This is like that one paper thin Russian paratrooper tank yet your simping for this tin can. Cringe. Frick your gay nostalgia I hope the future army is soulless
It's not a M113 bros, it's a ACV-15 IFV. >The hull of the ACV-15 IFV is made of welded aluminum armor with an additional layer of spaced laminate steel armor bolted onto the hull. The vehicle provides a protection against firing of small arms 14.5mm AP and 3 kg of explosive (8kg optional).
>The AIFV and Bradley are already M113s with stuff taped on it. >The AIFV
yes >The Bradley
no
Though to be honest for a new metal box I'd have to wonder if overhauling the M113s we have into bigger metal boxes wouldn't be a worthwhile idea to look at
Wasn't the Bradley created through the same process that gave us the AIFV and it still shares parts with the M113?
2 years ago
Anonymous
That process of iteration resulted in a completely new hull, drive train and suspension for the bradley
Yes they use similar parts and components but that doesn't mean the bradley is an M113 with more stuff put on it, because it turns out an air-transportable APC isn't physically large enough or have an engine or suspension to have all the additional systems, weapons and armor you want to put onto it, at least not without having to make compromises and possibly have something that doesn't actually do everything you wanted it to do.
Which is the reason why the US Army didn't settle with the AIFV and continued iterating.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I meant more that the lineage is M113 >> MICV-65 >> Bradley & AIFV.
Though does the AIFV have the same drive train and suspension as the M113? I know it doesn't have the same chassis/hull.
2 years ago
Anonymous
MICV-65 was a program and can allude to a bunch of contest entries, and design lineage can be less straight forward because you usually have designs with similar origins but different designers contribute to a final design, but basically for the AIFV:
M113A1 ----> XM734 (FMC's entry to the MICV-65 program) ----> XM765 (FMC's attempt to improve on the 734 to pitch to the army again) ----> PI M113A1 ----> AIFV
Basically, AIFV is very based on the M113A1's design, but by the time we get to AIFV the Army had already selected and would continue for a while with PC&F's XM701, and XM765 was a divergence in development with the Product Improved M113A1 and AIFV basically being private ventures by FMC.
This is not to say that there was absolutely no influence between the two lines of development though, as FMC would be brought back in later to develop the XM723, which was based on the XM701. The XM723 would be developed into the XM2 IFV and XM3 CFV, and these would become the Bradley IFV and CFV eventually.
2 years ago
Anonymous
to add to this and also further emphasize my point here
That process of iteration resulted in a completely new hull, drive train and suspension for the bradley
Yes they use similar parts and components but that doesn't mean the bradley is an M113 with more stuff put on it, because it turns out an air-transportable APC isn't physically large enough or have an engine or suspension to have all the additional systems, weapons and armor you want to put onto it, at least not without having to make compromises and possibly have something that doesn't actually do everything you wanted it to do.
Which is the reason why the US army didn't settle with the AIFV and continued iterating.
as well, one of the reasons why the army didn't go with the AIFV was because of limited mobility, because while it has more armor and the new turret system the AIFV (or at least initial versions) still have the same powerplant as the M113A1, but with a different turbocharger and radiator.
This is like that one paper thin Russian paratrooper tank yet your simping for this tin can. Cringe. Frick your gay nostalgia I hope the future army is soulless
Well, the Bradley is replacing the 113 as the AMPV, so my money is on the Brad. The real question is how the AMPV still only fits 6 men with the turret removed. What else is taking up all the space?
I also wonder how long until they put the Dragoon Turret off the Stryker on an AMPV.
I don't know if that's all it can carry, but that was the program requirement for the General Purpose variant. Seems like it should be able to fit 9, at least, plus the 2 crew.
back to your cold grave sprey
No one's ever really gone.
>sprey
In the Holy Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, I exconjure thee. Go back to the shadow!!
It's Mike Sparks you're thinking of, and he's still alive
I want him to actually make that irl so he can die in a moronic blaze of glory
Like that flat earther who built a rocket?
Supposedly that guy actually faked being a flat earthed to get attention and donations for his rocket launch.
