Infantry Vehicles

[IKnowNothing]

Problem isn’t the gun, it is again a viable fire control for engagement of those.

I’ve been to a bunch of counter drone ex’s, and handheld weapons and conventional turrets aren’t very successful.

1. How much of that would be mitigated by the shot pattern of such a payload?
2. To broaden the effect of that pattern, could the gun be set such that each "shot" is actually a burst with a standard preset oscillation?

Way out of my lane but there seems like a big difference conceptually between trying to hit an aerial point target with a gun (even with airburst) at 1km vice throwing a cloud of #4 buck into the flightpath at 50-150m

 

[FJAG]

Granted I don’t agreed with the way most armies run their AD setups - but I don’t see why down here we can run a set in a platoon on the ADAM cell net and have them have Stingers and not then trust that any other Western militaries Army cannot have their Infantry or Armored units do the same. It shouldn’t be that hard then to add in gun systems for that same role on their core role vehicle as well.

I'm not saying that that we "can't" have things the same, what I'm saying is we're at point zero at the moment and the plan for the future is different which may result in it being different.

Artillery AD units could have a mix of area defence systems like SkyRanger and NASAMS and would have the acquisition radars that the Infantry Battalion AD elements would tie into for coordination.

GBAD looks at delivering two capabilities - an anticipated battery of high mobility VSHORD (roughly a 10 km system) and a battery of area C-RAM (a roughly 5 - 20 km system). These are weapon system agnostic and currently in the definition phase.

"I know something that creates that same effect at shorter ranges, without the need for complex range detection and fusing- but it can't be as simple as a shotgun can it?"

Given how well most members of the military shoot under stress, I’m not sure the Shotgun is a viable option, given it’s fairly limited range and rate of fire.

Old soldier anecdote. When we stood up Blowpipe batteries in the 1970s, each battery was issued shotguns and plenty of ammo to teach snap shooting skills to Blowpipe dets.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A gun system that can operate while moving is likely required to cover missile AD assets as they relocate and setup in a new area. A lot of the AD systems in Ukraine have been hit on the move or in the process of setup or takedown.

 

[KevinB]

A gun system that can operate while moving is likely required to cover missile AD assets as they relocate and setup in a new area. A lot of the AD systems in Ukraine have been hit on the move or in the process of setup or takedown.

That’s a SHORAD role, so something like MSHORAD works well for that.

 

[Underway]

Revisiting an old discussion on the start of the new year.

Given the combat situation in Ukraine, has the speculative/fantasy "heavy APC" concept finally met its end? You know the tank weight/armoured APC that can shrug off heavy weapons.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Revisiting an old discussion on the start of the new year.

Given the combat situation in Ukraine, has the speculative/fantasy "heavy APC" concept finally met its end? You know the tank weight/armoured APC that can shrug off heavy weapons.

If Afghanistan reminded us of anything, war is definitely a contact sport you can't add padding to soften the hit. The Taliban just made a bigger bomb.

In a LSCO scenario like Ukraine, even expensive heavy armour is getting picked off at a high ratw due to drones, artillery, and ATGMs. Survivability is a tertiary consideration after speed and lethality.

The Sherman tank experience comes to mind. That said, I don't think Canada is ready or mature enough to have that discussion about acceptable combat losses...

 

[Underway]

If Afghanistan reminded us of anything, war is definitely a contact sport you can't add padding to soften the hit. The Taliban just made a bigger bomb.

In a LSCO scenario like Ukraine, even expensive heavy armour is getting picked off at a high ratw due to drones, artillery, and ATGMs. Survivability is a tertiary consideration after speed and lethality.

The Sherman tank experience comes to mind. That said, I don't think Canada is ready or mature enough to have that discussion about acceptable combat losses...

Not talking about Canada, just armour developement in general for IFV/APC's.

My outsider looking in perspective is that drones are not the problem, ATGM are. Few articles out there from Ukrainian troops that chuckle that drones are getting all the glory but are really only picking off immobilized or lone tanks, where ATGM and mines are doing most of the heavy lifting.

Is the fact Europe and NA are not directly involved in the fighting one of the reasons we are not developing better defences on armour for these threats or is this more of a function that its a team sport and tactics need to evolve vs weapons.