"Sir, this thing looks more like an IFV than a troop transport." "What's another word for troop, son?" "Infantry, sir" "And what does Infantry do?" "They fight, sir" "And what's another word for transport?" "A vehic... oh I see where you're going with this."
@@LeonardTavast Its a spectrum. But at one end is less transport capability and more firepower and on the other is more transport capability and less firepower. Another try of definition could be: IFV - What the Name Says APC - Battle Taxi Also IFVs were expected to keep up with the tanks, APCs were expected to follow the tanks. But yeah in the end it is a spectrum. In Ukraine for example we see many "classic APCs" like the M113 pressed into an IFV role. So what is it now? I am as confused as you are.
IFV is meant to fight abd suppress enemy light armor and infantry. APC have a 50 Cal maximum and aren't meant for direct combat. Just get in delivery troops and supplies and get out.
@@joebenson528especially with serious discussions of ceasefire about to take place. Trump said he's going to address that after inauguration. We'll see. He's already making moves on a Gaza ceasefire so that's a plus but tensions are higher with Russia.
@@SomebodysNephewhe’s gonna end up with a surprise pikachu face when he fails to realize that as it currently stands, even the Russians will reject his cease fire plans. He’s gonna end up saying “how dare they reject my perfect plan. It’s the best agreement in the history of cease fire agreements.” And end up doubling down on whatever’s going on
@@SomebodysNephew he called Netanyahu to push him to reject any ceasefire proposals that Biden's admin proposed for almost the last 12 months (i.e. literally the one signed on its first part today) lol
Having worked on the APMV platform, its great. The Cummins engine never quits, and the gas mileage is actually impressive. I had to only replace 1 engine within a fleet of 30 over 4 years.
One thing, how much use are those actually getting? I imagine it's mainly testing and developing training manuals for the use of it rather than any actual combat. So those engines are likely much less stressed than they would be for a multi day deployment of regular repositioning, still very good stats but just wanted to put it into perspective.
Yeah we spent many resources on them the tax payer would hate it if it went to waste vs spending and fraud practices for future technologies experimentation (where waste is considered acceptable)
Bradley is the only tank who isn't transform into a helicopter. They never had a plan but saw in Ukraine that the Bradley did well. The Bradley already did well in previous wars. It never needed an upgrade. It's upgraded for showing superiority.
Honestly, this program is just like an ACE in the hole for U.S Army. Maintenance, Firepower, Mobility, Modularity, Familiarity, Future Proof, Availability. No bells and whistles but very effective.
Very effective? We will only know this when this technique gets into real combat. The Germans also believed that their self-propelled artillery was good until it ended up in Ukraine. As a result, it turned out that the electronics were not reliable and that the 155 mm NATO shell made in Germany and the one made in Italy were not the same, which is why the barrel failed earlier than expected. Only after going through baptism of fire can you learn about the effectiveness of technology.
Bradley and M113 encompass two very different roles. Bradley is doing fantastic as a fighting vehicle in a support role, quickly clearing tree lines and giving heavy covering fire. This behemoth here seems to be better fit as true personnel carrier which primary anti-drone equipment. Bradley and Abrams attack from the front, this thing pushes and supports from the rear
The improved mortar is probably the most useful. US mortar vehicles have just been a mortar inside with a hatch open which is very obsolete, but gun mortars allow for spicy stuff like 50% better range and multiple round simultaneous impact firing.
I wished they made PERSONAL defense cannons. That is the future. Also a single man Ripsaw with the craziest optics, hybrid engine for stealth mode, and a 30mm cannon with a few loiting explosive drones. (Or ATGM). Imagine a tiny tankette like thay, with enough armor for 20mm under. That is driven by one man like a video game with a controller. Including a 3rd person selfie stick driving mode. Sensors like Isreals newest tank. Audio/thermal/whatever. Imagine what kind of mayhem a scout vehicle with a huge offense punch can do behind enemy lines. They'd be able to destroy all, but the heaviest stuff. Yet fast enough to hit and run. We got the unammened version. We need the manned version. Also PD cannons on every vehicle. (Think automated gun trophy system slaved to radar, able to shoot down slower ordance. From drones to ATGMs. Perfect for tanks secondary or helicopters primary. We have the technology. Just need to pair it all).
"I'm talking about versions with rapid fire mortars, javelin anti-tank missles, 30mm auto cannons, or stinger anti-air missles that can clap the cheeks of enemy drones." Well said.
If I know anything about military contracting...you should be concerned when companies start competing with logical, modular, cost-cutting stuff. When defense companies are throwing around "New 7th Gen automated systems-fluid mega-laser destroyer world platform integral systems!"...we're at peace and everything is fine. When you start seeing "Well, we could make these simpler, cheaper, and more quickly...". That. That should concern you.
It means they are being told to plan for the 4th of July party. "But sir, this is Janurary- in a month its..." "I said what I said and the 4th of July can be anytime and any day"
its all about funding. When the US began to send aid to Ukraine it was basically "we send our stuff to Ukraine and the money we spend is spent buying ourselves new stuff. Its like if your next door needed a gun so you convinced your wife that you would buy yourself a new one so you could give your current gun to him.
