The CV90

So. I've been trying to figure out how the CV90 actually rates against other IFVs, but I can only really find sponsored articles trying to either sell it, or competitors.
Is it actually good? From what comments I can find it looks pretty mediocre, but there's some folks praising it to high heaven. Are they just fanboys?

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

    >From what comments I can find it looks pretty mediocre, but there's some folks praising it to high heaven
    So tell us about what you've read, anon

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >So tell us about what you've read, anon
      Folks on twitter, mostly, and it's vague terms about how it's "the best". Which feels like people who, yeah, either unlocked in War Thunder, or want to be contrarian and like something that isn't yankshit or russian.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        So your research consists of twitter opinions?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          To be fair to him, thats more than most here

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I wouldn't call it research. I was curious and googled about. But the options really are articles put out by people trying to either market the CV90 or competitors, and the other is random loudmouths on twitter and reddit.
          So now I'm coming here to add more random loudmouths from PrepHole for a wider base of loudmouths.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Good protection
            >6-8 dismounts depending on variant
            >All cannon variations are good
            >Manovourable
            >Decent top speed
            >Low profile
            >Has seen abit of combat faired well
            >Regular upgrades keeps it up to date
            Probably the best IFV out there until the Lynx comes into full production.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Probably the best IFV out there until the Lynx comes into full production.
              I genuinely disagree with this assessment, because any IFV which lacks an ATGM is at a major disadvantage when compared to those IFVs which do have this capability when conducting operations against a mechanized near-peer force. Your points are generally good, but the lack of ATGM immediately removes the CV90 variants from the discussion of capable IFVs in my opinion. Before anyone comments that there are variants with an ATGM, I do know about this but those variants are not the standard. Hopefully the successor to the CV90 will have native ATGM support

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It doesn't lack an ATGM though. Infact it can have probably the best ATGM out there. Have you been listening to the warriortard shill?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Anon "it can" does not mean that it does have this capability across the fleet right now

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What kind of moronic comment is that? The CV90s customer base is HUGE the biggest one out there, they buy and add on what they deem fit.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Again there is not a single nation which has equipped its entire fleet of CV90s with an ATGM. Prove me wrong.
                >protip: you can't

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Dutch CV9035 with the MLU being delivered now.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                because all want the atgm with the dismounts

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >They all want to cope
                I doubt it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The Dutch CV9035 vehicles have been equipped with several enhanced capabilities such as an Active Protection System (APS), an Anti-Tank Guided Missile (ATGM), and a new Electro-Optic Aiming System (EOPS), which provides additional situational awareness.
                Imbecile

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The Slovakian MkIv's will be with ATGM

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                CZ ones too.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Slovakia

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The RB56 version of the CV9040 never entered serial production. There were difficulties integrating Bill 2 into the existing sight and a dismount would handle guidance rather than the gunner. CV90MKIV is much better anyways.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                BILL-2 integration was more of a "look what we can do if you want" project done inhouse by Hegglunds. Neither Sweden, Norway or Finland sees (at the time at least) integrated ATGM as worth the cost and complexity, given their terrain and doctrine. The closest have been Norway with the CROWS/Jav combo, but they generally feel that the CROWS have been pushed on them without benefit and probably wont pursue it further.

                The MkIV turret is a lot better because BAE has identified growth such as ATGM and APS as highly relevant for central european customers and worked this into the turret from the start.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >What kind of moronic comment is that? The CV90s customer base is HUGE the biggest one out there, they buy and add on what they deem fit.

                The CV 90 is a vehicle typical of peacetime armies, it has good mobility, light weight and is comparatively cheap to use. In a wartime army, it would be considered catastrophically underarmored and seriously underarmed due to lack of a fire and forget atgm.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What? Isn’t the CV90 with upgrades quite heavy and well-protected? I don’t know enough about its armaments to comment.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >What? Isn’t the CV90 with upgrades quite heavy and well-protected? I don’t know enough about its armaments to comment.

                If it doesnt have modern composite armor its going to get holed by any kind of fossile ATGMs from the cold war. The CV 90 has a centimeter or two more steel armor than the BMP-2, it doesnt make it more survivable against a shaped charge. The american experience with the Bradley should be enough proof of the failure of the IFV concept, but fanboys insist that it isnt valid becuase the Bradley is a completely different vehicle than the CV90.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Literally the same or even better armour than the bradley depending on what you put on it, as has been said before in the thread.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's very well armoured for an IFV and they offer ATGMs as an option, but none of the customers seem to be interested in having their ATGMs bolted to a vehicle.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It’s armor isn’t that good

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >In a wartime army, it would be considered catastrophically underarmored and seriously underarmed due to lack of a fire and forget atgm
                Is that why the US is working so hard to replace the Bradley?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There are two types of ATGM available the Spike LR in your image and the Akeron MP.
                Another addition to

                https://i.imgur.com/eD3ct9W.jpg

                >Good protection
                >6-8 dismounts depending on variant
                >All cannon variations are good
                >Manovourable
                >Decent top speed
                >Low profile
                >Has seen abit of combat faired well
                >Regular upgrades keeps it up to date
                Probably the best IFV out there until the Lynx comes into full production.

                post is that the newer model has its own drone launched from the turret.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >any IFV which lacks an ATGM is at a major disadvantage when compared to those IFVs which do have this capability
                Depends

                I would honestly prefer an IFV with Trophy and softkill APS over an IFV with ATGM but no APS, all else being equal. The former is more survivable while the latter has (usually) two shots and that's it, before both go back to a gun duel. Pitting one against the other, my money's on the former.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                CV90MKIV fixes that by adding an integrated ATGM

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They're not standard because Nordics doctrine was always dismounted atgms because of the limited terrain.
                Now that exports have expanded outside it's original design environment, the option exists.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The CV90 can fire ATGMs. The Swedish military simply does not use IFV mounted ATGM as part of their doctrine.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Most CV90s can’t fire atgms. It isn’t standard like on the Bradley. Any vehicle can fire ATGMs if they are fitted with ATGMs

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Atgms aren't like legos that you can just bolt on. Integration of systems is surprisingly complex and time consuming so that you can use the vehicles sighting and fire control systems basically with just an extra addon.
                The CV90 has this integration ready and if a user wishes atgms can be installed very quickly. Like has been said numerous times the nordics don't have integrated atgms as part of their doctrine because they believe that in the heavily wooded environments that dominate their landscape, they are better placed with the dismounts. The Dutch, Slovaks and Czechs to my knowledge have chosen to go with the integrated atgms but the vast majority of the existing fleet is with the nordics that don't want that.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >our doctrine is to cuck ourselves

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'm going to place more faith on the military planning of several nations than the ramblings of anonymous people on mongolian throat singing forums.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Several irrelevant militaries. Let’s not forget not a single military powerhouse has adopted the CV-90

