The Bradley will never be replaced. 80% of a vehicles effectiveness determines on if it looks cool. Skilled crew members will volunteer for a vehicle that looks cool. Lynx looks gay
>APS >programmable airburst rounds >modular >optionally unmanned >rubber track >silent hybrid engine
not saying it has to be the Lynx, but the OMFV candidates are clearly much better than the Bradley
so? Lynx in its APC configuration would be a good replacement for the M113, OMFV configuration would be good to replace the Bradley
parts commonality would improve logistics and probably make the vehicle cheaper
It’s almost a guarantee that OMFV will be the redback
says who? Hanwha hasn't even presented the OMFV Redback yet
It’s basically a sure thing. Oshkosh and hanwah are working together to produce the vehicles in the US. Redback is the new standard. Just ask Australia, Norway, and Poland
>Lynx
is a stripped down export chassis, Rheinmetall themselves said that the uprated models wouldn't differ much from other IFVs in terms of cost and complexity
>parts commonality would improve logistics and probably make the vehicle cheaper
except you're thinking in terms of Lynx commonality, when you should also be thinking US-wide commonality
if they went with Lynx, American manufacturers would have to adopt German parts, and unless GDLS is really shit out of ideas and have to do the expensive R&D work from scratch, they'd be better off iterating from what's already designed and built in the USA
as it stands, AMPV now has commonality with Bradley IFVs and that will be significant savings. OMFV can be the start of a new family. It's not likely that the US Army absolutely NEEDS their back-end APCs to have all the gubbins of the future OMFV chassis - this is one of the big criticisms of all those Boxer variants, some of which are clearly extraneous
It's a bit moronic tbh. It offers commonality with the Bradley for replacement parts, but the Bradley is being replaced. Should probably have just gone with the Ares, that way we would have common parts for MPF (Griffin II) and probably OMFV (Which is probably going to be Griffin III, regardless of what this autist posts)
The Bradley is being replaced but it isn’t going away. We have 8,000 of these things and there’s still a use for an armored box with a chaingun and ATGMs
Vehicles don't stay functional by default, they need to be maintained. Brads are going to the boneyard and then are going to rot out of service, same as 15,000 M60s before them
The US maintains its bone yards. Each vehicle will be drained off all fluids and prepared for the yard. If the need arises they would be restored in short order
>Repurposing existing chassis, existing spares, existing maintainers, existing supply lines = BAD >Move entire vehicle fleet and support infrastructure into unproven new model simultaneously, and trash all replaced vehicles = GOOD
Looks like you gobbled a whole bucketful
Existing maintainers cycle out after like 4 years and new ones need to be trained; there are no existing supply lines to where ever the next conflict is going to take place; that's not how any of this works. Are you moronic?
1 year ago
Anonymous
>what is institutional knowledge >what is parts manufacturing and supply chain management
[...]
Past that, hardware dedicated supply lines aren't a thing; it's a description of space on cargo ships and trucks
>but the Bradley is being replaced
gee it's almost as if there'll be a lot of chassis and spares that can be repurposed in future, not to mention existing institutional know-how up and down the logistics chain how precisley to manage the AMPV
He was referring to the Stryker you window licking nig nog. The Stryker was based on the LAV III, which is a Canadian produced and licensed version of of the Swiss made Piranha I.
>He was referring to the Stryker you window licking nig nog
so was that anon >you window licking nig nog
Stryker DVH is miles away from LAV III and even further removed from Piranha. In fact now it is Piranha V which is based off Stryker.
>Repurposing existing chassis, existing spares, existing maintainers, existing supply lines = BAD >Move entire vehicle fleet and support infrastructure into unproven new model simultaneously, and trash all replaced vehicles = GOOD
This is questionable at best
[...]
Existing maintainers cycle out after like 4 years and new ones need to be trained; there are no existing supply lines to where ever the next conflict is going to take place; that's not how any of this works. Are you moronic?
Past that, hardware dedicated supply lines aren't a thing; it's a description of space on cargo ships and trucks
As you said, it's a replacement for the m113. It's a box on tracks that's supposed to dump troops and ammo from one place to the other, and hopefully survive small arms and light explosives.
If it does that somewhat better than the m113, it's a success. Not necessarily based or cringe, just a neutral update to replace aging equipment. It's not gonna make or break any conflict, but it's nice to have something a bit newer.
You know what would be really cool. If they took the AMPV and added like a turret with a big gun maybe a 30mm canon. Yeah that would be sick, you know kind of like the Stryker dragoon but with more armor!
>Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
4,000 have been produced and it’s not a ripoff because the US pays licensing fees. To speak on your other points it’s not weak and and it’s speed is sufficient. >wasn’t very notable in its time
kek this is delicious cope. It was extremely successful in its time. Wracked up a ridiculous amount of enemy armor kills, more so than any infantry fighting vehicle ever produced. That’s something of note that your cope doesn’t protect against
Find me a single other IFV with comparable tank kills to its name
>Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
4,000 have been produced and it’s not a ripoff because the US pays licensing fees. To speak on your other points it’s not weak and and it’s speed is sufficient. >wasn’t very notable in its time
kek this is delicious cope. It was extremely successful in its time. Wracked up a ridiculous amount of enemy armor kills, more so than any infantry fighting vehicle ever produced. That’s something of note that your cope doesn’t protect against
It's Cringe you just same gayged so hard jn such a short period of time to get your point across. What a turbo autist.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Wut?
1 year ago
Anonymous
Cope
1 year ago
Anonymous
Well his point got across. Bradley did very well in its time.
Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
[...]
Bradley is outdated as frick, weak, slow and fat. It wasn't very notable in it's time at all.
>Stryker rip off
4000 for one user...it's shit no one wants it. Its weak as frick its base armor is rated for 7.62ap. >Bradley
Nope, if a BMP1/2 or any other IFV with an atgm replaced the Bradley in GW1 the result would be the same if not better. I'm sorry you had to find out like this, your fat top heavy weak ass IFV is dog shit.
>if a BMP1/2 or any other IFV with an atgm replaced the Bradley in GW1 the result would be the same if not better. >if
Too bad for you it was the Bradley
1 year ago
Anonymous
Thanks for conceding there isn't anything impressive about it at all and the job could have been done by literally any other vehicle with an atgm, even an unarmoured jeep with a kornet.
1 year ago
Anonymous
And yet 30 years later here we are. ATGMs are mounted on plenty of IFVs and yet none of them have wracked up armor kills like the brad. Even to this day it’s living rent free inside of your head.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Goes around in circles with his own argument
What medication are you on for the autism?
1 year ago
Anonymous
You’re the one that keeps copeing about “if things were different the Bradley wouldn’t be that good”. Things weren’t different though
1 year ago
Anonymous
Yeh, nah c**t your just moronic and your pride is hurt. Sorry for upsetting your moronic view on the Bradley, its OK though they say never meet your hero's...
1 year ago
Anonymous
>c**t
kek it’s warriortard. I’m sorry that you’ve had to endure decades of shame for the warrior.
1 year ago
Anonymous
https://i.imgur.com/JX0ycUr.jpg
Wut?
If you gave the capabilities of the Bradley to a different vehicle that vehicle would have been just as successful as the Bradley!
kek I hope your doing this for free
Cope
Well his point got across. Bradley did very well in its time. [...]
BTFO
Shamefull display of samegayging his own argument, poster count stayed the same the only thing that changed is the WiFi to mobile date to laptop.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Leave me out of your “who’s dick is smaller” contest
1 year ago
Anonymous
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
Shamefull display of samegayging his own argument, poster count stayed the same the only thing that changed is the WiFi to mobile date to laptop.
Look warriortard, I know you samegay, but you don't need to samegay every thread.
If you gave the capabilities of the Bradley to a different vehicle that vehicle would have been just as successful as the Bradley!
kek I hope your doing this for free
1 year ago
Anonymous
>muh Brad capabilities >a tow
Wow very impressive.
It’s based off the Pirhana. So is the LAV series that’s in use with multiple countries. Sorry you had to find out like this
1 year ago
Anonymous
So what your saying is that the stryker is based of the Pirhana that is a Swiss vehicle? Just like I said earlier here
Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
[...]
Bradley is outdated as frick, weak, slow and fat. It wasn't very notable in it's time at all.
interesting, do you usually have trouble maintaining a conversation?
1 year ago
Anonymous
I conceded it was a Swiss design here
>Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
4,000 have been produced and it’s not a ripoff because the US pays licensing fees. To speak on your other points it’s not weak and and it’s speed is sufficient. >wasn’t very notable in its time
kek this is delicious cope. It was extremely successful in its time. Wracked up a ridiculous amount of enemy armor kills, more so than any infantry fighting vehicle ever produced. That’s something of note that your cope doesn’t protect against
when I said the us still pays licensing fees for every unit they produce. I’m sorry you couldn’t keep up
He was referring to the Stryker you window licking nig nog. The Stryker was based on the LAV III, which is a Canadian produced and licensed version of of the Swiss made Piranha I.
The AMPV unnecessarily pisses me off. It is a mildly upgraded Bradley chassis 40 years after the Brad was introduced. When I was first briefed on getting these we were told it would be a completely new "future-proof" design etc etc. Yet it's the same 40 year old suspension. At least give it rubber tracks or something. It is a hell of a lot better than an M113, but bottom line it's still a modernized Bradley without a turret. That's a concept we could have made 40 years ago and be on to an actual new iteration of both an IVF (OMPF) and an APC. Instead we will have a new IVF...maybe...and an APC that's basically a legacy design with some software updates.