@@Thanksforaskingme its very true actually- with adversaries being near/peer- attrition and replacement manufacturing is key on a larger global stage. The more you can churn out, the more you can throw into the fight- both via your forces as well as allied forces. And that edge can be night and day when talking near peer. Those that are in power realize the threats are a bit more modernized than those we faced within the last 30 years- and adjustmwnts have to be made ASAP as you dont want to be caught pants down with no immediate response ability.
I’m a junkie for this kind of stuff. In the 80s my favorite toys were GI Joes and the tanks were my most favorite. My dream ride is a tank of some kind. It’ll never happen, but a fella can dream.
@@ry4n737 It looks like AMOS is being ditched a bit, NEMO is simpler and probably easier to make and cheaper to buy, so the focus seems to be there for now.
@@TheLazyFinnYeah, AMOS has the downsides of being more expensive, more complex and heavier than NEMO. I do like the two barrels of mortar fun raining down simultaneous impact fun though.
I been inside of one of these and spoken with the head of Engineering on the project. He explicitly stated that this was supposed to replace both the Bradley and M113. He also said that they had tested it against artillery and was able to take a direct hit from a 155 shell and there was no hull breach. The fuel is stored externally (the tanks are armored) to increase survivability and as a bonus, it has power outlets so you can charge your phone.
I was there when the Bradleys were first built by FMC in the 1980's in a factory located in Santa Clara, California next to San Jose airport. FMC also built the M113 and the Marine AAV. The Bradley was unfairly maligned in the movie The Pentagon Wars. Glad to see in this video the advent of one-piece body construction. When they were being built in the 1980's, construction was time-consuming because each weld caused the aluminum plates to buckle. Each plate had to be pushed back into shape using wooden 2x4s as levers.
For one, movie, hillarious and relatable as it is, had little in common even with the book and was more focused not on Bradley, but on desing / procurment process. It admitted, rightfully so, that Bradley has done well in the Gulf. Though it has to be said clearly - Bradley is NOT in the same league of ICVs as M1 Abrams is in MBTs. Take an analogy to JSF - programme has been absolute debacle, but ultimately aircraft it produced, after a lot of time and faqton of money, with bl. 4 is finally reaching it's intended potential. In any case, I hold opinion that concept of ICV in general is flawed premise: you put electronics just as sophisticated as in a tank, 3-4x more troops than in a tank in vehicle nowhere near as protected and intimidating as a tank. If you ask me, Koreans with AS 21 Redback (or late CV-90 model) or Israelis with Namer are onto something. If it is supposed to work with tanks, it has no business going where tanks can't go. If it transports the troops, it should have space and power to do that and armour and other protection to do it safely. Firepower is secondary issue.
@@piotrd.4850 Minimum 40% of F35's off-line at any time. That's a functioning system? Go Russian if you want new tech weapons. Calm down, take a breath and look up YASEN. They're better, cheaper, in production, more advanced and they work. What's current in production 'Wonder-weapon'' do we have?
@@MicMc539 >go russian if you want new tech weapons >new gr8 b8 m8, here's a (you) as a reminder, and as an actual apples to apples comparison there are now more than 1,000 F-35s in service in various countries Russia hasn't even replaced all of their Su-27s with Su-30s yet, let alone with 37s or 57s.
Taught Forward Observation to LT's at Ft Sill. We had the M981 Fist a converted 113 that had a sit in 360 degree targeting turret. it housed 2 TOW missiles. We had 113 support. A TOW mobile system, so you could dismount and shoot from a hide. As an FO I love anything that can send hate downrange. We used the guided laser GLLD targeting system on the FIST to call for fire on ARTY. 4 radios inside, 2 vehicle 2 PRC77 in docks. When you dialed in the LLD the rounds were fire for effect. This was 1985, now with GPS, FO's can be more accurate.
Lord that beats dragging that boat anchor PRC 77 around in the top of your ruck. That's what kids are for. See? It screws with the compass and I'm keeping pace count. We still use them No one's really checking those freqs Still effective for our purposes. Cheers
Perhaps they could turn the M113s into drones, to carry ammos, supplies and fuel at least. Maybe they could have only one pilot inside some sort of titanium bathtub for extra protection and with a modern mini cockpit, if drones are not reliable.
crazy how BAE actually managed to manufacture these instead of planning to make plans and then delaying it for 10yrs. Almost feels like the days there was still competition in defense contracts and output actually expects out of a gov contract
Well this program is also designed to expedite retirement of current systems... which means they can be shipped off to Ukraine. This is the real face of Ukraine war aid - using aid funds to pay for new systems by writing off current systems and sending them off to fight Russia. Expect to see (or we have already seen) similar upgrades in artillery and especially munitions manufacturing capacity.
@@davidmclean357And it’s all sorely needed, because politicians never want to pay for new weapons unless you tell them that the old ones can’t get the job done under any circumstances.
@@davidmclean357 Sending the old stuff off is ironically often cheaper than having to retire _and disassemble_ it. Scraping an armoured vehicle cost money, the local junkyard can't do it.
Hey mate your absolutely real to take some time out, bloody hell it’s not like you just went for walk and talked about stuff that haven’t experienced in the past when on tour. Doing it a civie just to get a true reflection of what’s going down in the Ukraine is outstanding 👍👏💪
Ukraine has proven the Bradley is still an extremely good and most importantly very survivable platform against anything russia throws at it so making a new gen vehicle based on it makes good sense.