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Because military powerhouses generally design and build their own shit for obvious reasons. The fact that Sweden went with the effort to build and design their own ones was a much more expensive choice than just buying say bradleys, meaning they probably had a good reason for it and believed it was worth the effort. And a good reminder that most of the countries that have adopted the CV has had them go against other competitors like the bradley with the Norwegian tender.
                And if you're seriously saying that Finland and Sweden are irrelevant then you're clearly uninformed or just trolling.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It’s not military planning it’s cope. They simply didn’t have the budget to integrate atgms so they relied primarily on unguided dismount AT for decades. there is no reason beyond budget not to have an integrated ATGM on an IFV

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'll agree so long as it's like the soviet design of just having one atgm on the vehicle. But even the CV90s missile packet takes away one stowage bin which is a change especially for the crew of the vehicle. If you have several ones and a whole reloading system then that takes away precious space that could have been used for more infantry or ammo for the main gun.
                Integrated atgms are fantastic on an open plain, but on forest roads with short to medium engagement distances and readily available cover everywhere there isn't really all that many probable scenarios where an integrated atgm would decisively win over a dismount one. Now granted if I was a tanker then I sure has hell wouldn't say no to having a atgm or two with me but I also recognize that a well trained crew working with it's dismounts can still get the job done.
                > Surprise head meeting with the enemy
                It's faster to just shoot with the main gun to get immediate effect on the enemy and reverse fast to cover
                > You're on the defense
                Dismounts have time to set up and you have the added flexibility of having your IFV and it's extremely good anti-infantry capability separate from the atgms. Though if you do need to get out the infantry will need like 20 seconds more time to pick up the atgm before getting inside.
                >You're on the offense
                Blast through anything light enough and the back off to cover to let the infantry dismount when reaching heavier resistance and continue on with the atgms now in play with the dismounts

                IFVs also don't work alone or even just with their dismounts. They're just one part of the whole system so they'll have MBTs, artillery and air support there with them.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This doctrine is born out of cost cutting directives, nothing else.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Black person your argument is defeating itself

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I’m saying any vehicle can mount and fire atgms if the vehicle is equipped with them. My point is most CV-90s in existence don’t have atgms

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Sweden is gay for 40mm right?
              How much ammo can they carry?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/0JRDE1k.jpg

                Yea the Bradley is noticebly bigger. Here’s the seats you’re hung up on. Why choose this hill to die on?

                https://i.imgur.com/W2mgBrp.jpg

                >needs a wide angle lense to make it look bigger
                kek

                Why do you always post multiple replies Warriortard it's cringe and doesn't help your argument at all. The door looks wider on the Bradley which is another reason it's super vulnerable and not very safe.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                But you concede that it’s more spacious inside. It’s wider and taller but somehow smaller in your eyes?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Kek the door being wider doesn't mean the room Inside bigger. Do you have dimensions of the Bradley and CV90?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I have eyes

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/lLu9GNz.jpg

                >nooooooooo you can’t just understand that there’s more room in the larger vehicle. You need to post unobtainable dimensions or I win!!
                kek desperate

                Just stop it's cringe.
                >Huge profile but worse protection
                >Weighs 5 tons more but worse protection
                >Huge profile but is similar size in the rear
                I get it now, the Bradley is designed for fat people.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you keep saying it’s worse protection? They’re both rated to 30mm all around with add on. And both 14.5 as base models

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                cv90 armour is classified.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Open source info says 30mm all around. And even if it were classified than why should I trust you when you say it’s better protected?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >They are the same protected
                How can one be so ridiculously heavy and slow then? Let's get real it's a much much worse vehicle and protection wise...let's not go there with the sheer amount of wasted Bradley's out there from such low tier opponents too.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >How can one be so ridiculously heavy and slow then?
                Much larger internal volume.
                >inb4 cv90 is better protected it’s just classified bro

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Proof?
                >Inb4 I don't know the actual size

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Photographic evidence posted itt. Haven’t seen any armor rating comparisons to argue your point tho

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                But you said it could store lots of atgms plus dismounts all you proved was it had to remove 3 seats to do so? Sad.
                Photographic kek let's get some figures Jose. Armor ratings are a given. The Bradley has shit armor the CV90 doesn't this is common knowledge.

                Just pointing out that no CV-90s were lost in the gulf war or the 2003 war in iraq

                The same can’t be said for the Bradley. It really is a deathtrap piece of shit

                Sadly very true even the training ranges are very dangerous to Bradley crews given there horrible optics and awareness.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The Bradley has shit armor the CV90 doesn't this is common knowledge.
                May I see a source. Open sources say they have the same protection rating

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There is no such thing as “protection rating” outside of world of tanks

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes. Armor is rated for a certain protection. For example, open sources claim Bradley and CV-90 are rated against 30mm all around

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There are NATO standard protection ratings for vehicles.
                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/STANAG_4569
                All western production vehicles are certified within that framework.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Its not a protection level, it’s a standardization of threat levels for testing.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Can you source that claim

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                My friend, it’s even in the fricking NAME of the standard.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The CV-90 is more protected because it just is ok

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >But you said it could store lots of atgms plus dismounts all you proved was it had to remove 3 seats to do so?
                The M3 Bradley with fewer seats is the cavalry varient. It carries more of everything except dismounts because its a scout vehicle, not an IFV.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The protection levels of any armoured vehicle are fairly easy to calculate from its weight budget and dimensions. If you have X tons left after you've counted the weight of the gun, engine, tracks, etc. and you have to cover Y square meters of area with it, you get a certain level of protection. Your armour is of course not uniformly thick, but the basic principle remains the same. Even if the exact protection levels are classified, we can tell from weight, outer dimensions and armament that the CV90 has better levels of protection than most IFVs. Certainly better levels of protection than the tall and spacious Bradley with all the area it needs to cover with armour.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                May I see the source? Everything online says 30mm all around. Can you do these calculations for us to see

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >30mm
                30 what? Russian? NATO? AP? APCR? APDS? APFSDS? Vhit? Azimuth? Elevation?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Point blank nato APFSDS, like all other armor rating protections

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You've never worked with 4569, have you?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This is a good point. Actually as far as I'm aware Soviet/Russian IFVs didn't have apfsds rounds for their autocannons which would mean they have a significantly lower armor penetration capabilities, particularly at any kind of range.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >lower armor penetration capabilities, particularly at any kind of range.
                Oh but it gets way more fun than that.
                Certain types or armor, plating and backings, say ceramics, polymers or even different variants of steel will handle different types of threats. So when designing a composite armor package, you may end up maxing it against one type of threat, say 30x173 APFSDS going 1100m/s, which for some reason makes it less optimal against something like a 30x165 APDS due to the different penetration characteristics between a full dart and a subcaliber penetrator. And thats before you get into ricochets vs normalization, behind-armor effects and whatnot.