I hope I'm wrong because I haven't messed with them in person, but it still makes me mad.
should use Lynx in its APC variant as M113 replacement and Lynx OMFV in as M2 Bradley replacement
The Bradley will never be replaced. 80% of a vehicles effectiveness determines on if it looks cool. Skilled crew members will volunteer for a vehicle that looks cool. Lynx looks gay
ok boomer
I notice that you lacked an argument in your response. Go ahead, post the triangular barrel shroud on the ifv variant
>APS
>programmable airburst rounds
>modular
>optionally unmanned
>rubber track
>silent hybrid engine
not saying it has to be the Lynx, but the OMFV candidates are clearly much better than the Bradley
>doesn’t post a picture
They look gay as frick. None of that stuff actually matters
cope
the basic b***h Lynx is an export model, idiot
so? Lynx in its APC configuration would be a good replacement for the M113, OMFV configuration would be good to replace the Bradley
parts commonality would improve logistics and probably make the vehicle cheaper
says who? Hanwha hasn't even presented the OMFV Redback yet
It’s basically a sure thing. Oshkosh and hanwah are working together to produce the vehicles in the US. Redback is the new standard. Just ask Australia, Norway, and Poland
Oshkosh isn't winning OMFV.
Explain this picture to me as if I think the warrior was a good ifv
Oshkosh-Point Blank-Rheinmetall-GD-BAE OMFV proposals, left to right
Why are some colder
>Australia
Lynx
>Norway
CV90
>Poland
Might buy the hull
>Lynx
is a stripped down export chassis, Rheinmetall themselves said that the uprated models wouldn't differ much from other IFVs in terms of cost and complexity
>parts commonality would improve logistics and probably make the vehicle cheaper
except you're thinking in terms of Lynx commonality, when you should also be thinking US-wide commonality
if they went with Lynx, American manufacturers would have to adopt German parts, and unless GDLS is really shit out of ideas and have to do the expensive R&D work from scratch, they'd be better off iterating from what's already designed and built in the USA
as it stands, AMPV now has commonality with Bradley IFVs and that will be significant savings. OMFV can be the start of a new family. It's not likely that the US Army absolutely NEEDS their back-end APCs to have all the gubbins of the future OMFV chassis - this is one of the big criticisms of all those Boxer variants, some of which are clearly extraneous
Agreed. And low rate initial production on the ampv is 450 vehicles. The US needs a lot of hulls and neither Germany nor South Korea can provide them
It’s almost a guarantee that OMFV will be the redback
It's a bit moronic tbh. It offers commonality with the Bradley for replacement parts, but the Bradley is being replaced. Should probably have just gone with the Ares, that way we would have common parts for MPF (Griffin II) and probably OMFV (Which is probably going to be Griffin III, regardless of what this autist posts)
The Bradley is being replaced but it isn’t going away. We have 8,000 of these things and there’s still a use for an armored box with a chaingun and ATGMs
Vehicles don't stay functional by default, they need to be maintained. Brads are going to the boneyard and then are going to rot out of service, same as 15,000 M60s before them
The US maintains its bone yards. Each vehicle will be drained off all fluids and prepared for the yard. If the need arises they would be restored in short order
This is questionable at best
Existing maintainers cycle out after like 4 years and new ones need to be trained; there are no existing supply lines to where ever the next conflict is going to take place; that's not how any of this works. Are you moronic?
>what is institutional knowledge
>what is parts manufacturing and supply chain management
I was referring to manufacturing
>but the Bradley is being replaced
gee it's almost as if there'll be a lot of chassis and spares that can be repurposed in future, not to mention existing institutional know-how up and down the logistics chain how precisley to manage the AMPV
>He was referring to the Stryker you window licking nig nog
so was that anon
>you window licking nig nog
Stryker DVH is miles away from LAV III and even further removed from Piranha. In fact now it is Piranha V which is based off Stryker.
>Make it so you need to train maintainers on two chassis, establish supply lines for two sets of parts unnecessarily
Did you eat paste in school?
>Repurposing existing chassis, existing spares, existing maintainers, existing supply lines = BAD
>Move entire vehicle fleet and support infrastructure into unproven new model simultaneously, and trash all replaced vehicles = GOOD
Looks like you gobbled a whole bucketful
Past that, hardware dedicated supply lines aren't a thing; it's a description of space on cargo ships and trucks
As you said, it's a replacement for the m113. It's a box on tracks that's supposed to dump troops and ammo from one place to the other, and hopefully survive small arms and light explosives.
If it does that somewhat better than the m113, it's a success. Not necessarily based or cringe, just a neutral update to replace aging equipment. It's not gonna make or break any conflict, but it's nice to have something a bit newer.