Ukraine has proved nothing, If you believe the pro Ukraine propaganda they would have conquered Russia and be moving on China by now. Just like if you believe the pro Russian propaganda the Russians Should have taken the whole country a year ago. Meanwhile LA is burning up Carolinian are still living in tents and you knuckle draggers are cheering on the prospect of nuclear war.
Россия не вытаскивала свои новинки ещё.хватает обычных фпв дронов с гранатой рпг и нету брэдли.Всё горит не важно в такой войне как на Украине.На передовой техника долго не живёт как и их экипажи.
This felt like your classic vids; A bunch of good ol' humor with great data. I like it how you're mixing it up. Some serious vids, some with jokes. Good stuff Cappy.
I suspect that the reports of Bradley’s with 25mm auto cannons outfighting Russian tanks had something to do with this push for MPVs. I note that 30mm is the same round as used in the GAU-8. Include some tungsten or DU penetration magazines and you can take on most tanks.
funny considering the GAU8 wasnt even capable of destroying a T55 after six passes in test conditions and the USAF had to overinflate the A10s kill count in the Gulf War and Iraq war
Seems like Bradley's are making much more of a difference in Ukraine than any western tank, carries the homies to the trench line, can at the very least disable a T90 and fast, so many vids of them piecing up russian apcs
@@nicholasbrown668 this may have less to do with the 30mm round of the GAU-8 itself, and more to do with GAU-8's accuracy and the platform it's mounted in. Whenever the A-10 fires it's gun the whole plane vibrates, and where ever the pilot is aiming, realistically there's s 20 meter area around that point where the bullets will land (which is why F-111s and F-15Es did better at killing tanks, using laser guided missiles and bombs). Performance is probably much better when fired on a stabilized, land-based platform with a much lower fire-rate that can actually, accurately hit the parts of the tank it can actually pen.
@@nicholasbrown668 the A10 is more effective against armor as a missile platform. The whole 30mm cannon thing is way overblown. That’s why they’re phasing out the A10. I’ve heard F16s can do just as well with their cannon in the infantry support role.
@@barrag3463 I mean its also the round itself, it just doesn't have the penetrating power to kill a tank, of the rounds that landed on the T55 in testing, next to none of them were able to pierce the top armor and only a handful were able to pierce the armor on the rear top of the tanks engine compartment The GAU8 is a great anti infantry weapon in open settings, but it's not a heavy armor killer like the USAF wanted it to be
I hope they go with the German RCh155 wheeled artillery system for the US Military along with the Patria Nemo that would make a awesome fit for the US Military and maybe throw in a couple hundred modern GMars that have double the capacity of rockets then the older wheeled himars which is still capable but who doesn't want more missiles on a similar platform especially when you have newer prism missiles coming into service
M113-2 electric boogaloo Legit tho, if they can make sure it generates enough power for future systems and manage similar modularity to the M113, it's a very good system.
Yeah, that's been the design philosophy of the IDF for decades, with the Namer and Eitan. The one downside is that the logistics can be difficult, as that sort of vehicle typically requires more tech support and fuel. However, this isn't really an issue for the US, as we are the undisputed kings of logistics.
@@MaticTheProto the boxer isnt on an ifv level but has the potential to be the future of lighter formations. you can fill pretty much every role with a boxer variant for a reasonable price.
Regarding monolithic hulls.... I'm not sure of the complete wisdom of such an approach. Yes, it theoretically saves cost and improves survivability.... for the first shot. Most of the time, armored vehicles aren't completely destroyed following an engagement. Instead, they take minor damage where they've been hit. Traditionally, repair meant swapping out the damaged panel for a new one. But if it's all one piece, that means the vehicle can't be as easily repaired or even need to be scrapped and replaced in its entirety.
Same here. I think that with some clever thinking and repair kits, it might be patched up in "adequate" manner in the field, but some thinking and testing shoudl be done. On the other hand - more components survive, get them out put on new hull from storage. Usually, it's the components that take time to make and are most expensive.
It is not so simple, swapping damaged panels in all fine and dandy but the vehicle has to survive long enough to be repaired. Also if it is a "troop transport" type vehicle then the #1 priority is the survival of the troops inside. Yes, Damage to the hull could potentially "total" the vehicle but if it uses a version of the Bradley hull then there is nothing to worry about. it will be more than simply metal, it will be layered, and if we are learning like we should, then a form of reactive armor on top of that. It could potentially be more expensive, or it could save millions because we aren't having 200+ of them destroyed along with the crew and the equipment inside. The US military knows that the better quality the technology you can give the warfighter the more effective they are. Period. Keeping troops alive is cheaper and quicker than training new ones. Period.
It's hard to repair a panel when you are a flaming body inside the twisted metal sarcophagus left over because people are still building these things when $10 cardboard drones can completely obliterate them.
Great episode! Glad to see the M113 being put out to pasture. It was getting downright embarrassing to see these still fielded. The design was almost 30 years old when I went in; and that was 35 years ago. They're antiques. And they weren't all that to begin with. As for its modularity of this new vehicle, we've heard that before. But based on this video it looks like they might be on to something this time. When you mention 30 different turret designs, the first thing that came to mind was training, as every version will have its learning curve for the soldiers operating it. If you're just dealing with a handful of options, like on the Stryker and Bradley, that's not so bad. But 30? Of course, you have to consider logistics is supporting all the variants' ammunition needs as well. All that aside, it still looks pretty good and might be what we need.