                I got to watch one test where an armor package was fired on by a 30x173 APFSDS from two different producers, and one would consistently ricochet when fired at an angle, while the other would normalize and penetrate.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >30 what?

                30 mm conventional AP, not APDS or APFSDS.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I will not. I have spoken with engineers at Hägglunds who assured me that such was the case and that was good enough for me. Whether it's good enough for you is up to you.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Ohhhh your dad works at Nintendo I see

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                modern cv90 has Stanag 4569 with level 4 (14.5 at 200m) as a base and level 6+ (30mm apfsds at 500m) for applique armor versions. At least thats according to hägglunds themselfes

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >nooooooooo you can’t just understand that there’s more room in the larger vehicle. You need to post unobtainable dimensions or I win!!
                kek desperate

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >that god damn muzzle

              While your points are valid, the tradeoff for thick armor is that it's a god damn midget wagon, riding in it for a few hours must be fricking miserable.
              Same with the Lynx though.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Weird how you never hear this from it's users then

                https://i.imgur.com/WkKQ5Ok.jpg

                [...]

                the argument that the CV90 isnt comfortable or is too small is just moronic. the average person in my team in the back of the CV90 was 190cm and weighed around 100kg. no one complained and you who have never been in the back of one have no reason to either.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I simply don’t believe that guy has ever spent any time at all in a CV-90 and is just saying that to further his argument. We can use our eyes to see pictures of
                How cramped the CV-90 is

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Good point

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Photos generally really don't give a good idea of space, and the picture in that quote honestly didn't look all that bad to me. Like the back seat of a normal car. Maybe a bit of bending in the knees but seeing as it's an open space you can probably move your legs around a fair bit so long as you work with your buddies.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Look at this picture. Use objects for scale. Particularly the rifle. It’s already pretty crowded and there is no AT, no comms gear, not even daypacks.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >germans
                Ok that certainly does look a little cramped but is that even a CV? looks pretty different from the other one plus germans don't operate them.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >germans
                Ok that certainly does look a little cramped but is that even a CV? looks pretty different from the other one plus germans don't operate them.

                Yeah pretty sure that's Puma from some quick googling pic related

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                vs the CV90
                Sure as frick looks bigger than a puma at least.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This is an m1113

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Nope got the picture from this site
                https://www.dutchaviationsupport.eu/00-HTMS/cv90topgun02.htm
                And Pic related is an m113, completely different looking.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                BTW I like the surround AC ports with adjustable jets. So everyone can get cold air just where they want it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                God that’s short

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Doesn't really look like that much shorter, just a lot wider. Another picture that looks rather comfortable.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I wouldn't call it research. I was curious and googled about. But the options really are articles put out by people trying to either market the CV90 or competitors, and the other is random loudmouths on twitter and reddit.
        So now I'm coming here to add more random loudmouths from PrepHole for a wider base of loudmouths.

        Could you regale us with some details of what you've read and WHY you feel it is merely shilling, rather than give us a vague feeling and expect us to do all the work for you?

        to date you still haven't posted anything that makes me think "hm this guy has read up"

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >hm this guy has read up"
          Frick, I haven't. Its a quarter past two, I'm half drunk and I was thinking of the shit being sent to Ukraine, and I'm bored of googling, so I wanted to see if I could make other people do my job for me.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm half drunk
            Is this a cry for help?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah, I'm out of tequila. Send help.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Twat

            CV90 appears pretty cool. The 9040 has a Bofors 40mm gun with 72 + 168 rounds, but it can be fitted with 35mm Bushmaster if that's more your thing. 3rd gen thermal sights, stabilisation and fully-networked up-to-date FCS. The sights have an armoured shutter, which is nifty.
            Protection ranges from 30mm (front) to 20mm (sides) which is quite nice.

            Turret options include remote turret, 120mm compact gun, and one with a Spike NLOS ATGM.

            Speed is 70kph forward 40kph reverse. The Mk IV has a more powerful transmission.

            All in all, it's hard to say no. The only issue is lack of APS and I don't see an RWR, though I may be mistaken.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >any IFV which lacks an ATGM is at a major disadvantage when compared to those IFVs which do have this capability
              Depends

              I would honestly prefer an IFV with Trophy and softkill APS over an IFV with ATGM but no APS, all else being equal. The former is more survivable while the latter has (usually) two shots and that's it, before both go back to a gun duel. Pitting one against the other, my money's on the former.

              Dutch CV90s have the Iron Fist APS can't find any examples with an RWR though.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Fairly sure he mean LWR and not RWR, which is included in the EO&radar sensors for the APS.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Twat
              Can't deny that. Thanks for the answer though.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Folks on twitter

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    As far as I can tell, the shilling for it here most likely came from some goober who unlocked it on War Thunder and really liked it.
    It's kind of like how you suddenly love AKs if you get a non-piece of shit AK.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Seems okay, 35 and 30mm models with increased ammo capacity seems to fit its customers needs. 40mm seem the most potent but suffer from ammo supply in longer engagements, then again the payload of the 40mm should counter some of that.

    mobility seem to be the key to the platform and given the terrain (or lack thereof aka mud) in ukraine it will be interesting to see how it fares.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >mobility seem to be the key to the platform and given the terrain (or lack thereof aka mud) in ukraine it will be interesting to see how it fares.

      it will get eaten at range by any ATGM in the russian arsenal. I've told this to swedes and they refuse to believe it. They think it is as well armored as a strv 122. Swedish doctrine even have these thin cans following directly behind the infantry, just like the ukie and russian BMPs. They wont fare any better because to an anti tank missile they all have about the same level of protection. Once images of wrecked CV90s are spammed across the world, the sales of this colonial policing shitbox will plunge, and swedes blame the ukies for wasting it using monkey tactics. The truth is that it was a shitty budget vehicle from the start made by pinetree monkeys.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >So. I've been trying to figure out how the CV90 actually rates against other IFV
    >Is it actually good?
    Describe to us what your operational doctrine is, where/how you want to use it, and your preference regarding mobility, firepower and protection. Then you will get an idea if it is "good".

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's getting sent to Ukraine, basically, wanna know if it'll do well there.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        well then you'll have a vehicle with good protection, high mobility, a good autocannon with an effective HE shell but somewhat low ammo count, and room for 8 dismounts (maybe 7 depending on which version sweden sends).

        Compared to something like the Bradley, it will be lacking in the ATGM-department, something that would have been relevant to have in terrain like Ukraine, but probably somewhat higher mobility.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >It's getting sent to Ukraine, basically, wanna know if it'll do well there

        well then you'll have a vehicle with good protection, high mobility, a good autocannon with an effective HE shell but somewhat low ammo count, and room for 8 dismounts (maybe 7 depending on which version sweden sends).

