So it's job is to do what IFVs do, but it doesn't carry infantry and instead is a different vehicle which requires a different supply chain? I'm agreeing with the other anon who said it's a solution looking for a problem unless the frogs don't have IFVs in which case, it's not a bad idea except for the fact it's money not spent on IFVs.
The right tool for the right job.
The US tries to use the Bradley for both jobs, how's that work?
Other countries split the job.
They have IFVs, the VBCI.
The Bradley scout version is used in US Army Heavy brigades, or whatever they call those.
The Stryker is used in the Stryker brigades' Cavalry squadrons.
he Marines use the LAV 25 in their units
https://i.imgur.com/1pGq5ID.jpg
?
Having a common vehicle variant helps with standardization.
BTW, IMO the Stryker is a POS and a mistake. All of those should be junked and replaced with a heavy brigade model. IMO all light infantry divisions (including airborne) should also have the equipment to go heavy, when the mission requires. I doubt the US Army would follow that advice, though.
Tell me what it does that an IFV doesn't do, anon. The Bradley demonstrated it did just a fine job in both roles during the Gulf War and round 2, and having a unified platform is easier logistically.
Other countries split the job.
France did just fine with the AMX-10RC and ERC-90 doing recon and fire support.
And now the Jaguar replaces them,
Stay mad.
France does it's own thing too much to be considered part of the West, in some respects, since when people say West they really mean the US and everyone who follows it's lead on the strong majority of things, which is why Japan and South Korea tend to get lumped in despite clearly being an Eastern nation.
Germany is on prohibition after being morons about Russia for the past decade, but maybe we'll let off for good behavior if they've learned their lesson.
France does _a lot_ of deployments in North West Africa and the military has become highly specialised for this: except for the Leclerc tank it is now all wheeled which allows for rapid deployment and high speed operations as Operation Serval exemplified, they are also very good at company-sized taskforces too
But I do wonder if that makes them too specialised, what would they do in rough terrain where wheels would get bogged?
Ugely
No it's cool
>where do you work out?
>the library
It’s a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. I’m most excited for the Ajax. shaping up to be the standard in armoured fighting vehicles
What the frick are you talking about
BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP
>It’s a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
You aren't familiar with light armor recon and infantry fire support?
Drones moron
So it's job is to do what IFVs do, but it doesn't carry infantry and instead is a different vehicle which requires a different supply chain? I'm agreeing with the other anon who said it's a solution looking for a problem unless the frogs don't have IFVs in which case, it's not a bad idea except for the fact it's money not spent on IFVs.
The right tool for the right job.
The US tries to use the Bradley for both jobs, how's that work?
Other countries split the job.
They have IFVs, the VBCI.
?
The Bradley scout version is used in US Army Heavy brigades, or whatever they call those.
The Stryker is used in the Stryker brigades' Cavalry squadrons.
he Marines use the LAV 25 in their units
Having a common vehicle variant helps with standardization.
BTW, IMO the Stryker is a POS and a mistake. All of those should be junked and replaced with a heavy brigade model. IMO all light infantry divisions (including airborne) should also have the equipment to go heavy, when the mission requires. I doubt the US Army would follow that advice, though.
>heavy
>and tracked
so hard to deploy, slow, needing contstant maintenance and fuel
these are light, quickly deployed, and speedy
>everything should be heavy
wut
the IFVs job is not recon
Tell me what it does that an IFV doesn't do, anon. The Bradley demonstrated it did just a fine job in both roles during the Gulf War and round 2, and having a unified platform is easier logistically.
Other countries split the job.
France did just fine with the AMX-10RC and ERC-90 doing recon and fire support.
And now the Jaguar replaces them,
Stay mad.
The most obvious warriortard bait post in the history of bait posts
Yes, infantry love to spend hours in a human paint shaker vibrator and go deaf!
It's looks like if you modernised the turret of a centurion and put it on a Ratel.
It's brother the VBMR Griffon, it replaces the VAB for APC purposes
I think the Griffon and Jaguar share a common chassis and a lot of parts?
40mm cannon sounds interesting. 2 ATGM, seems familiar. Crew of 3, but no infantry, so not an IFV?
So, when do the French sell it to Russia and China?
Not an IFV.
Cavalry, all the ISTAR jobs, and fire support for these
Why doesn't the West build 6x6s like France does?
Isn't France part of the West?
France does it's own thing too much to be considered part of the West, in some respects, since when people say West they really mean the US and everyone who follows it's lead on the strong majority of things, which is why Japan and South Korea tend to get lumped in despite clearly being an Eastern nation.
Fair, we should probably just say the Anglosphere+Germany.
Germany is on prohibition after being morons about Russia for the past decade, but maybe we'll let off for good behavior if they've learned their lesson.
France does _a lot_ of deployments in North West Africa and the military has become highly specialised for this: except for the Leclerc tank it is now all wheeled which allows for rapid deployment and high speed operations as Operation Serval exemplified, they are also very good at company-sized taskforces too
But I do wonder if that makes them too specialised, what would they do in rough terrain where wheels would get bogged?