I think that with M113 just to have some fixed and held in "high readiness reserve" could still have its uses. Think of it as tracked Jeep / basic Humvee for rough terrain. Box to move things in bad conditions (weather, terrain) but in relatively uncontested rear.
I think it will just have a handful of system templates, but being modular means new design/ systems can be integrated much easier to fight against new tactics, much like the Ukrainians throwing hate with FPV and mini drones after Bayraktar TB2 was ineffective after the first few months.
FINALLY! This looks like the best "Modular" program I have seen. The point is to have a single platform with several build-outs being used to their strengths. Not an All-In-One vehicle. The past attempts at common/modular platforms for vehicles, boats and planes have been executed...interestingly
Maybe those old m113s could be given to resupply teams, as they don't really need lots of firepower but precisely the cheapest way to deliver stuff to combat? They could be pretty rad project for making them completely unmanned.
I feel like the single piece hull design may be a double edged sword. On hand, yes, it's always great to be able to reduce weight and improve protection. On the other hand, these types of vehicles are regularly damaged while still being recoverable and then easily repaired in the field. Haveing what essentially amounts to a "unibody" will mean that even in cases where the extra protection wasn't needed, the damage is bad enough to mean that A: The chassis is scrapped taking the vehicle out of the fight or B: They fix it with welds and replacement panels, leading to a false sense of security and the negating of the benefits in the first place.
If the unibody is just the "frame" of the hull with the armor and suspension added on later, that *might* (not always) meant that such repairs aren't as big of an issue for integrity, but it certainly will complicate repairs. It certainly is going to be patch repaired I think, at least some of the time. Being able to just replace the whole thing sounds great, and with our current logistics system we might be able to do the transportation to the front part, but the issue will be production needing to scale up in the event of a real war. (Much like how we were suddenly running into production capacity issues just selling ammo to Europe and Ukraine).
We could make a positive speculation though, maybe they'll have stacks of unibodies and you just pull the parts from the damaged AMPV, green the spares for what got junked and slap it on a new frame. Maybe it's just quicker, cheaper and easier to just discard bent frames. Training certainly would be cheaper, as their job is make the AMPV Legos go, no need to train up expensive metal fabricators as it's more like a factory line than repair shop
so under-rated for its predictions. * hunter-seeker drones * cyber-attacks * IFVs and Brads dominating the light armor of the 90s and early 21st century * non-state actors being viable as military/geopolitical threats * twin towers getting hit * commie china being a major global threat * live overhead battle direction by commanders * impending ecological collapse due to reliance on one of the world's key energy resources...
Also worth noting that the AMPV could just eliminate the need for the OMFV/XM30 while using the ideas paid for in the XM30 development (as the US Army has the rights to ALL that is developed in that project and even made it clear that XM30's could be built using both the Rheinmetall and GDLS parts ... like the Rheinmetall Lynx hull and the GDLS turret...) That means the unmanned functionality developed for the XM30 could easily placed within the AMPV too. Same with some of the drone and weapon ideas. And the AMPV could mount an autoloading and quick firing 50mm (or even 75mm, like the one first shown in the 1970's) cannon as there is no reason to believe such turrets would be too big for the platform.
No it wouldn't-the AMPV has the same issues that the Bradley has that is currently driving the development for the XM30. If you replaced the Bradley with an AMPV with a turret, you'd basically have a Bradley again. It would be a lateral move with no meaningful improvement
@@sherminator981XM193 brings considerably more hate and discontent per serving vs. 25 Mike. Obviously less total ammo capacity, there are trade-offs for everything. Assuming equivalent sensors and fire control systems you'd get increased range, payload and effectiveness against various threats( such as UAV's)
@@sherminator981 What do you believe can only be incorporated into an XM30? Gun? No. Electric drive? No. Missiles? No. Drones? No. Unmanned driving? No. Sensors? No. Modularity? No. All those things and more are doable... NOW, with the AMPV platform with the incorporation of the same tech (and BAE should have been the 3rd competitor for OMFV and still has all the tech and skills they developed for that program available.) Frankly, the AMPV, with the various turrets, addresses plenty of the shortcomings people note about the Bradley at a significant cost saving. Is it really worth paying 20x more for a vehicle that is, at best, 10% better?
@@DarkHorseSki Yes it is because your still using a platform that was designed nearly 50 years ago that shares the same shortcomings as its predecessor. The Army spelled out that the Bradley already has hit its max headroom for protection, power generation and other things so it is no longer viable for future missions it wants to do. Buying AMPVs to replace Bradley's is nothing more then a lateral move and once you start adding the things your talking about to an old design its going to drive the price up and your still dealing with the limitations of a footprint of something that wasn't thought about 40-50 years ago engineering wise. You have limited space/power to do it. They are already struggling putting an Anti Missile defense system on the Bradley because of that. As for pricing, your numbers are completely made up-the Army expect the XM30 to cost only 3x what the M2A4 is, but also don't forget that the XM30 will need a whole new logistics trail to support it with new training and maintenance support to keep it functional, so that accounts for the price increases. Plus I'm not even sure if the M2A4s are completely new vehicles-they might be remanufactured units also.