        Compared to something like the Bradley, it will be lacking in the ATGM-department, something that would have been relevant to have in terrain like Ukraine, but probably somewhat higher mobility.

        Hmm let's see

        Sweden operates ~350 CV9040 and 54 CV90 command types, 42 artillery observer, 40 mortar, and ~27 SPAAG and ~21 recovery variants - exact numbers are hard to reconcile.

        Sweden said they'd send 50 CV90s. Conjecturally, this may be 44 IFV and command variants plus 6 others - likely to be the SPAA and recovery varients.

        Giving us a notional Ukrainian CV90 mechanised infantry battlegroup comprising 3 companies, each
        >3 platoons x 4 IFVs
        >2 company CO + XO IFVs
        >1 recovery vehicle
        >1 SPAAG vehicle
        and 2 battalion CO + XO vehicles.

        they're all pretty much the same, like all military equipment. the differences exist between generations, not within generations.

        anon will chime in saying >ackshually there's a huge difference between 20mm autocannon and 90mm cannon, and he will be correct. but the areas in which X is worse are generally offset by the areas in which X is better, or offset enough to be close enough to parity that it's much of a muchness.

        There is actually a significant difference between the early 90s CV9040A and a new-build Mk IV.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Sweden said they'd send 50 CV90s. Conjecturally, this may be 44 IFV and command variants plus 6 others - likely to be the SPAA and recovery varients.
          I kinda expect them to be only IFV version for simplicity, but i would like to see them put together a complete mech inf group like you described.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >only IFV version for simplicity
            you'll find chassis-specific recovery vehicles being included in some of the NATO stuff being sent, because you know for sure that if a CV90 is damaged, a CV90 ARV is able to recover it. (The US ran into this problem in Desert Storm; the M60-based M88 couldn't recover M1 Abrams.) The Swedes designed the CV90 ARV to operate with their IFV units so it's likely they will send some. no point keeping the excess ARVs anyway.

            That is how the British are doing it, sending complete "battalion sets" of the right variants in the right proportions per doctrine, and probably training the Ukrainian crews on the same vehicles as well. They're sending 14 Challenger 2s, because that's what a British armoured battlegroup has.

            The US however is sending 31 Abrams - because Ukraine operates 31 tanks in one tank battalion.
            Similarly, Poland first delivered 30 PT-91s, then 14 Leopards.

            so back to the CV90s, it's entirely possible that Sweden may choose to send some other combination. say, 48 IFVs and 2 recovery types, to outfit 4 full companies of mechanised infantry. it's purely my conjecture.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >the M60-based M88 couldn't recover M1 Abrams.
              That must be why US Army last ordered new M88's in 2017.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                of the more powerful M88A2 model, smartarse.
                M88A1s will in future be used for IFV recovery.

                >you'll find chassis-specific recovery vehicles being included in some of the NATO stuff being sent, because you know for sure that if a CV90 is damaged, a CV90 ARV is able to recover it.
                Thats the swedish approach, the Norwegians for example use Leo 1 ARV's for the CV90 for the extra winch and crane capability, with Leo 2 ARV for the mbt.

                >the Norwegians for example use Leo 1 ARV's for the CV90
                because they had the Leo 1 ARVs around and sufficient for the job. Also the reason why a Bradley recovery variant doesn't exist, see above.

                Other armies without pre-existing buying newer chassis will usually buy the recovery variant as well for this reason. E.g. UK ASCOD, Australia Boxer, etc

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >because they had the Leo 1 ARVs around and sufficient for the job. Also the reason why a Bradley recovery variant doesn't exist, see above.
                Yes, but my point was that while the swedes use CV90-based ARV's, that might not be included in the delivery for Ukraine if they have other recovery assets, one of which being the Leo 1 ARV being delivered.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's already been officially stated that sweden is sending 50 strf9040C. So no recovery vehicles.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >strf9040C
                source?

                >because they had the Leo 1 ARVs around and sufficient for the job. Also the reason why a Bradley recovery variant doesn't exist, see above.
                Yes, but my point was that while the swedes use CV90-based ARV's, that might not be included in the delivery for Ukraine if they have other recovery assets, one of which being the Leo 1 ARV being delivered.

                >Leo 1 ARV
                Ukraine is getting Leo 1 ARVs?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                12 Bergepanzer 2 was delivered by germany in december, and some more are expected as part of the MBT deliveries that are coming from other NATO nations

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They might be needed for current equipment, particularly tanks.
                But yeah that's 1 possibility.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, all the cv9040c are going to Ukraine. Although, due to the most recent upgrade package, it was my understanding that the upgraded c variants would be designated as the e variant.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >cv9040c
                A 2nd time, I ask for source

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Was on the press conference when it was announced, they explicitly said it’s the variants designed for and previously used in international operations (ie. C variant). It’s also the variant that currently doesn’t have a use in the armed forces

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Does it have an ATGM?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >the variants designed for and previously used in international operations (ie. C variant)
                Interesting.
                Were I them I would have saved those in particular for the Swedish Army, in case of a future commitment.
                The C standard also include the SPAAG, ARV and other variants. It's possible the 50 will be:
                >42 infantry variant
                >2 command
                >3 SPAAG
                >3 recovery

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Well the army is modernising the cv90s, and I guess that the c variants are different enough to be a bit of a hassle to upgrade in parallel

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                in my mind, all the more reason to keep 1 battalion set around at least
                what if another conflict kicks off somewhere hot and the Swedes need to deploy again? they'd have to mod new C variants right?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >you'll find chassis-specific recovery vehicles being included in some of the NATO stuff being sent, because you know for sure that if a CV90 is damaged, a CV90 ARV is able to recover it.
              Thats the swedish approach, the Norwegians for example use Leo 1 ARV's for the CV90 for the extra winch and crane capability, with Leo 2 ARV for the mbt.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              They're sending 28 challengers, they recently doubled it. I imagine for the reason you stated.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Reportedly, they will equip two Ukrainian battlegroups. We are seeing a shift away from Russian fighting doctrine to NATO; previously, the complement for a Soviet-style BTG would be 10 tanks.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >~27 SPAAG

          Maximum elevation of the gun is limited to 55 degrees due to lack of money to design a proper AAA turret. If you look under the hood, the swedish armed forces are a clownshow of low IQ people at all levels.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    they're all pretty much the same, like all military equipment. the differences exist between generations, not within generations.

    anon will chime in saying >ackshually there's a huge difference between 20mm autocannon and 90mm cannon, and he will be correct. but the areas in which X is worse are generally offset by the areas in which X is better, or offset enough to be close enough to parity that it's much of a muchness.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    WE GAAN

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Does it sport the infamous 40mm Bofors, loaded from a CLIP?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >clip
      Ah as expected this thread is a thinly veiled Warriortard sperg

      Did you know CV90 is now available in 50mm flavour?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        My favorite thing about the 40mm is that the spent casing gets launched damn near into the stratosphere

