New Ukrainian BMP. The BMP-64.

[Ray]

Sir, being better Armour and have better firepower is a disadvantage ? retaining most qualities of the previous, of-course not the port holes..

The objective is to end the exsistance of the enemy in the given area, Using Armour to add more punch is a advantage..

that post was specific to Bhadra`s post..



Sir, All three can be together..

Better firepower and better armour is not a disadvantage.

If not the capability of fighting from inside the ICV and merely being carried, what is the advantage?

Are you aware that a medium or cluster bombs can destroy a tank?

Remember always that a minefield will stop armour. Even if trawls are used, they are sitting ducks being slow.

In the final analysis it is dismounted infantry.

Yet, if feasible in the mounted role, instead of not being able to participate and ward off the dangers being boxed into a fortified coffin, it is better to take on some enemy especially those who are about to use A Tk weapons.

 

[Ray]

And what mountain warfare have to armor mechanized forces wrafare?

To tell you that you don't have to teach Indians how to fight.


We have greater experience in combat than Europeans that you claimed earlier.

We have combat experience in High Altitude, plains, deserts, canal and ditch cum bund, jungles, riverine terrain and in all aspects of warfare to include counter insurgency.

So spare us your homilies!

 

[Damian]

If not the capability of fighting from inside the ICV and merely being carried, what is the advantage?

Advantage of IFV is it's weaponary, IFV it is just APC with better weapons, that's all. And there is no need to fight from inside vehicle for it's dismounts.

Every high tech army sees this, so in demands lists for IFV's there are no firing ports, because why to use them? Why to risk lower armor protection and survivability?

Are you aware that a medium or cluster bombs can destroy a tank?

Are you aware of a fact that everything can be destroyed? But higher survivability is allways a nice thing eh?

To tell you that you don't have to teach Indians how to fight.


We have greater experience in combat than Europeans that you claimed earlier.

We have combat experience in High Altitude, plains, deserts, canal and ditch cum bund, jungles, riverine terrain and in all aspects of warfare to include counter insurgency.

So spare us your homilies!

...

What homilies? Did I say something about teaching Indians how to fight? People are You allways overeacting in discussion when different point of view is showed to You? This is some kind of complex?

 

[Ray]

Advantage of IFV is it's weaponary, IFV it is just APC with better weapons, that's all. And there is no need to fight from inside vehicle for it's dismounts.

Every high tech army sees this, so in demands lists for IFV's there are no firing ports, because why to use them? Why to risk lower armor protection and survivability?

It is your view. Are you a weapons sales person?

What is the tactical advantage is what I have been repeatedly asking.

You keep saying that Europeans know better. They do? They have been fighting wars? The little they have done is hardly laudable inspite of all the brouhaha!

Are you aware of a fact that everything can be destroyed? But higher survivability is allways a nice thing eh?

As a soldier, I would be ashamed to die with firing a shot, even in anger!

BTW, we are not mortally afraid of the body bag that we have to hunker down scared!



...

What homilies? Did I say something about teaching Indians how to fight? People are You allways overeacting in discussion when different point of view is showed to You? This is some kind of complex?

Not over reacting.

It is just that you said that the Europeans have greater combat experience!

The facts belie that statement and that is what I am pointing out.

To give the facts to someone with delusions is not over reacting!

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Well in theory yes!

But what are minefields for?

It is to separate the infantry from the armour.

Sir,

They were not suppose to attack that post on the first place rather head for the real objective, knowing there is little chance of PAF Air-cover..

they could have been brought mine rollers, So does the should not have assault with external Fuel tanks on..

Mine field is there, that can be removed by mine roller, there are etc ways to deal with that too..

 

[Ray]

Damian

Check Post #18

No Ray, but maybe Indians have different experiences with IFV's and APC's, however countries with far greater experience in combat with use of AFV's and in AFV's designing, had resigned from firing ports.

 

[Ray]

Sir,

They were not suppose to attack that post on the first place rather head for the real objective, knowing there is little chance of PAF Air-cover..

they could have been brought mine rollers, So does the should not have assault with external Fuel tanks on..

Mine field is there, that can be removed by mine roller, there are etc ways to deal with that too..

Are you talking of Longewala?

Mine rollers?

The IA had them.

It takes 10 hits and then it is useless!

They could have done many things and so could we.

But war is not a set piece foreseen event.

It cannot be if Aunty had ****, then she would be Uncle!

 

[Damian]

It is your view. Are you a weapons sales person?

No, why I would have to bee weapon sales person?

What is the tactical advantage is what I have been repeatedly asking.

As I said, higher survivability. What do You need anything else if You can't survive on battlefield?

You keep saying that Europeans know better. They do? They have been fighting wars? The little they have done is hardly laudable inspite of all the brouhaha!

In terms of designing AFV's, yes they do, show me anything made in India comparable to SPz Puma for example.

Not over reacting.

It is just that you said that the Europeans have greater combat experience!

The facts belie that statement and that is what I am pointing out.