history has always shown that "multi purpose" use military vehicles usually come with high casualties as well. you have to give up something to do everything. that balance triangle applies still
@ozone-xv7hk “Jack of all trades, master of none…” However I’d argue this isn’t really the case, as is two separate modules. The base is designed for one thing: be an armored cargo box, whether that cargo be people, supplies, or weapon systems. The top is also specialized to its job
Cappy, do a video on CTAI's 40CTC autocannon. Its APFSDS round will punch through 140mm of RHA It's standard round goes through 210mm of concrete, dry round to point penetrate or airburst And it's Anti Aerial Airburst for drones etc Reach out up to 8.5km
BTW, did you know that BAE is now more American than British? They do more business in the USA, than in any other country. Did you know they actually made a movie about the search for getting a new SP mortar system for the US Army? It's called "Finding NEMO"
Its British, 44% of its revenue comes from USA sales, the USA is a customer. Over 50% of Apple, Google, Ford, Mcdonalds, Nike etc's sales are outside of the USA. Does that make them non-American? No.
Great video. I'm an ex- 11HE9 (11 Hotel Echo Niner) mechanized infantry guy, 1st Infantry Division. 2 years at Ft. Riley, KS and 2 years in Boblingen, West Germany, 1984-88. I operated the M901 ITV (Improved TOW Vehicle). Essentially a M113A1 w/ a TOW turret on top. Good to see the Army getting smart to replace the old 113 platform. Our vehicles were Vietnam era 113's, poorly maintained at the depot level, beat up and under-powered. Of course the 901 has long been replaced by the M2 Bradley. The many versions of the AMPV make perfect sense.
Everyone in the private sector is seeking solution. Drones feel like the tank during WW1 where they didn't have any effective options besides improv and early anti-tank rifles until later on with proper development.
The "Op" being getting the budget passed without civilian protests. It has been public information since 2014 - literally everyone in the world except the average US civilian knows about its existence. The recent push to pay for the program means that republican lawmakers will need to justify helping Ukraine when they have been very loudly hating on any help given to Ukraine at all. Liberals hate all military and the conservatives have been programmed by their leaders to hate assistance for Ukraine.
its one of the most public widely disclosed programs in military history. no ones talking about it because it didnt have a 30mm autocannon until last year and was considered boring until now
Thanks for watching spare parts army, remember to Elevate your business with Odoo today. www.odoo.com/r/pah
Thanks for the great video 😊
hilarious to watch that odoo hahahah u love using odoo eh? ahahahahah
At some point it should become obvious that it's not near peer vs near peer, it's peer vs peer and one peer has overpriced equipment.
Thanks for covering this Chris! I usually follow the defense stuff pretty closely, but hadn't heard about this at all.
I accept your apology but mainly because that wasn't a British accent.... It just wasn't
I was waiting for ... "MODULAR" ... And I wasn't disappointed.
I could only hold out so long haha it becomes inevitable
Alas, modular in this case actually matter a lot. But the phrase has been worn out so much from past PR.
@@Taskandpurpose Congrats to BAE for finally doing what GER industry has been doing with Boxer, Lynx and PMMC for a decade plus ...
where is my"kinetic" ?
@@Samichski😂"force multiplier" also
"Sir, this thing looks more like an IFV than a troop transport."
"What's another word for troop, son?"
"Infantry, sir"
"And what does Infantry do?"
"They fight, sir"
"And what's another word for transport?"
"A vehic... oh I see where you're going with this."
I never really understood the difference between an IFV and an APC if both are tracked.
@@LeonardTavast armanent. a IFV needs to have a autocannon or other large calibre gun. apc generally uses a machine gun like a.50.
One has more room for carrying people
The other has more room for carrying ammo
@@LeonardTavast Its a spectrum. But at one end is less transport capability and more firepower and on the other is more transport capability and less firepower.
Another try of definition could be:
IFV - What the Name Says
APC - Battle Taxi
Also IFVs were expected to keep up with the tanks, APCs were expected to follow the tanks.
But yeah in the end it is a spectrum.
In Ukraine for example we see many "classic APCs" like the M113 pressed into an IFV role. So what is it now? I am as confused as you are.
IFV is meant to fight abd suppress enemy light armor and infantry. APC have a 50 Cal maximum and aren't meant for direct combat. Just get in delivery troops and supplies and get out.
Sir were getting 3,000 AMPV
The army: shhhh....
This program was well known, unless you're a zoomer. We'll fail to get funding for it for a 4th time and the program will dissolve by the deadline.
@@joebenson528Dissolved by the deadline is a bit ambitious.
@@joebenson528especially with serious discussions of ceasefire about to take place. Trump said he's going to address that after inauguration. We'll see. He's already making moves on a Gaza ceasefire so that's a plus but tensions are higher with Russia.
@@SomebodysNephewhe’s gonna end up with a surprise pikachu face when he fails to realize that as it currently stands, even the Russians will reject his cease fire plans. He’s gonna end up saying “how dare they reject my perfect plan. It’s the best agreement in the history of cease fire agreements.” And end up doubling down on whatever’s going on
@@SomebodysNephew he called Netanyahu to push him to reject any ceasefire proposals that Biden's admin proposed for almost the last 12 months (i.e. literally the one signed on its first part today) lol
Having worked on the APMV platform, its great. The Cummins engine never quits, and the gas mileage is actually impressive. I had to only replace 1 engine within a fleet of 30 over 4 years.
Military vehicles need engines often?