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Nice digits. Have a 40mm video you have probably seen before. I like to skip to the 5:50 mark.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Im just going to say it, Bradley looks straight up like a tall fat moron with a pencil dick

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I don't get how they made it so big but so weak at the same time? Like I thought the trade off of being a huge target would be great armor buts it's not the case infact it has terrible protection.
              It's also slow as frick, it's slower than every western MBT.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Did you know CV90 is now available in 50mm flavour?
        Is the 50mm two or three rounds per clip? Don't tell me they load each 50mm round individually

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah that's it spot on then we rolled off a bridge because our situational awareness is so bad...wait, my bad that's the bradley

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Accidents happen when sleep-deprived in war, which is something you treehugging yuros will never understand

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >sleep-deprived in war
              It was in training and it was decided the Bradleys optics were at fault. Its OK your education is to blame for your moronicness, you are but a chubby American.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >N-no I will not provide a s-source!!! You j-just have to believe m-me ok?!?!!?!
                It's all so tiresome on nu-/k/. This shit wouldn't have been happening in 2010

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >spergs about source
                You claimed it was in a war, accepting you had some idea of what I was talking about when in reality you haven't a clue because it was in training so why would you need a source for something you already thought you knew?
                American education at its finest.
                >B-b-back in my day...
                Stfu fatty

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It did happen during the push to Baghdad in 2003. Never happened in training like you said hence your lack of source.
                >Stfu fatty
                I'll be forever more ripped than you can imagine Sven. Try not to get killed in a Malmo no-go zone today

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Kek how wrong you are see

                >Not long after the decision was made to turn off lights and drive using optics, a Bradley crew flipped off a bridge they didn’t even know they were crossing, according to an investigation into the fatal mishap obtained by Army Times through the Freedom of Information Act.
                >Jenkins made a radio call to relay the problem, saying the optics inside their Bradley weren’t working.
                >The issue wasn’t unique to them. Before the fatal roll over, another Bradley crew, also experiencing troubles with their optics, accidentally drove into the woods. Multiple troops reported that their vehicle optics were “flaring out" and “fogging up,” or simply “going out," according to summaries of witness interviews.
                >Not being able to cross a bridge in 2019 with night optics

                I wasn't aware they fell off another bridge how fricking bad must the situational awareness be.
                >b-but it was Baghdad
                No it was in 2019 USA
                >3 Fort Stewart soldiers died when vehicle fell from bridge during training, general says
                https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/10/21/team-investigates-bradley-vehicle-rollover-that-led-to-3-training-deaths-at-fort-stewart/

                Now stfu you fat misinformed idiot

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Kekt and rekt

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Finally a source. I'll concede the point about training. Though it must be said that one (1) training accident does not make a vehicle useless. You would see the same in Sweden if your army actually trained instead of collecting handouts

                Kekt and rekt

                >Kekt
                Go back to your nafo discord newbie

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Not long after the decision was made to turn off lights and drive using optics, a Bradley crew flipped off a bridge they didn’t even know they were crossing, according to an investigation into the fatal mishap obtained by Army Times through the Freedom of Information Act.
                >Jenkins made a radio call to relay the problem, saying the optics inside their Bradley weren’t working.
                >The issue wasn’t unique to them. Before the fatal roll over, another Bradley crew, also experiencing troubles with their optics, accidentally drove into the woods. Multiple troops reported that their vehicle optics were “flaring out" and “fogging up,” or simply “going out," according to summaries of witness interviews.
                >Not being able to cross a bridge in 2019 with night optics

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      To simplify yes but turned upside down and loaded from below through 3 sliders for different ammo

      in case of ammo problems it can still be hand-fed through a panel in the top of the gun.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    CV90 SEXOOOOOO
    Sweden makes good shit

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >my atgm bait shitbox is better than your atgm bait shitbox
    girls pls

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I fricked a chick in the back of a cv90 one time. Its really roomy but the anti-slip mat on the floor really fricks up your knees. The fabric seats only works for reverse cowgirl, but its not perfect.
      This is the only way to rate these vehicles

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    stridsfordon deployed to Poltava...

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      VGH...

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        ivvagine... once avain figvting alonvside ovr cossack allies... vgh...

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    its the best selling western ifv of modern times. This thing is a bigger export sucess than anything else on the market since the german marder and in the cv90's case the exports have all been new producttion.

    Also has 7 current operators with another 3 on the way. Compare this with any of the other western ifv's which has at most 4 operators.
    Point is regardless of if you think its mediocre or not clearly the market has overwhelmingly chosen the cv90 over the other alternatives

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Mig-21 argument

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        except mig 21 was bought because it was the only thing the eastern block could get.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yea and the CV-90 is only bought by neighbors. No one outside of the very specific Northern European environment wants them. It’s a regional platform

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            It’s true
            Canda, the Uk, and Poland evaluated it at one time and all of them passed on it. The US was also looking at it for a now cancelled program.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >bigger export sucess than anything else on the market since the german marder
              Only 5 countries bought the Marder, two of them in tiny numbers (<50).
              The Mowag Piranha is probably the most successful Western IFV.

              >UK
              passed only because BAE was in their bad books, and may well end up buying CV90 or a derivative in future to replace Warrior
              >Canada
              was never going to buy many
              >US
              was never going to buy

              its the best selling western ifv of modern times. This thing is a bigger export sucess than anything else on the market since the german marder and in the cv90's case the exports have all been new producttion.

              Also has 7 current operators with another 3 on the way. Compare this with any of the other western ifv's which has at most 4 operators.
              Point is regardless of if you think its mediocre or not clearly the market has overwhelmingly chosen the cv90 over the other alternatives

              >has 7 current operators with another 3 on the way
              They're all Nordic-Baltic mini-states.
              It IS regional; most of them are on or very near to the Baltic Sea.

              >Compare this with any of the other western ifv's
              Most major nations buy their own IFVs, or sell to their particular client states (eg Arabs).

              I like CV90, don't get me wrong, and it seems to be successful, but it's not "best selling". Call me when a major army forgoes its own national manufacturer for the CV90.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >but it's not "best selling"
                In the export market it sure is. Disregarding sales to the nation that developed it (which will always put the US on top simply because they have the largest military) the cv90 has more sales than anything else western be it bradley, ascod, lynx etc

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Disregarding sales to the nation that developed it
                kek why would we disregard that? How many units exist is incredibly relevant

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                anon's right though, US and USSR designs will mog everyone else's otherwise

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That’s because the US mogs anyway.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >you have to cripple the US to make it fair
                you just love to see it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                For now, Italy should stop dragging their feet

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                how are Switzerland, slovakia and the czech republic "Nordic-Baltic mini-states"?

                >Disregarding sales to the nation that developed it
                kek why would we disregard that? How many units exist is incredibly relevant

                Because we are talking about exports? aka what the market is willing to buy/actually looking for.

