combat?
that was from yemen, supplied by jordan to anti-houthi forces
Overall? I mean the South African Border War they were used a ton.
In combat they are up
Wut? That's the entry hatch for the engine gnomes.
it's good enough for it's price
but personally it's my favorite bangbus of this war, i have a strong emotions to this cute fricker after mariupol footage
I was a full on polgay until Azov dabbed on vatBlack folk in mariupol.
I still jizz to that video where its 30mm shred the Russians in Mariupol. With them hiding behin BMP2 but rounds go thru BMP2 and or under tracks hitting them in shins. 30mm vs shins
you forgot the video they took at a bit of a distance and ammo racked a T72 under his side skirts
You like making shit up, do you?
They literally did ammo rack a T-series during a raid though, part of the footage released from Mariupol
No they didn't. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that.
Not that anon but yes they did. I don't think the tank was moving. The video was thermal footage of a Ukrainian raid on a Russian position, it unloaded into the rear-side of a T-72. I don't have it but some other anon might.
They didn't, they ruptured the fuel tanks and ignited the fuel on the outside of the hull, then fricking noguns homosexuals like you claim a 30mm ammo racked a fricking tank.
It's not even an excuse to be ignorant, since in every god damn thread about that incident, people pointed out exactly what happened.
Proof?
Pic related is the T-72 fuel system
?t=197
Video is the live fire trials of Strv103, timestamp is where the external fuel tank is hit. The tank itself is not damaged
>weaker cannon
If that's a 30 mm, it's pretty strong for a vehicle like that.
Hell, the 14.5x114 MG in some BTRs can be quite effective against anything that isn't an MBT or a heavy IFV.
For a 30mm it’s weak is what I mean. At that point it would make sense to jump down to 25mm to increase the amount of rounds that can be stored.
>For a 30mm it’s weak is what I mean
it was and is knocking out Russian tanks so it's as strong as it needs to be. Hell weren't there multiple video clips of some Ukrainian nutjobs taking on multiple tanks and coming out on top
There's video from Mariupol where it ambushes two tanks and pounds them. Vatniks claimed that black smoke that came out of those tanks were merely smoke cover released by tanks
Why is this a novel idea to you? Tank side armor is notoriously weak.
I think the fascination more comes from a basically aluminum wrapped truck weak to anything more than HMG fire taking on MBTs and IFVs in a city that was under siege for months.
Makes sense. Guess they're just using what they've got.
Yeah, said "heavy" IFV because Russian deathtraps don't qualify but they're called IFVs anyway.
At this point I'm starting to suspect they explode if bonked with an empty NLAW tube.
14.5mm protection has been the minimum protection level for every western IFV since the Marder, and even the M113A3 has that level of protection (on the front).
STANAG 4 is not hard to achieve.
Did ok. Plenty of POM goodness.
It always bothers me that the reticle doesn't seem to correlate to where the rounds are going.
yeah, that's how it works in real life, if your vehicle doesn't have modern FCS just adjust your point of aim until you get impacts in the right area
Vehicle autocannons usually isn't standard zeroed to 50m.
It's quicker to adjust visualy than to adjust zeroing unless the system has automatic laser rangefinder adjusted ranging.
That’s why modern systems have rangefinders and a FCS. Everything you shoot at should be in the crosshairs. An FCS isn’t zeroed to a particular range.
That's what i just said, but okay...
No you said that autocannons aren’t typically zeroed to 50m. You implies that modern Cannons need to be zeroed for a specific range when in actuality you just point the crosshairs at what you want to hit, get it’s range, and the computer automatically makes the fine adjustments so you can aim with the crosshairs at any range. The btr-4 doesn’t seem to have that or atleast the gunner wasn’t using it in the videos
And what do you think i meant with the use of the word "system" in my post if not FCS?
>You implies that modern Cannons need to be zeroed for a specific range
The canon mount offset to the optic in terms of elevation and parallax is what i am talking about, whatever else you read into it is on you.
Fricking LMAO. I didn’t read past the 50m zero bit. It does seem that I said the same thing you did
Good enough to stop the Kharkiv offensive
>Stryker dragoon with more weak points and a weaker cannon
Aldo costs less than 1/4th of dragoon
Yea the FCS in the dragoon is much more advanced. It’s worth it if you have the money
IF, many countries don't have such money and when you have tighter budget having 100 okay IFVs is better than having 25 excellent IFVs, or god forbid, trying to buy something from G*rmans
Dude. Patria exists. There is not a single country on this earth that cannot afford to have a bespoke IFV fleet of the exact right size and proportion.
>Patria
>only sold in Europe and South Africa
Under everyone you mean rich countries without their own IFV program?
What kind of battle network system do Patria IFVs operate?
Dragoon also has 3rd gen FLIR, a true 30mm autocannon (not Russian 30mm) spall liners everywhere, commander's optics, and a whole lot more.
the ICV version is also getting a Javelin
How many of the these things do the ukies have left? I havent seen very many of them recently.
>I presume the production line is closed.
Weak points or not, having side doors is probably enormously convenient compared to how you'd enter a Stryker.