Yeah yeah everybody’s talking about the gun and troop capacity,... what about that funky armor? The rep says it made the griffin popped up in the show room floor, and boy it does. I only clicked the thumbnail of this vide bc of how it looks.
I've fired many tow's from a Bradley. It's garbage. You have to be stationary and time to target at max range is over 30 seconds. You have to stay exposed for over 30 seconds to an enemy tank waiting for the missile to get there. Tanks can ID and counter fire in well under 10 seconds. They need fire and forget top down attack missiles integrated like the javelins but bigger..
I'm telling ya they should put an A10 cannon on a tank but not just any tank . A tank built to handle it and the turnt should turn as fast like a man's head on a swivel lol
Not bad But i would take Reihnmetall and thier equipment anyday. Spike missles airburst and better armor. Not bad though. Plus the Active protection system can be fitted to any vehicle.
@ The US is pretty good at moving 70 ton tanks around the world. And the requirement are for more dismounts. And yep the armored forces were neglected throughout this century but they are trying to fix that. The US favored specialized infantry because they believed the only threat would be terrorists because they believed what China and Russia told them. Now reality has slapped them in the face and they're playing catch up.
This thing is garbage. The trade off for that 50mm cannon in that small body? 6 Troops. That things not an IFV or APC. This is the Bradley all over again excerpt worst.
Considering the history of ifv non of the countries have done it right. Even the Soviet did it wrong. Ifv means an armored vehicle which fights with infantry and provide support and protection as such by default it means that the ifv will be needing armor to withstand threats which can range from tanks to atgms to rpgs to ieds and mines so forget light vehicle. Considering srinking budgets and rising costs weapons and it's development use a heavy armored and armed tracked chassis for ifv and for apc and battle taxi role use wheeled platform.
According to Israeli's its a heavy apc and they never like the idea of ifv considering how they were the first who face of against bmp's as it was too lightly armored. After the lebanon war they realized the m113 were not armored enough to survive urban combat which led to various convension of older tank chasis into heavy apc's. With hezbollah and hamas getting armed with more sophisticated weaponary and adhering to urban combat Israeli's have considered uping the fire power on namer by installing an unmannned 30mm turret effectively turning it into ifv, well i world have opted for a proper 2 man turret but budget constrains always wins. On the otherside m113 will be replaced by eitan 8x8 apc its a 35 ton vehicale one the most heavily armored. So instead of having a medium armored ifv, apc; light armored 8x8 afv and unarmored tricks as in the big armies they have heavy ifv for front line medium armored 8x8 for apc and light armored trucks for the rear. As I have said before ifv as a concept demands armor. While the apc/battle taxi role is better for 8x8 as they are cheaper to maintain and sufficently fast as most armies even with the avalaiblilty of enough fast off road vehicles chose to supply by road.
Its way too heavy and it made by a foreign competitor firm!!! Also the CV90 has horrible IED and mine protection Which is a pretty big none starter for the US army after iraq as it should be.
@ what?? With every generation of CV90 there has been an increase in payload and corresponding protection levels. The inherent mine protection levels have risen substantially to presently defeat the heaviest (10 kg TNT) anti-tank mines. It has also proven itself do very well against IEDs in Afghanistan by Swedish, Norwegian and Danish CV90s. In the first strike on a norwegian CV90, only 1 crewmember was killed in a massive IED blast, big enough to take out a leopard 2. In the second encounter, a Danish CV90 went over a IED so powerful that it flipped the CV9035DK upside down. Out of the 5 crew members, only 2 were lost. One Danish CV90 survived an IED blast with no injury to the crew what so ever. After tracks and optics were repaired, it continued serving for 5 more months.
It's nice n' compact and packs a wallop, good protected entry for the dismounts too.
and shooting down UAVs
IR heat signature protection is cool
The wash rack would be absolutely brutal
I want to see it fire any videos on that?
Gotta have that POP and DAZZLE!! If it doesn't look FABULOUS it's not worth the Army's time.
one emp and it all goes down though they should have backup analog systems too
To generate that level of EMP you need a nuke. Second you can shield electronics from EMP.
Yeah yeah everybody’s talking about the gun and troop capacity,... what about that funky armor? The rep says it made the griffin popped up in the show room floor, and boy it does. I only clicked the thumbnail of this vide bc of how it looks.
Developed from the Ajax? The brittisch program that probably will be cancelled by vibration and noise problems? OMG
....is a Extreme Credit Check required?
It looks like someone took an old British army Scimitar and stuck a bunch of hexagons all over it
Seems awfully tall. That silhouette is brutal. Easy to see for miles.
Interesting
can u trust General Dynamics?!
Well they made the famous F16, so why not???
Lockheed Martin built F-16 not GD.
@@Armored_Kong Hate to correct you but it was a General Dynamics aircraft.
@@Armored_Kong
"F16, F 16, F-16 or FI6 may refer to: General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, a 1974 American multirole fighter jet aircraft FI6"
@@Armored_Kong
General Dynamics started, designed, and developed the F-16 Fighting Falcon. Later, Lockheed Martin bought the F-16 program.
