My father is from Mechanised Infantry and I have seen BMP-2 (Sarath) in Ahmednagar and Bikaner. It's a very good IFV. But if you compare it with IFVs of other countries such as US army Strykers (is it amphibious?) the BMPs look so outdated in technology.
Stryker is a wheeled platform which does not have IFV variant, it have only APC variant. US Army only IFV currently in service is M2 Bradley.
There is of course currently performed R&D work to design variant of Stryker armed with 25mm or 30mm automatic cannon, this variant can be called IFV.
And here some explanation. How vehicles are classified.
APC is aclassified as personell carrier but armed only with light armament, APC do not directly support infantry and other vehicles in battle, it's purpose is only to transport infantry under armor.
IFV on the other hand have capability to transport infantry under armor protection, but also have armament that permitts it to provide direct support for infantry and other vehicles.
In other words, APC mostly can't fight against harder targets, like other APC's, however IFV can engage vast types of targets, like infantry, APC's, other IFV's, even MBT's.
In both cases of course we have different classes of APC's and IFV's.
We have lightweight class, that is amphibious, but we can also recently observe a shift towards heavier, non amphibious vehicles.
Indian FICV will be a much better product compared to any junk that russia can offer.
It depends. FICV appears to be a typical IFV, with relatively light protection. Question is, if it will be capable to directly compete with new Russian IFV based on "Kurganets-25" platform. New Russian IFV will use modular armor protection so if nececary it can be in lighter configuration with amphibious capabilities, or in heavier, up armored variant.
And then, there is also heavy "Armata" platform, which will have most likely, a heavy APC and heavy IFV variants.
I wud like to see a 75mm gun on it rather than a 40mm gun. So that once again we can show to the world our Jugaad style.
It is complete stupidity, where you would store such big ammunition and in the same time have troops transport capabilities? Not to mention that a 75mm ammunition would pose increased danger for crew and troops inside in case of armor perforation, ammo cook off are not nice.
Merkava carries troops also.
No, Merkava tanks do not have troop transport capabilities. It is complete myth and lack of understanding of vehicles design.
Rear hull compartment is for ammunition storage only.
Where do you want to transport troops there? There are not even benches or seats for troops. Which during transportation posses additional danger for these troops, as they can hit their heads on to something inside if for example mine explode under hull.
Also using this compartment for something else than ammunition storage, means your tank is left with 5 or 10 rounds for main armament, which means, it losts it's full combat capabilities and is vurnable on the battlefield.
This is why IFV's are armed with medium calliber automatic cannons, such armament use ammunition of smaller dimensions, thus vehicle can enough ammunition to operate in combat conditions, yet still can transport troops.
As of My Requirements The FICV or IFV should have
1.Armour should be equal to modern Tanks Armour
2. 30 or 40mm Auto Cannon along with one or two Machine Guns guided with lasers and two or Four Pieces of Anti Tank Missiles
3. Can carry atleast Five Highly equipped Infantry
4 Can Live from NBC and Laser Warning Systems
5.Amphibious Charac.
6.Can Knock out Shoulder Fire Anti Tank Missiles
Funny, please explain me, how you want to achieve protection equal to a MBT and still have amphibious capabilities?
Tracked vehicles can keep their amphibious capabilities only up to 25 metric tons of combat weight, above that, they are unable to swim.
Not to mention that achieving MBT protection levels would be difficult within practical weight limits. It is because of the internal volume of vehicle hull.
Because MBT does not need to carry infantry squad, it can be much more compact, and this is why it can achieve good protection within reasonable weight limits.
In case of APC and IFV, it is immposible because to carry infantry inside, much greater internal volume is nececary.
This is why some compromises are nececary.
Other things are not fully correct at your list, but still reasonable and can be done.