                Not counting sweden since its the nation that developed it or estonia since they purchased 2nd hand from other users CV90 has 1052 units exported, for some perspective using the samee criteria (just exported units).

                CV90: 1052
                BMP-3: 945*
                ASCOD: 609
                Bradley: 521
                LYNX: 218
                PUMA: 0
                VBCI: 0
                Dardo: 0
                K-21: 0

                * BMP-3 caveat here is that some were inherited from the ussr so its not actually this much of an export sucess

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You are talking about exports. Number of total vehicles is more relevant than # of customers. Especially when the larger number also has the most capabilities

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Nta but what your saying is moronic.
                X nation develops Y produced 6000 sells 1000 keeps 5000.
                Z nation develops Q produces 6000 sells 5000 keeps 1000
                Z nations product is a much bigger success.
                >Has better capabilities
                Kekekek hi warriortard, no the Bradley is not more capable than the CV90 it's much much worse in every possible metric.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There aren’t 6000 CV90s tho. And yea the Bradley has capabilities the CV-90 doesn’t have. Such as the entire fleet has integrated ATGMs while only a small fraction of the already much less produced CV-90 has atgms. That’s a huge capability right there that Bradley mogs in. Modern variants have better armor protection with 30mm all around.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >And yea the Bradley has capabilities the CV-90 doesn’t have
                Correct. And if your doctrine requires you to have a mounted ATGM capability, the Bradley meets this better than a legacy Cv.
                If your doctrine requires you to have greater mobility in difficult terrain and a spicy HE round, the Cv meets this better than a Brad. "Best" comes down to what fullfils your requirements

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No there are 1280 total with 731 sold to customers who wanted that specific vehicle
                Bradley has 6780 total with 520 sold. 400 to Saudi Arabia that just wanted to buy into the US's country club. The 89 for Croatia and 32 for Lebanon aren't even new just old used Bradley's.

                >capability
                You can buy the CV90 with an ATGM just like you can choose the cannons calibre nations not choosing that moots your moronic point. Bradleys armor is dogshit and needs HUGE add on pieces to make it barely to standard.
                The CV90 is better protected, faster, lighter, more lethal, better optics, has a better capability, smaller profile and a better export success.
                Step outside of your echo chamber the Bradley is a pos.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Bradleys armor is dogshit and needs HUGE add on pieces to make it barely to standard
                Both Bradley and cv90 base models are 14.5 rated all around. Both are 30mm protected with add on armor.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Amazing the CV90 manages this while being 5 tons lighter and 20kmh faster. The Bradley is a piece of shit.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yea the integrated atgms add a ton of extra weight. Compare that to CV90 armed with 2 ATGMs and integrated launcher not the base model. It’s coming off as a bad faith argument

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Kek you think a dual atgm launcher and 7 TOWs weights 5 tons?? Get this man a hospital he's got a severe lack of reality lmao

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What does it weigh?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You made the claim "atgms add a ton of extra weight" you source it.
                I'll help you abit though a single tow weighs 18kgx10 =180kg a tow launcher weighs 100kgx2 = 200kg. Let's add in a fancy motor that makes it fold and a box for it to sit in do you really think that adds another 4600kg lmao.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                NTA but internal volume is much larger. That’s how the Bradley can carry so many extra TOWs

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Way more internal volume in the Bradley. Spacier for troops and able to carry a lot more ATGMs for the integrated launchers standard across the fleet

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                kek why did you imply the CV90 has the same amount of hulls as the Bradley?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Damn, i guess the bmp1 is the best ifv of all time then by leaps and bounds

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If the BMP1 had any relevant capabilities than yes it would have been. Unfortunately it’s slavshit

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Well I mean the BMP1 is credited with killing Bradley's so...

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                a bmp1 can destroy a cv90 too you know? i wouldnt want to try that if i was in a bmp1 but its totally possible.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                But it never has despite the CV90 seeing the same amount of combat as the Bradley. Both were in afghanistan

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The Bradley was in Iraq gulf war 91 for and Iraq 2003 for a short period until it was removed from theatre due to numerous incidents were it was blown to shit due to inadequate protection.

                [...]
                [...]
                [...]
                This is becoming an obsession

                Correct. You entering every IFV thread shilling the Bradley is an obsession, I could understand if you picked a decent IFV.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yea it dominated the gulf. It was smart to witch’s them out with MRAPs during the counterinsurgency too. Mine protected vehicles will always be better than IFVs for COIN

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >number built
                CV90-1280
                BFV-6785

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                if you bothered to read the criteria was exports only. 2nd that number is wrong im gonna guess by BFV you mean bradley? if so the US made 6230 units for itself and exported 521 meaning a total of 6751 were produced. Sweden made 569 Cv90's for itself and exported 1052 for a total of 1621 units produced.

                the point is though that the us could build literally anything and as long as they adopted it themselfes they would oputproduce anyone. that does not mean their equipment is automatically the best as

                https://i.imgur.com/TB23VR8.jpg

                Damn, i guess the bmp1 is the best ifv of all time then by leaps and bounds

                was pointing out

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes but the export criteria is yours and not as relevant as number of units produced.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >that does not mean their equipment is automatically the best as

                https://i.imgur.com/TB23VR8.jpg

                Damn, i guess the bmp1 is the best ifv of all time then by leaps and bounds was pointing out
                It doesn’t mean that but it doesn’t change the fact that neither vehicle being discussed is “better”. Both are good at what they were designed to do.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >may well end up buying CV90 or a derivative in future to replace Warrior
                Keep up. They already bought Boxer to fill that roll.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They might scrap for cv-90 tho

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Boxer, not CV90, dipshit

                Wheeled and tracked ifvs are different enough that one can't really replace the other.
                With wheels you get better on road speed and a larger operational radius. With tracks you get much better offroad mobility with the difference growing much faster depending on the terrain and some being completely of limits to wheels. Also tracks are mandatory once you go past a certain weight.

                >Wheeled and tracked ifvs are different enough that one can't really replace the other.
                I agree, but UK is in a shit position so it seems they had to make that choice

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Wheeled and tracked ifvs are different enough that one can't really replace the other.
                With wheels you get better on road speed and a larger operational radius. With tracks you get much better offroad mobility with the difference growing much faster depending on the terrain and some being completely of limits to wheels. Also tracks are mandatory once you go past a certain weight.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Ahh yes the Nordic countries that are Czechia and Slovakia.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It’s decent to good. Probably going to be outmatched by newer IFVs coming online

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I don’t like it because the entire fleet doesn’t have integrated atgms.