One thing, how much use are those actually getting? I imagine it's mainly testing and developing training manuals for the use of it rather than any actual combat. So those engines are likely much less stressed than they would be for a multi day deployment of regular repositioning, still very good stats but just wanted to put it into perspective.
Mechanized autoloading mortar rounds that can be fired on the move is HUGE! More please!
Damn we’re finally graduating from armor that was current in the 80s? Let’s gooo
Same Bradley lower, just a new turret.
LAV-25 :( all the money went to the AAV replacement
Yeah we spent many resources on them the tax payer would hate it if it went to waste vs spending and fraud practices for future technologies experimentation (where waste is considered acceptable)
Yeah right. It's big, it's slow, and incredibly expensive. Russia is laughing, wanting us to build these moronic AMPV's.
Yummy Lancet food.
@@chad_8313 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 How much are they paying you, guy?
"Wait so this whole thing is just a work around to upgrade the Bradley?"
"Always has been."
It's the reason Ukraine didn't get more Bradleys. They were already earmarked for this project.
Modular!
@phil20_20 modular 6th gen hypersonic attritable kill web multi domain stealth! Did that get you exicted mister US military?
"upgrade"
Bradley is the only tank who isn't transform into a helicopter. They never had a plan but saw in Ukraine that the Bradley did well. The Bradley already did well in previous wars. It never needed an upgrade. It's upgraded for showing superiority.
Honestly, this program is just like an ACE in the hole for U.S Army.
Maintenance, Firepower, Mobility, Modularity, Familiarity, Future Proof, Availability.
No bells and whistles but very effective.
get me over the edge, I'm almost there....
LETHALITY
OOOOOOHHHH YYYYEEAAAAH BABAYYYYY
And fully automated. So when the robots decide to make their move, they will have turret a like this to squash the humans
@@AntoineWilliams7118 all of this happened before all of this will happen again.
Very effective? We will only know this when this technique gets into real combat. The Germans also believed that their self-propelled artillery was good until it ended up in Ukraine. As a result, it turned out that the electronics were not reliable and that the 155 mm NATO shell made in Germany and the one made in Italy were not the same, which is why the barrel failed earlier than expected. Only after going through baptism of fire can you learn about the effectiveness of technology.
@@nikgor3516I just noticed an article titled, "Germany delivers first RCH 155 self-propelled gun to Ukraine", but its only three days ago!
Thanks!
Thanks!
Army: "Is it finally time to replace the M113 with the Bradley?"
Military Industrial Complex: "No we're going to replace the M113 with MORE Bradley!"
Well, the M2A4 is a beast
Yes, could yo please compare this vehicle to a Bradley?
I think that's pronounced "Chadly".
Makes me think of the snl skit about needing more cowbell lol
Bradley and M113 encompass two very different roles. Bradley is doing fantastic as a fighting vehicle in a support role, quickly clearing tree lines and giving heavy covering fire. This behemoth here seems to be better fit as true personnel carrier which primary anti-drone equipment. Bradley and Abrams attack from the front, this thing pushes and supports from the rear
The improved mortar is probably the most useful. US mortar vehicles have just been a mortar inside with a hatch open which is very obsolete, but gun mortars allow for spicy stuff like 50% better range and multiple round simultaneous impact firing.
The CV90 mortar variant Mjolner is awesome 👍🏻
@@petter5721just the name alone is literally legendary.
I wished they made PERSONAL defense cannons. That is the future.
Also a single man Ripsaw with the craziest optics, hybrid engine for stealth mode, and a 30mm cannon with a few loiting explosive drones. (Or ATGM).
Imagine a tiny tankette like thay, with enough armor for 20mm under. That is driven by one man like a video game with a controller. Including a 3rd person selfie stick driving mode. Sensors like Isreals newest tank. Audio/thermal/whatever.
Imagine what kind of mayhem a scout vehicle with a huge offense punch can do behind enemy lines. They'd be able to destroy all, but the heaviest stuff. Yet fast enough to hit and run.
We got the unammened version. We need the manned version.
Also PD cannons on every vehicle. (Think automated gun trophy system slaved to radar, able to shoot down slower ordance. From drones to ATGMs. Perfect for tanks secondary or helicopters primary. We have the technology. Just need to pair it all).
And spotter drones are a massive force multipler for mortars.
Their battlefield utility has drastically increased...
@casbot71 newer Abrams can launch drones which show over head views inside the tank. Been out for few years. Not sure about production though
Cappy: Whatchu got there?
US Army casually kinda in front of their new armored vehicle: A smoothie.
I love how this channel keeps getting better and better over the years :)
It does.
"I'm talking about versions with rapid fire mortars, javelin anti-tank missles, 30mm auto cannons, or stinger anti-air missles that can clap the cheeks of enemy drones." Well said.
If I know anything about military contracting...you should be concerned when companies start competing with logical, modular, cost-cutting stuff. When defense companies are throwing around "New 7th Gen automated systems-fluid mega-laser destroyer world platform integral systems!"...we're at peace and everything is fine. When you start seeing "Well, we could make these simpler, cheaper, and more quickly...". That. That should concern you.
Yeah, it means that the MIC is realizing that playtime is over...
It means they are being told to plan for the 4th of July party.
"But sir, this is Janurary- in a month its..."
