Difference between IFV and APC

[Tarek Morgen]

I have a small problem telling both apart, so I though I might simply ask at a place where people do know about these things.

As far as I understood an APC role is only to transport troops from place A to B, and while doing that, to offer some protection.

An IFV would actually follow the troop into the combat after they dismount.#

Right so far?

So where is the line drawn between the two categories? Sometimes it is rather easy, so I am pretty sure for example that the Bradly is an IFV and the Fuchs an APC.

But when you look at the new German/Dutch Boxer for example I am not sure where to put it. ARticles often describe it as IFV, but the name itself (Gepanzertes Transport Kraftfahrzeug) sounds like an APC. And it seems a bit too strongly armed for a simple transport role.

Or would it be possible that the lack of frontlines in todays conflict render the distinction obsolete anyway since you have to expect all of your Vehicles used to mount infrantry to come under attack? I.e. that all APCs have slowly to become IFV to adap to the new situation? Or is my understanding of the concepts completly wrong?

[TopHatter]

As far as I understood an APC role is only to transport troops from place A to B, and while doing that, to offer some protection.

An IFV would actually follow the troop into the combat after they dismount.#

Right so far?

Basically yes. An APC is a essentially a battlefield taxi that is incapable of supporting the troops contained within.

They typically mount a single heavy or light machine gun, which while useful, is not really support in the sense of an ATGM launcher or autocannon.

(In the case of MOUT, all of the above basically goes out the window...like every other rule of "conventional" warfare)

So where is the line drawn between the two categories? Sometimes it is rather easy...

But when you look at the new German/Dutch Boxer for example I am not sure where to put it. ARticles often describe it as IFV, but the name itself (Gepanzertes Transport Kraftfahrzeug) sounds like an APC. And it seems a bit too strongly armed for a simple transport role.

That's the military and defense industry for you; always blurring the lines between neatly-defined categories

I think you're right, in some cases APC's are evolving into IFV's because they can't simply be a battle taxi that takes off after discharging it's human cargo.

[Officer of Engineers]

APCs stay out of the fight. IFVs stay in the fight.

[bugs]

Or would it be possible that the lack of frontlines in todays conflict render the distinction obsolete anyway since you have to expect all of your Vehicles used to mount infrantry to come under attack?

If your APC comes under attack you have failed to secure your lines of comunication, no matter how much armor you put on it, is going to solve that.

[melvinchen]

In the past, when APCs were first introduced, they were lightly armoured and lightly armed, usually with only a 7.62mm GPMG or a 0.5-in on a cupola.

These days, the vehicles are much better armoured and usually armed with 20/25/30mm guns, some even with ATGMs...they play a heavier armour role, rather than just infantry transporters.

[Albany Rifles]

To add to what the Colonel said IFVs also are intended to keep up with the tanks they operate with so they have to have comparable maneuverability as the tank forces with which they work. Also the IFV is married to the infantry squad/section while the APC is a support vehicle used by support personnel in maneuver units (engineers, medics, mechanics, etc)

[S2]

Tarek Morgen Reply

"An IFV would actually follow the troop into the combat after they dismount.#"

A.R. would be the best expert I know of here but somebody had the grand idea in the late seventies that the Bradley was literally going ONTO the assault objective with the infantry (dismounts) remaining mounted and using their lil' port weapons to reek 6400mil havoc on the entrenched defenders.

A death sentence.

To my mind, there's therefore very little functional difference in protection. Mobility, yeah...considerable. Firepower, yeah...a lot. But the fundamental truth remains that what you can see and hit can return the dubious favor.

That said, the proliferation of vehicle-killing man-portable ATGW and unguided shaped-charge rockets makes assaulting the objective and dismounting on top of your enemy groovy if you can get there but a bloodbath enroute unless these weapons can be suppressed.

A-R-T-I-L-L-E-R-Y delivered HE, WP, and HC smoke are the mech grunts bestest buddies if that's the case and good luck to the manuever screw who hasn't wired that into his op.

[omon]

Israelis got cool ifv, it is called merkava:))

[bugs]

A-R-T-I-L-L-E-R-Y delivered HE, WP, and HC smoke are the mech grunts bestest buddies if that's the case and good luck to the manuever screw who hasn't wired that into his op.

There is no way you could beat the mobility, firepower, protection of a artillery ...T-R-U-C-K.

[Mihais]

Israelis got cool ifv, it is called merkava:))

To much mixture and you get something smelly.No APC,just an emergency compartment,with the disadvantage that you reduce your ammo load.A very LOCALIZED solution for a very specific battlefield environment.

[Tarek Morgen]

Thanks for the explanations. Does the US field any new APCs? The only one I can think of would be the old M113.

[ArmchairGeneral]

Stryker.

[Tarek Morgen]

I would have thought that this one would already be a IFV

[Albany Rifles]

I would have thought that this one would already be a IFV

Negative. The Stryker is a transport vehicle with a very effective weapons station but the squad is still supposed to dismount to fight.

The M113A3 is the latest variant but there are no others. There was going ot be an FCS APC but that went away.

BTW most M113A3s are rebuilds....i.e., the strip it down to its armor and then put rebuilt and/or new parts on it.

[Albany Rifles]

Firing Port Weapons

The entire idea scared the crap out of me. When I was a company commander I allowed them to come out of the arms room once a quarter to be cleaned.

M231 Firing Port Weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The idea of being in a company wedge formation in the attack with the comamnd group in th emiddle and M231s facing in toward me from flanking platoons was not something I found to be a comfort...particulalry since they were a burst on target weapon.