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Western IFVs of that generation are for the most part functionally identical. Autists will tell you about minor design details and how they totally change everything, they really don’t. As long as it has 2nd/3rd gen thermals and BMS integration, it performs quasi identically. It’s way more important how they are integrated into combined arms formations than how their gun performs at 2km vs RHA targets.
    The only downside of the CV90 is that it is not HK capable, but that is a rather new development in the IVF world.

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    /k/'s inability to understand how different national and doctrinal factors influence vehicle designs continue to baffle me.
    Im surprised the F-35 project didnt straight up make the place implode

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Elaborate

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Not him but the requirements for the CV90 was different from the requirements for the marder.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It’s ok. It has the 2nd largest vehicle fleet out of all western IFVs so that counts for something

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    APS seems better than ATGMs for an IFV imo, your dismounts can provide ATGM protection

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Both is better. Plus the dismounts can also carry an ATGM.
      >The US Army recently completed rigorous testing on the Iron Fist Active Protection System (APS) that showed significantly improved results over previous tests. The testing completed in October 2022 of the Iron Fist Light Decoupled (IFLD) system demonstrated improvements in both durability and system effectiveness, compared to the previous testing on the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle.
      >In 2016, the Army chose to test the Iron Fist Lightweight Decoupled System to protect its medium- and light-armored vehicles. Initial testing in 2018 was set to validate the vendor’s (General Dynamics and Elbit Systems, Inc.) performance claims. The US Congress provided additional funding in the fiscal year 2022, toward the goal of equipping an entire Army brigade of Bradley vehicles in 2025 with continued funding.
      https://defense-update.com/20230105_us-army-completes-successful-iron-fist-tests-series-on-bradley-armored-fighting-vehicles.html

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >warriortard has joined the chat
    And there it goes

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    in trials the cv90 has shown that it is actually very good and reliable.

    but all modern in service IFVs are good.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      No most are. The Bradley is terrible

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Even the most modern bradleys are Africa tier

        No there are 1280 total with 731 sold to customers who wanted that specific vehicle
        Bradley has 6780 total with 520 sold. 400 to Saudi Arabia that just wanted to buy into the US's country club. The 89 for Croatia and 32 for Lebanon aren't even new just old used Bradley's.

        >capability
        You can buy the CV90 with an ATGM just like you can choose the cannons calibre nations not choosing that moots your moronic point. Bradleys armor is dogshit and needs HUGE add on pieces to make it barely to standard.
        The CV90 is better protected, faster, lighter, more lethal, better optics, has a better capability, smaller profile and a better export success.
        Step outside of your echo chamber the Bradley is a pos.

        >Bradleys armor is dogshit and needs HUGE add on pieces to make it barely to standard
        Both Bradley and cv90 base models are 14.5 rated all around. Both are 30mm protected with add on armor.

        This is becoming an obsession

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Even the most modern bradleys are Africa tier

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Matsimus loves it and I'd say he knows a little bit more about armored vehicles than your average /k/-tard

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      That moron shills the warrior because he was a mechanic

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ok warriortard we heard you the first time now.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This homie does nothing but read off Wikipedia pages

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        He went to a CV-90 live demo and even got to fire some rounds. Other than that he isn’t an authority on anything.

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Alot more room in the Bradley for the same amount of protection all around. That’s important when you have an intergrated ATGM and value crew comfort

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Looks like there's more in the cv90. Also storing 10+ atgms in a badly armored vehicle seems like a recipe for disaster, are they stored in armored compartments? That top image doesn't even have 6 seats maybe you got confused and they compromise seats for storage.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The Bradley one is much larger and looks much larger in these pictures.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >isn’t the argument that the CV90s dismounts will just carry atgms? How is that different than atgms stored in the Bradley?

          So it compromises seats for storage.
          But the ATGMs aren't stored in armored boxes? It doesn't look bigger.

          So to sum up
          The Bradley has a huge profile, shit armor slow as frick can't carry much unless it gets rid of dismounts. That sounds terrible.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Yea the Bradley is noticebly bigger. Here’s the seats you’re hung up on. Why choose this hill to die on?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Thats not a CV90, anon.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              This is the CV-90

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That’s not the CV-90

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >isn’t the argument that the CV90s dismounts will just carry atgms? How is that different than atgms stored in the Bradley?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yea the m2 and m3 have a much larger internal compartment at the expense of being much taller.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This is an m3 for carrying 10 TOWs. This is what the m2 comparment looks like. It’s much roomier than the CV-90

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Sorry doesn't look roomier at all, just old and out dated like the inside of a soviet era mig... same colour too.
        But thanks for correcting the moron that thought it could carry 12 ATGMs plus 6 dismounts kek what a clown.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >needs a wide angle lense to make it look bigger
          kek

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That's not an M3 Bradley.
        M3 Bradley doesn't have two benches for seating on each side of the hull, only 1 bench the other is where the extra ATGMs are stored

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Other m2 layout

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Damn that looks comfy. The CV-90 looks so small in comparison

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Not as bad as soviet compartments but holy shit that’s miserable

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          That’s not a CV-90 moron

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        No shortage of space in the brad.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yep she’s designed to fight righ along with the infantry. From the perfect cannon for suppressing infantry, to the tank busting capability of the TOW, right down to the large amount of gear it can carry into a fight. That’s food, water, ammo, and supplies space

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/dCyWAPM.jpg

      Damn that looks comfy. The CV-90 looks so small in comparison

      the argument that the CV90 isnt comfortable or is too small is just moronic. the average person in my team in the back of the CV90 was 190cm and weighed around 100kg. no one complained and you who have never been in the back of one have no reason to either.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It started sometime around the latest Cv-contracts for Slovakia i think.
        Its like Warriortard, but somehow more moronic

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          That’s really cramped

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah its warrior tard alright. You can see here

          That’s really cramped

          You are the only poster who ever talks about warriortard.

          He posts twice after a comment he doesn't like or when he feels threatened. He's harmless to everyone but his own mind. Spare a thought for his family.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I don’t believe you

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Warriortard is mad he got BTFO in the falklands thread. He really hates how small of a conflict the falklands was and tried to shoehorn the opinion that it was /k/ino

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I immediately knew it was him once he started talking about armor protection ratings.

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Anyone who says "terrible" and "piece of shit" referring to any of the Western tracked IFVs currently in service is probably being disingenuous and arguing in bad faith

    Those words are for describing real pieces of shit like the BMD and BMP-2, not anything with thermals and cannon-resistant armour

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >IFV with a bore evacuator
    Is this some mobile gun system type of variant?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      RUAG 120mm compact tank gun
      >it's only a model

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The CV90 has plenty of room.

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Just pointing out that no CV-90s were lost in the gulf war or the 2003 war in iraq

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The same can’t be said for the Bradley. It really is a deathtrap piece of shit

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      didnt one blow up in afghanistan

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Just pointing out that no CV-90s were lost in the gulf war or the 2003 war in iraq

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Kek that warrior got wrecked

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            not a Warrior, a Cv9030 Mk1 that hit a 25kg IED under the left front roadwheel

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              how do they know how much a ied weighed?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Bomb techs look at crater size, damage to vehicle, blast-power from how far shit has flown etc. Its still an estimate because its an IED and everyone will be different, but still

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                how do they know how much a ied weighed?