You know what would be really cool. If they took the AMPV and added like a turret with a big gun maybe a 30mm canon. Yeah that would be sick, you know kind of like the Stryker dragoon but with more armor!
I love this unmanned turret. Throw on a javelin and you have your Bradley replacement
Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
Bradley is outdated as frick, weak, slow and fat. It wasn't very notable in it's time at all.
>Weak armor, also no one uses these because they are shit redesign ripped from the Swiss.
4,000 have been produced and it’s not a ripoff because the US pays licensing fees. To speak on your other points it’s not weak and and it’s speed is sufficient.
>wasn’t very notable in its time
kek this is delicious cope. It was extremely successful in its time. Wracked up a ridiculous amount of enemy armor kills, more so than any infantry fighting vehicle ever produced. That’s something of note that your cope doesn’t protect against
Find me one instance of a Bradley killing a tank. You’ve been fed propaganda
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1991/03/15/half-tank-half-taxi-bradley-proves-worth-in-battle/73f5d131-026e-486b-a988-319831dcb226/
Find me a single other IFV with comparable tank kills to its name
It's Cringe you just same gayged so hard jn such a short period of time to get your point across. What a turbo autist.
Wut?
Cope
Well his point got across. Bradley did very well in its time.
BTFO
>Stryker rip off
4000 for one user...it's shit no one wants it. Its weak as frick its base armor is rated for 7.62ap.
>Bradley
Nope, if a BMP1/2 or any other IFV with an atgm replaced the Bradley in GW1 the result would be the same if not better. I'm sorry you had to find out like this, your fat top heavy weak ass IFV is dog shit.
>if a BMP1/2 or any other IFV with an atgm replaced the Bradley in GW1 the result would be the same if not better.
>if
Too bad for you it was the Bradley
Thanks for conceding there isn't anything impressive about it at all and the job could have been done by literally any other vehicle with an atgm, even an unarmoured jeep with a kornet.
And yet 30 years later here we are. ATGMs are mounted on plenty of IFVs and yet none of them have wracked up armor kills like the brad. Even to this day it’s living rent free inside of your head.
>Goes around in circles with his own argument
What medication are you on for the autism?
You’re the one that keeps copeing about “if things were different the Bradley wouldn’t be that good”. Things weren’t different though
Yeh, nah c**t your just moronic and your pride is hurt. Sorry for upsetting your moronic view on the Bradley, its OK though they say never meet your hero's...
>c**t
kek it’s warriortard. I’m sorry that you’ve had to endure decades of shame for the warrior.
Shamefull display of samegayging his own argument, poster count stayed the same the only thing that changed is the WiFi to mobile date to laptop.
Leave me out of your “who’s dick is smaller” contest
Look warriortard, I know you samegay, but you don't need to samegay every thread.
If you gave the capabilities of the Bradley to a different vehicle that vehicle would have been just as successful as the Bradley!
kek I hope your doing this for free
>muh Brad capabilities
>a tow
Wow very impressive.
It’s based off the Pirhana. So is the LAV series that’s in use with multiple countries. Sorry you had to find out like this
So what your saying is that the stryker is based of the Pirhana that is a Swiss vehicle? Just like I said earlier here
interesting, do you usually have trouble maintaining a conversation?
I conceded it was a Swiss design here
when I said the us still pays licensing fees for every unit they produce. I’m sorry you couldn’t keep up
>if reality were different my argument would be correct
This has to be a Russian
>BMP1/2 or any other IFV with an atgm replaced the Bradley in GW1
lol
lmao even
definitely vatnik/turdworlder
He was referring to the Stryker you window licking nig nog. The Stryker was based on the LAV III, which is a Canadian produced and licensed version of of the Swiss made Piranha I.
Shut the frick up Burton, There's a reason you aren't in charge of procurement
Shit maybe they could name it after a previously serving general like Omar Bradley or something as well.
The AMPV unnecessarily pisses me off. It is a mildly upgraded Bradley chassis 40 years after the Brad was introduced. When I was first briefed on getting these we were told it would be a completely new "future-proof" design etc etc. Yet it's the same 40 year old suspension. At least give it rubber tracks or something. It is a hell of a lot better than an M113, but bottom line it's still a modernized Bradley without a turret. That's a concept we could have made 40 years ago and be on to an actual new iteration of both an IVF (OMPF) and an APC. Instead we will have a new IVF...maybe...and an APC that's basically a legacy design with some software updates.
I hope I'm wrong because I haven't messed with them in person, but it still makes me mad.
looks like they opted not to make AMPV the future programme after all
it's basically quality-of-life improvements over the M113 using an existing chassis to minimise costs and maximise commonality moving forward
nothing wrong with that for your second-line APC, imho
Bradleys are cool but only on green and without that disgusting ERA and additional armor addons
National embarrassment