To give the facts to someone with delusions is not over reacting!

With armor-mechanized warfare? When did India fought a war with just masses of tanks and other AFV's? I must remind You that all theory of designing and using AFV's was born during WWII in Europe, when nations was learning in sweet and blood how to properly design them and properly use.

Mine rollers?

The IA had them.

It takes 10 hits and then it is useless!

Mine rollers can't be used alone, some tanks should be equipped with anti mine blades and there allways should be vehicles with MICLIC or similiar device somehwere around.

Also Russians designed special anti mine active protection for vehicles. It is used to detonate mines with electromagnetic fuzes... You can call it electromagnetic mine roller.

 

[Ray]

Anyway, I have not got the logic of not having portholes and instead being an expensive battle taxi.

I have no further interest and so will leave and go and have dinner.

It is already late since it is 0053 out here!

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Better firepower and better armour is not a disadvantage.

If not the capability of fighting from inside the ICV and merely being carried, what is the advantage?

Are you aware that a medium or cluster bombs can destroy a tank?

Remember always that a minefield will stop armour. Even if trawls are used, they are sitting ducks being slow.

Carrying infantry inside better protected vehicle is a advantage, the men need not to fight from inside as there is a turret with cannon provided to deal with threads, When there is a turret with a cannon why need to fight from inside ?, the logic of enemy can be shot down through portholes also compromise the deign of the vehicle being heavy armored..

I am aware sir, not just bombs many other things, But what best should be there when needed to the extend one can..

Sir, the same can slow the infantry down too, Anti-Infantry Mines..

 

[Ray]

With armor-mechanized warfare? When did India fought a war with just masses of tanks and other AFV's? I must remind You that all theory of designing and using AFV's was born during WWII in Europe, when nations was learning in sweet and blood how to properly design them and properly use.

Live in your world.

I am surprised you are not updated on wars and military history. Living and revel in the past!

For your information, check how many Indian military personnel died in WWI and WWII and so please spare us all that mushy pith about nations were learning in sweat and blood.

I have understood the quality and depth of your grasp of facts.

 

[Ray]

Carrying infantry inside better protected vehicle is a advantage, the men need not to fight from inside as there is a turret with cannon provided to deal with threads, When there is a turret with a cannon why need to fight from inside ?, the logic of enemy can be shot down through portholes also compromise the deign of the vehicle being heavy armored..

I am aware sir, not just bombs many other things, But what best should be there when needed to the extend one can..

Sir, the same can slow the infantry down too, Anti-Infantry Mines..

You will forgive me, I have operated with them and they were placed under my command.

I am not talking through theory and instead through practical experience.

I was concerned since my career depended on it!

Not my knowledge from western glossies!

But if you can logically explain with tactical employment as to why fighting from within is not essential, it will be an education for me and I will be grateful.

 

[Damian]

Live in your world.

I am surprised you are not updated on wars and military history. Living and revel in the past!

For your information, check how many Indian military personnel died in WWI and WWII and so please spare us all that mushy pith about nations were learning in sweat and blood.

I have understood the quality and depth of your grasp of facts.

Did I say that Indians not participated in that war and not suffered the same losses? But the difference is that back then, the big AFV's manufacturers learned how to design and use these vehicles properly. Do You understand it? My arguments are not anti Indian for christ sake!


BTW, Above made by NII Stali, electromagnetic protection against mines with electromagnetic fuzing system.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

With armor-mechanized warfare? When did India fought a war with just masses of tanks and other AFV's?

The 1965 war witnessed some of the largest tank battles since World War II.

Battle of Asal Uttar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Battle of Chawinda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Damian]

Well Kunal, I do not see masses of armor there... in 1991 Operation Desert Storm US alone had approx 2,000+ tanks in the region, not to mentions it's allies and enemy.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You will forgive me, I have operated with them and they were placed under my command.

Sir, i am just saying my views, what i see, no disrespect sir..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Well Kunal, I do not see masses of armor there... in 1991 Operation Desert Storm US alone had approx 2,000+ tanks in the region, not to mentions it's allies and enemy.

I provided about the battle in the region, The number of tank used in these single battles were in huge masses after WW2..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Anyways logging off now..

 

[W.G.Ewald]

FM 7-7: The Mechanized Infantry Platoon and Squad (APC) - Table of Contents 1985

FM 3-21.71 MECHANIZED INFANTRY PLATOON AND SQUAD (BRADLEY) 2002

FM 7-7 - The Mechanized Infantry Platoon and Squad (APC) - ENLISTED.INFO

 

[W.G.Ewald]

In fight infantry should be outside not inside of vehicle, infantry outside is more usefull than in inside, in fact infantry should be inside only during long marches or when it is needed (artillery bombardment).

Look at any modern IFV or APC, do You see anywhere firing ports? No, these were deleted for better protection. Firing ports can be replaced by far more effective additional RWS and vehicle own weaponary in rotating turret.

When we first got the Bradley it had firing ports.