Search results

It just seems to me that all these up armouring stuff misses the point - any moderately protected IFV will always be toast if faced with artillery, any decent ATGM, tank rounds. As long as they are protected against heavy machine guns, it doesn't really matter. The main benefit of the BMP type...

I wonder if a BMP-2 armed with the 100mm cannon might be an interesting weapon to have

A. They are amphibious (unlike the Bradley and CV90) which means a significant tactical asset given the number of canals used for defense on the other side B. All of them have decent ATGMs unlike the Napak m-113s, and equate to 2000 odd tank destroyers C. Their 30mm cannons are really useful at...

Question is why though. Our primary land threat, the Napaks use M-113s. The BMP-2 retains amphibious capability which is critical in the canal infested Rajasthan / Punjab front, and has pretty decent firepower Even China uses wheeled and BMP-1 based models, and the BMP-2 has enough firepower to...

Well I would imagine we can design an updated BMP with some more protection against 30mm, maybe replace the turret with an unmanned to save weight etc though would be equally vulnerable to plunging fire and ATGMs. That wouldn't cost much - but a full fledged modern ifv, a Draco, Ascod, Puma...

Both expensive 25 tonne fancy IFVs and obsolete are equally toast if targeted accurately BMP-2 upgraded with thermals and ATGMs have the same firepower BMP-2s are amphibious We can order 3000 BMPs for the same cost as day 750-1000 modern IFVs and mechanise 50-60 battalions of infantry Under a...