Based in Spanish Austrian ASCOD?
Yes.
No anti-tank missile?
The switchblade drone?
Hmm, I don’t like it it doesn’t have missiles
I've fired many tow's from a Bradley. It's garbage. You have to be stationary and time to target at max range is over 30 seconds. You have to stay exposed for over 30 seconds to an enemy tank waiting for the missile to get there. Tanks can ID and counter fire in well under 10 seconds. They need fire and forget top down attack missiles integrated like the javelins but bigger..
@@babochee that’s what they have on this vehicle. It’s a loitering munition called switchblade.
I'm telling ya they should put an A10 cannon on a tank but not just any tank . A tank built to handle it and the turnt should turn as fast like a man's head on a swivel lol
They already did that on the Stryker chassis
@@metanumia look up stryker with anti air 30mm gatling cannon
+95°!!!
85°, not 95.
Is this a new IFV?
It's a candidate for the bradley replacement
"A little drone that has an explosive warhead" So, A missile?
A bomb with loiter capability.
suicide drone
Not bad
But i would take Reihnmetall and thier equipment anyday.
Spike missles airburst and better armor.
Not bad though.
Plus the Active protection system can be fitted to any vehicle.
can be fitted to any vehicle, but is not fitted to any vehicle. Learn the difference.
Just get the CV90 !!! You can mount everything from a .50 cal to a 120mm !!!
That's actually an ASCOD, and you can do that with the ASCOD, that's why Spain, Austria, UK, Thailand and the Philippines use it.
That's actually an ASCOD, and you can do that with the ASCOD, that's why Spain, Austria, UK, Thailand and the Philippines use it.
Not enough grunt capacity.
@
The US is pretty good at moving 70 ton tanks around the world.
And the requirement are for more dismounts. And yep the armored forces were neglected throughout this century but they are trying to fix that. The US favored specialized infantry because they believed the only threat would be terrorists because they believed what China and Russia told them. Now reality has slapped them in the face and they're playing catch up.
not enough for the Marine Crops which has a minimum capacity standard of 47 per vehicle.
lIKE CROSSAUT
I hate the US, but I gotta admit, that is one unique AFV! Im acing it in Armored Warfare. My fav auto cannon.
We hate you too.
This thing is garbage. The trade off for that 50mm cannon in that small body? 6 Troops. That things not an IFV or APC. This is the Bradley all over again excerpt worst.
This is only a show of possibilities, not a final product. So calm down the model the Army will order is fare worth.
Considering the history of ifv non of the countries have done it right. Even the Soviet did it wrong. Ifv means an armored vehicle which fights with infantry and provide support and protection as such by default it means that the ifv will be needing armor to withstand threats which can range from tanks to atgms to rpgs to ieds and mines so forget light vehicle. Considering srinking budgets and rising costs weapons and it's development use a heavy armored and armed tracked chassis for ifv and for apc and battle taxi role use wheeled platform.
According to Israeli's its a heavy apc and they never like the idea of ifv considering how they were the first who face of against bmp's as it was too lightly armored. After the lebanon war they realized the m113 were not armored enough to survive urban combat which led to various convension of older tank chasis into heavy apc's. With hezbollah and hamas getting armed with more sophisticated weaponary and adhering to urban combat Israeli's have considered uping the fire power on namer by installing an unmannned 30mm turret effectively turning it into ifv, well i world have opted for a proper 2 man turret but budget constrains always wins. On the otherside m113 will be replaced by eitan 8x8 apc its a 35 ton vehicale one the most heavily armored. So instead of having a medium armored ifv, apc; light armored 8x8 afv and unarmored tricks as in the big armies they have heavy ifv for front line medium armored 8x8 for apc and light armored trucks for the rear. As I have said before ifv as a concept demands armor. While the apc/battle taxi role is better for 8x8 as they are cheaper to maintain and sufficently fast as most armies even with the avalaiblilty of enough fast off road vehicles chose to supply by road.
not to mention not holding that much ammunition capacity either relative to a 25mm bushmaster
CV90 should win over this stupid thing
It's just a prototype you numpty.
I like the Puma/Lynx
Its way too heavy and it made by a foreign competitor firm!!! Also the CV90 has horrible IED and mine protection Which is a pretty big none starter for the US army after iraq as it should be.
@ they just partnered with Raytheon to offer a us model though.
@ what?? With every generation of CV90 there has been an increase in payload and corresponding protection levels. The inherent mine protection levels have risen substantially to presently defeat the heaviest (10 kg TNT) anti-tank mines. It has also proven itself do very well against IEDs in Afghanistan by Swedish, Norwegian and Danish CV90s. In the first strike on a norwegian CV90, only 1 crewmember was killed in a massive IED blast, big enough to take out a leopard 2. In the second encounter, a Danish CV90 went over a IED so powerful that it flipped the CV9035DK upside down. Out of the 5 crew members, only 2 were lost. One Danish CV90 survived an IED blast with no injury to the crew what so ever. After tracks and optics were repaired, it continued serving for 5 more months.