"I said what I said and the 4th of July can be anytime and any day"
its all about funding. When the US began to send aid to Ukraine it was basically "we send our stuff to Ukraine and the money we spend is spent buying ourselves new stuff. Its like if your next door needed a gun so you convinced your wife that you would buy yourself a new one so you could give your current gun to him.
The US has noticed that mass and quantity matter a lot.
@@Thanksforaskingme its very true actually- with adversaries being near/peer- attrition and replacement manufacturing is key on a larger global stage. The more you can churn out, the more you can throw into the fight- both via your forces as well as allied forces.
And that edge can be night and day when talking near peer. Those that are in power realize the threats are a bit more modernized than those we faced within the last 30 years- and adjustmwnts have to be made ASAP as you dont want to be caught pants down with no immediate response ability.
"Stryker clown car convertible" 😂
You're getting better at this, Kappy.
Holy moly, last time I looked Task & Purpose had 400k subscribers! So cool to see this channel becoming popular, S-tier TH-cam.
And no wonder. This is a comedy show🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Stoking that sweet sweet anti-Russian milkshake makes all the boys come.
@@robertaurens5665 real
@@robertaurens5665bro is either baiting, is a pro hater or a bot
@@colkillervin3560 I just have the ability to see through gratuitous bullshit. Old army quip, bullhit baffles brains
I’m a junkie for this kind of stuff. In the 80s my favorite toys were GI Joes and the tanks were my most favorite. My dream ride is a tank of some kind. It’ll never happen, but a fella can dream.
Cappy is back
Great work Thx
Being from Finland, it's really cool to see the NEMO being adopted here.
yeah good luck stopping a fucking artillery shell guided. This armor is a joke. it will be blasted .
What a great mortar system...I was first thinking AMMOS mortar system to start with..but the NEMO looks even better
@@ry4n737 It looks like AMOS is being ditched a bit, NEMO is simpler and probably easier to make and cheaper to buy, so the focus seems to be there for now.
@@TheLazyFinnYeah, AMOS has the downsides of being more expensive, more complex and heavier than NEMO. I do like the two barrels of mortar fun raining down simultaneous impact fun though.
@@CorporalCookie Who doesn't lol, NEMO can still fire simultaneous impact I think
I been inside of one of these and spoken with the head of Engineering on the project. He explicitly stated that this was supposed to replace both the Bradley and M113. He also said that they had tested it against artillery and was able to take a direct hit from a 155 shell and there was no hull breach. The fuel is stored externally (the tanks are armored) to increase survivability and as a bonus, it has power outlets so you can charge your phone.
thats cope lol, no way it takes a direct hit from arty shell. even mbts are not safe from that...
You had me at "power outlets". Gotta charge up the handheld game console while you're out pulling barbed wire.
Is there a shower inside? 😂
Weird, wasn’t the fuel outside thing a bad thing before? Also idk about the shell
@@rybolov considering those console controls are used for drones half the time.... yeah charging makes a lot of sense
I was there when the Bradleys were first built by FMC in the 1980's in a factory located in Santa Clara, California next to San Jose airport. FMC also built the M113 and the Marine AAV. The Bradley was unfairly maligned in the movie The Pentagon Wars.
Glad to see in this video the advent of one-piece body construction. When they were being built in the 1980's, construction was time-consuming because each weld caused the aluminum plates to buckle. Each plate had to be pushed back into shape using wooden 2x4s as levers.
For one, movie, hillarious and relatable as it is, had little in common even with the book and was more focused not on Bradley, but on desing / procurment process. It admitted, rightfully so, that Bradley has done well in the Gulf. Though it has to be said clearly - Bradley is NOT in the same league of ICVs as M1 Abrams is in MBTs. Take an analogy to JSF - programme has been absolute debacle, but ultimately aircraft it produced, after a lot of time and faqton of money, with bl. 4 is finally reaching it's intended potential. In any case, I hold opinion that concept of ICV in general is flawed premise: you put electronics just as sophisticated as in a tank, 3-4x more troops than in a tank in vehicle nowhere near as protected and intimidating as a tank. If you ask me, Koreans with AS 21 Redback (or late CV-90 model) or Israelis with Namer are onto something. If it is supposed to work with tanks, it has no business going where tanks can't go. If it transports the troops, it should have space and power to do that and armour and other protection to do it safely. Firepower is secondary issue.
@@piotrd.4850 Minimum 40% of F35's off-line at any time.
That's a functioning system?
Go Russian if you want new tech weapons.
Calm down, take a breath and look up YASEN.
They're better, cheaper, in production, more advanced and they work.
What's current in production 'Wonder-weapon'' do we have?
@Lazerpig ^
@@MicMc539
>go russian if you want new tech weapons
>new
gr8 b8 m8, here's a (you)
as a reminder, and as an actual apples to apples comparison
there are now more than 1,000 F-35s in service in various countries
Russia hasn't even replaced all of their Su-27s with Su-30s yet, let alone with 37s or 57s.
@@barrag3463 Excellent !
We agree that a minimum of 400 of the F35's are broken and not flying.
Freebumb and Dumbocracy at their best.
Haditha!
Dude!! One of your funniest videos in a while. Love your mindset, sarcasm and hilarity. This 153DC approves and will be back for more.
I salute you. You have come a long way from your early reporting. The information you provide is accurate and very valuable. Keep up the good work.
