Namer : The Best IFV

>Thick heavy armor 60+ tons
>Has survived Kornet missile hits
>Now equipped with Torphy APS
>Room for 9 man squad
>1200 hp engine
>Unmanned low profile turret
>30 mm cannon
>Spike missiles

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    *Name

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The best IFV is a decent IFV you can produce shitloads of

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So... the Warrior then?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There weren’t that many warrior produced and the turret was pretty bad. Namer is on a whole new level

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes

        There weren’t that many warrior produced and the turret was pretty bad. Namer is on a whole new level

        Turret is ok for the time, it's only mediocre now compared to the cutting edge (after the 90's). Most IFVs till recently would rarely fire on the move after all, and the warrior was still quite capable of doing what the Bradley did in 91 after all.

        Warriortard compares it to modern Bradleys but forgets to remind people how mediocre (compared to now) the original Bradley's were in comparison. When the warrior was commissioned it was a decent enough box on tracks, but they failed to upgrade it for sure, and it fell behind.
        The bongs should send them to Ukraine to be honest, they need a new IFV already, it's more than half a century old and they could do with a new one.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Warrior came in service for the BA in 1987.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If they are too expensive and you cannot produce them at scale, then no.

      slav logic. is the t72 better than the abrams because there are thousands more t72s? past a certain point numbers become irrelevant. and all new ifvs are becoming more and more expensive. isnt the puma like 15m?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yep, it's what won the 2nd world war. I like the tiger but clearly the t-34 and Sherman numerical advantage won the tank engagements

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Now show me T-72 climbing same slope.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Just replace rubber pads with ice pads,or remove all rubber pads and voilá: traction on ice.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That hatch is thick.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If they are too expensive and you cannot produce them at scale, then no.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    But where is the SOVL????

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What an utterly horrifying monstrosity.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Mobile oppression palace vibes. It's funny cus the garden gnomes are basically soulless crab people too.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We need cold-blooded weapons tech

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Anything on a cent chassis I love
      SOVL for sure, and the slats are just mmmmmmmm

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Gives me the same vibes

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I really like the CV90 family and I also really like the concept of the Boxer. 1 or 2 common carriers and a large family of modules that just get dropped in like giant Lego bricks with a crane. I wish we had more ships like that, with big empty sections that standardized mission modules just slot into.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I really like the CV90 family

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Qrd?

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Israeli MIC is kino

    >battle tested against Muslims
    >actually used day to day by the IDF
    >doesn't come with political strings attached unlike with every Western weapon, you just have to be from a cunt who doesn't actively hate garden gnomes
    >if your cunt was a good goy at one point you get access to top level tech without stupid Western cunt prices
    >not Chinkshit
    >not slavshit

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      tested against Muslims
      Really bro, really?

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's good for the area it's meant for but strategically is useless due to excessive weight/size. You'd never be able to deploy these far from the area they were produced

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It's good for the area it's meant for but strategically is useless due to excessive weight/size. You'd never be able to deploy these far from the area they were produced

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You do realise any tank would get stuck there right, have you not seen historical photos?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's not really true at all. It wouldn't be impossible to deploy, just significantly slower. A Bradley weighs half as much, so that means you can deploy 2 Bradleys for 1 namer. You have about 40 Bradleys in a Battalion, so in the time would take to get a fully battalion of Brads, you'd only have 1.5 companies of Namers available if we're talking about moving them to theater.

      This disadvantage can be negated by simply sending more Namers at once, but this may be cost or crew prohibitive.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >IFV
    It's literally in the same weight class as a tank. It's really pushing the definition of IFV.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why would you want a 60 ton IFV? This only makes sense for Israel or something where your only war is your regularly scheduled botched invasion of Lebanon.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For me it's the Ratel. Give every squad a mortar.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Best for Israeli short range use without power projection expeditionary missions.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why haven't more countries made a heavy IFV like the Namer using tank hulls? Why not max protection and troop transport numbers?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Big, heavy, slow, and expensive, even Israel can't afford to make all the Namers they want.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        $3 million 80 km/h

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because western IFV is knee jerk reaction to Russian BMP that was copied without much critical thought.

      Israel on the hand was on the receiving end of the BMP during it's deput. And Israel was less than impressed. They found BMP deployment effect on the battlefield non existent. Also after war they had many captured BMPs and found them useless for anything. Mind you Israel adopted captured T-54 tanks.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    60 fucking tons? And it's just an IFV? Fucking mud will love this motherfucker lmao

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not OP The garden gnome, but:

    All IFVs should be based on tanks to lower cost, ease logistics and improve protection.

    All Tanks should have merkava-style layout, that is engine up front and hatch in the back for easy access & maintenance.

    Now fight me, phaggots.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's perhaps the best IFV for where it will be used. It's extremely survivable, important in urban fighting where ambushes are easier.

    It being big and heavy matters less because the IDF isn't advancing further than a few hundred miles.

    It isn't going to run into heavy mud or snow.

    Same thing with the Merkava. I would take being in a Merk over any tank in urban combat, but I wouldn't want my nation to get them unless we had a situation very similar to Israel's.

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    one 30 year old javelin goes through the roof and incinerates every garden gnome inside its belly

    Call it Baal

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it has an APS
      so no
      it won’t

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        is Trophy really capable of defending against top attack ATGMs like Javelin? would be new to me, but perhaps it can.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          rafael is very secretive about what they can and cannot intercept. even though i am the one maintaining it. and if i knew for sure i wouldn’t be able to talk about it.

          they war heads can aim at a pretty high angle
          but it most probably can, from the same reason RPGs from a roof top would be a precived threat for an israeli vehicle. rather than non existent javelin counterpart in the russian-arab arsenal.

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Pretty neat for specifically fighting insurgents and such in urban setting but outside of that it becomes problematic to operate due to the weight and logistical footprint which is why US rejected it.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Has survived Kornet missile hits
    So have mud huts and unarmored trucks.

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