Qnext

Usage of the wheeled armored personnel carriers in the global military conflicts showed their vulnerability to portable anti-tank guided weapons. Armored personnel carriers with quiet weak armored protection become an easy target for any anti-tank missiles or for straight aimed artillery guns. Accordingly the new generation APC should have armor protection similar to the main battle tank, to increase it's survivability in the battlefield.



Details:
http://www.military-today.com/apc/btr_t.htm

zraver

Useless junk.

1- it's to slow to pace modern MBT's

2- it is not signifigantly better protected from ATGM's than a bradley or similiar IFV

3- no top protection

4- top only egress

5- heavy and fuel guzzeling meaning extra strain on hte logisitcs life line

6- does not carry carry natural sqauds but splits them up requiring more tranports (see logistics) or less infantrymen (less combat power)

The wayforward with IFV's is NERA and actice defensive systems.

glyn

gunnut

Interesting concept. But a tank chassis isn't the best platform to turn into an APC.

Rear-mounted engine reduces the usable space to carry men/cargo. You can't put a door on the front because that's facing the enemy. The only choice left is top, which is awkward.

Tank chassis is probably best used as a tank, then maybe a tank destoryer or AA gun/missile carriage.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

sappersgt

I had heard about the IDF converting surplus T-55s and T-62s to APCs for awhile. It's nice to finally see what and how they are doing it. The IDF has always seen a real need for armored vehicles to carry troops and supplies around the battlefield. Soft skinned trucks and vehicles are just too vulnerable

Back in the 80s there was a brisk market in buying up surplus and derelict halftracks for the same reason. An open topped but armored halftrack has much more survivability on the battlefield than a "deuce and a half". There are thousands still in use.

The last company manufacturing replacement rubber tracks (think of a long automobile tire w/o sidewalls) recently went out of business. Replacements are going to get expensive. When the cost gets high enough I guess some tire company will start making them again!

-{SpoonmaN}-

Yeah it only has space for 5 passengers, nothing particularly impressive. I don't know how the Russians do things at team level but I don't like the idea of having to break up squads to transport them when they're on the battlefield.

__________________
"I have this to say to the people of Australia: Kick me, I'm different."

-{SpoonmaN}-

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapo...NagmaShot.html

The Israelis also converted some of their aging Centurions into these babies, called the Nagmashot. As far as I know they're still used in combat support elements (I remember seeing footage of them in the last South Lebanon War).
I gotta admit I envy the Israelis, we barely have enough APCs for our Infantry and Armour, let alone for engineers and logistical units.

sappersgt

I think the main issue here is cost. They, both the Israelis and Russians, have lots of surplus T-55s around. They are cheaper to convert these old otherwise useless tanks to APCs than buy new ones. Sure they are not near as efficient as the newer model APCs but then how much is a new Bradley, $2 million?

pdf27

Technically, you're much better off with something like Puma - optimised as an APC, but with even better armour than a T-55.

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/puma_tracked/

Pioneer

I like the way you think my friend!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:biggrin :

Regards
Pioneer