                And its not the actual weight of the IED, but the equivalent weight in TNT that one uses to estimate the blast

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                And its not the actual weight of the IED, but the equivalent weight in TNT that one uses to estimate the blast

                thanks for a real answer. i honestly didnt know how they did that.

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    CV90 was behind the Bradley for ~10 years. It sold well because it was cheap in a time after the Cold war when budgets were going down.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Looks to me like the CV90 is superior in every way why would you post this self own?
      Why is some freak show having a meltdown in the CV90 thread about the Brapley no one cares, it's trash.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >moronic ESL screeching because he can't read
        grim

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >looks to me like
        kek

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >ESL confused by basic English phrases
          https://ludwig.guru/s/it+looks+to+me+like

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Paint scheme looks really gay. Why do manufacturers across the west love this tacky pattern

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Because it works really well in any kind of distance and it's easy to paint for a different occasion, just pick one color and change that, for example the light green to white for winter.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            What about this type of textured pattern

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >APS
              >that optics suite
              >that 50mm cannon
              These things are going to be great paired with brads

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They aren't pairing, they're replacing. That is the GDLS Griffin 3, competing for the Bradley replacement program (OMFV).

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They are the replacement but it’s incredibly naive for you to think the Bradley won’t also stay in service. They absolutely will and that’s why they have upgrades scheduled out to 2028

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I never implied the Bradley wouldn't continue being used. Do you honestly think they can replace a vehicle, that has hundreds of units in service, overnight? No. Don't be silly.
                A fleet of vehicles that large can take several years to be replaced.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There are thousands of bradleys in service

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Correct.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              It’s also got a multi mission launcher for atgms and drones

  27. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    So in summary
    >Current CV90
    >Better ATGM
    >Better Protection
    >Better APS
    >Better Optics
    >Has a Drone
    >Better Cannon
    >Better Ammunition
    >Faster
    >Looks the best
    >Manouverable af
    >Multiple choice variants depending on user
    Wow no wonder its the best IFV right now and has been for some time.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >ATGMs not standard
      >none equipped with APS compared to Bradley’s having a full regiment by 2025
      >similar armor
      >worse gun
      It’s easy to see why you’re the first person in history to call the CV-90 the best ifv

  28. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Probably the best IFV available currently with tons of customizability to make it fit for your doctrine.
    The most notable thing about in comparison to other ifvs is it's mobility, video related. You'll also see a bradley get completely mogged in the snow.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >replies to OP
      >post count remains the same
      >Bradley mogged

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        They're not standard because Nordics doctrine was always dismounted atgms because of the limited terrain.
        Now that exports have expanded outside it's original design environment, the option exists.

        This is me. That is as far along the thread I got before replying and going back to answer the op before continuing on, still catching up.
        Though I gotta say I love your attentiveness.

  29. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Here it killing snipers in iraq. Supporting troops like it was designed to do

    [Open]
    Here it is lighting up insurgents with 7.62

    [Open]
    Here it is destroying enemies hidden in a building using its TOW.

    [Open]

    There’s plenty more just like those

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It’s awesome that these videos exist. To see the IFV concept come to life by watching the Bradley support it’s own infantry is awesome

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >look it can blow up someone's living room
      yeah sure, but even a BMP-1 can do all that

  30. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    CV90 also sounds like pure sex.

  31. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Another IFV thread ends in warriortard sperging about the Bradley
    I wish this guy would just get banned already

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You are the only poster who ever talks about warriortard.

  32. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It’s pretty good. Better situational awareness than the warrior that’s for sure. Driver of a warrior collided with another soldier and killed him instantly. The accident rate seems to be super high on warrior for some reason despite not many units built.
    > A 26-YEAR-OLD British soldier has died during a routing training exercise after a collision involving a Warrior Armoured Vehicle on Salisbury Plain.
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1629480/british-army-soldier-dies-salisbury-plain-warrior-armoured-vehicle-training-exercise?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The warrior is a deathtrap
      > Two thirds of the army's Warrior armoured vehicles in Afghanistan still have not had crucial safety improvements made to them 18 months after six British soldiers were killed when theirs was turned into a fireball by a huge bomb
      https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/17/army-warriors-afghanistan-still-not-upgraded

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Wait. I could have sworn that the warrior has never been destroyed. That’s what warriortard is always claiming

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >By a HUGE bomb
        Is that what it takes to defeat the warrior? I'm aware only 5 have been destroyed 2 by A10 1 by Challenger 2. Amazing only 2 have been destroyed to enemy fire. Makes you appreciate how tough they are, maybe not as lethal as the CV90 but definitely protected well.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Huge bombs. The exact same things that kill Bradley

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Not many have been deployed so those are pretty bad numbers

            You have been called out for double posting wtf is wrong with you are you actually mentally ill? Or seriously autistic?
            And no Bradley's got fricked by basic RPG were the Warrior tanks them for fun.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Not many have been deployed so those are pretty bad numbers

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/g21dC0h.jpg

      The warrior is a deathtrap
      > Two thirds of the army's Warrior armoured vehicles in Afghanistan still have not had crucial safety improvements made to them 18 months after six British soldiers were killed when theirs was turned into a fireball by a huge bomb
      https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/17/army-warriors-afghanistan-still-not-upgraded

      I was aware of the other obvious flaws of the warrior like the clip feed system and unstabilized gun but I hadn’t realized the armor protection had the same problems the Bradley had.

  33. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    When are these going to be delivered to Ukraine? Any updates on training? Saw a clip yesterday of the ukies training on the Bradley.

  34. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    look I just think its 40mm autocannon is neat

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      does it hurt if you get hit by that

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Not if you've stretched enough.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >40mm
      It’s 54mm, fricking Burger can’t read a metric tape.

  35. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    kek burgers can't handle not having the best toys and screeches like autistic 3 year olds
    many such cases

  36. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I’ve always been fascinated with the CV90. It just looks like a man-sized, heavy-hitting, big tread real protection IFV, almost (or in reality) a light tank. The image of an army’s BIG TRUCK tickles me is all.

    So what’s the latest package of these things?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The Mk4. Here's the promo video.

  37. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >light tank with an 120mm cannon
    Das it meng.

  38. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's the least modern of the modern IFVs. Better than old cold warriors like the Bradley, worse than newer things like the Griffin and Lynx

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >My private venture be all-end all is way better then a proven platform which have been in use for +30 years.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Hard to say about the griffin since it's still in development but the Mk. 4 is practically an all new vehicle that is on par with the Lynx in terms of modernity.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

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