It's not a M113 bros, it's a ACV-15 IFV.
>The hull of the ACV-15 IFV is made of welded aluminum armor with an additional layer of spaced laminate steel armor bolted onto the hull. The vehicle provides a protection against firing of small arms 14.5mm AP and 3 kg of explosive (8kg optional).
Interesting I thought it was just a fully modernized M113, since the modernized AIFVs usually keep their shape.
So its an M113 with stuff taped on it
The AIFV and Bradley are already M113s with stuff taped on it.
Why doesn't America use these
The Bradley was better. The AIFV was created out of the same process and program that created the Bradley.
the Bradley is already and use, and is replacing all current m113 variants
Bradley-AD when??
>The AIFV and Bradley are already M113s with stuff taped on it.
>The AIFV
yes
>The Bradley
no
Though to be honest for a new metal box I'd have to wonder if overhauling the M113s we have into bigger metal boxes wouldn't be a worthwhile idea to look at
Wasn't the Bradley created through the same process that gave us the AIFV and it still shares parts with the M113?
That process of iteration resulted in a completely new hull, drive train and suspension for the bradley
Yes they use similar parts and components but that doesn't mean the bradley is an M113 with more stuff put on it, because it turns out an air-transportable APC isn't physically large enough or have an engine or suspension to have all the additional systems, weapons and armor you want to put onto it, at least not without having to make compromises and possibly have something that doesn't actually do everything you wanted it to do.
Which is the reason why the US Army didn't settle with the AIFV and continued iterating.
I meant more that the lineage is M113 >> MICV-65 >> Bradley & AIFV.
Though does the AIFV have the same drive train and suspension as the M113? I know it doesn't have the same chassis/hull.
MICV-65 was a program and can allude to a bunch of contest entries, and design lineage can be less straight forward because you usually have designs with similar origins but different designers contribute to a final design, but basically for the AIFV:
M113A1 ----> XM734 (FMC's entry to the MICV-65 program) ----> XM765 (FMC's attempt to improve on the 734 to pitch to the army again) ----> PI M113A1 ----> AIFV
Basically, AIFV is very based on the M113A1's design, but by the time we get to AIFV the Army had already selected and would continue for a while with PC&F's XM701, and XM765 was a divergence in development with the Product Improved M113A1 and AIFV basically being private ventures by FMC.
This is not to say that there was absolutely no influence between the two lines of development though, as FMC would be brought back in later to develop the XM723, which was based on the XM701. The XM723 would be developed into the XM2 IFV and XM3 CFV, and these would become the Bradley IFV and CFV eventually.
to add to this and also further emphasize my point here
as well, one of the reasons why the army didn't go with the AIFV was because of limited mobility, because while it has more armor and the new turret system the AIFV (or at least initial versions) still have the same powerplant as the M113A1, but with a different turbocharger and radiator.
its not, its a new chasis.
ahhh, the gavin
bro your bradley is looking a little weird
This is like that one paper thin Russian paratrooper tank yet your simping for this tin can. Cringe. Frick your gay nostalgia I hope the future army is soulless
Bradley on a budget.
Y-you, you have your hand on my white boy butt cheeks!
Eww Black folk
sovl
sex
Lung cancer, because of that damned turret.
You sure you just didn't smoke too much
GOOD
SOLID
TANK
Which is the best metal box, the M113, AIFV or the Bradley?
Well, the Bradley is replacing the 113 as the AMPV, so my money is on the Brad. The real question is how the AMPV still only fits 6 men with the turret removed. What else is taking up all the space?
I also wonder how long until they put the Dragoon Turret off the Stryker on an AMPV.
Does the AMPV still only carry 6 men?
I don't know if that's all it can carry, but that was the program requirement for the General Purpose variant. Seems like it should be able to fit 9, at least, plus the 2 crew.
I too like the predator. Best tank in 40k.
Frick off Mike.
>somewhat heavier
>still aluminium
>still amphibious
>sport a 105mm cannon
>but mainly doesn't look like a dumpster
>French
No thanks.
best version