"I read that in a British accent because..."
You really didn't, but we appreciated the effort anyway. Cor Blimey, Guv'nor.
I like it when Perun drops by to give his own analysis 🧐
Yeah, he definitely sounded like he impersonating an Ozzy. And not any well at that! 😆
I thought he was trying for South Carolina.
Idk if Cappy really knew what he was going for 😂
I think he spelt radar as rader in an attempt to anglicise his video even more … you have to say it, when Chris takes on a character, he goes deep!
*Pentagon Wars 2 : The Bradley Strikes Back*
Does it end with USAF officer's career being ended for doing the right thing too?
Portholes? What are we, the navy? 😂
@@STB-jh7od i think this is another pentagon wars 2
will there be more smoked sheep?
Taught Forward Observation to LT's at Ft Sill. We had the M981 Fist a converted 113 that had a sit in 360 degree targeting turret. it housed 2 TOW missiles. We had 113 support. A TOW mobile system, so you could dismount and shoot from a hide. As an FO I love anything that can send hate downrange. We used the guided laser GLLD targeting system on the FIST to call for fire on ARTY. 4 radios inside, 2 vehicle 2 PRC77 in docks. When you dialed in the LLD the rounds were fire for effect. This was 1985, now with GPS, FO's can be more accurate.
Lord that beats dragging that boat anchor PRC 77 around in the top of your ruck.
That's what kids are for.
See?
It screws with the compass and I'm keeping pace count.
We still use them
No one's really checking those freqs
Still effective for our purposes.
Cheers
Perhaps they could turn the M113s into drones, to carry ammos, supplies and fuel at least. Maybe they could have only one pilot inside some sort of titanium bathtub for extra protection and with a modern mini cockpit, if drones are not reliable.
@Battery-kf4vu They'd make good gun trucks and Ordnance carriers.
This sounds positive and promising, surprised it wasn't cancelled.
Chris, I love this presentation AND, as usual, the humor is endearing.
crazy how BAE actually managed to manufacture these instead of planning to make plans and then delaying it for 10yrs. Almost feels like the days there was still competition in defense contracts and output actually expects out of a gov contract
the UK issue with defence contracts is the gov constantly moving the goal post and asking for more crap leading to redesigns
it's almost like we'll have to fight a war
Well this program is also designed to expedite retirement of current systems... which means they can be shipped off to Ukraine. This is the real face of Ukraine war aid - using aid funds to pay for new systems by writing off current systems and sending them off to fight Russia. Expect to see (or we have already seen) similar upgrades in artillery and especially munitions manufacturing capacity.
@@davidmclean357And it’s all sorely needed, because politicians never want to pay for new weapons unless you tell them that the old ones can’t get the job done under any circumstances.
@@davidmclean357 Sending the old stuff off is ironically often cheaper than having to retire _and disassemble_ it.
Scraping an armoured vehicle cost money, the local junkyard can't do it.
Patria NEMO 🇫🇮🇫🇮 mentioned Thank you from Finland!
Thanks to Finland from Latvia. Patrias are amazing
Hey mate your absolutely real to take some time out, bloody hell it’s not like you just went for walk and talked about stuff that haven’t experienced in the past when on tour. Doing it a civie just to get a true reflection of what’s going down in the Ukraine is outstanding 👍👏💪
Ukraine has proven the Bradley is still an extremely good and most importantly very survivable platform against anything russia throws at it so making a new gen vehicle based on it makes good sense.
With the exception of AT mines
Why you lie? There is cemeteries if braldeysquares
Ukraine has proved nothing, If you believe the pro Ukraine propaganda they would have conquered Russia and be moving on China by now. Just like if you believe the pro Russian propaganda the Russians Should have taken the whole country a year ago. Meanwhile LA is burning up Carolinian are still living in tents and you knuckle draggers are cheering on the prospect of nuclear war.
Россия не вытаскивала свои новинки ещё.хватает обычных фпв дронов с гранатой рпг и нету брэдли.Всё горит не важно в такой войне как на Украине.На передовой техника долго не живёт как и их экипажи.
@@vladimir08090 like the t-90? ok putinbot
As a person who watches alot of youtube....you make a good video every time...good perspective and information
That's your only job quali.
@@johnsmith1474I mean I eat hotdogs! That's a pretty big qualification.
If it's replacing the M113, some guy is going to try and get it to fly at some point
Aerogavin mk2
I predict it will fly... in a C-17.
@@dwaneanderson8039good comment
@@platapus112Someone let Lazerpig know. He needs to get on designing a new version. Again with a stripper pole.
This felt like your classic vids; A bunch of good ol' humor with great data. I like it how you're mixing it up. Some serious vids, some with jokes. Good stuff Cappy.
Good to have you back, Cap.
I suspect that the reports of Bradley’s with 25mm auto cannons outfighting Russian tanks had something to do with this push for MPVs. I note that 30mm is the same round as used in the GAU-8. Include some tungsten or DU penetration magazines and you can take on most tanks.
funny considering the GAU8 wasnt even capable of destroying a T55 after six passes in test conditions and the USAF had to overinflate the A10s kill count in the Gulf War and Iraq war
Seems like Bradley's are making much more of a difference in Ukraine than any western tank, carries the homies to the trench line, can at the very least disable a T90 and fast, so many vids of them piecing up russian apcs
@@nicholasbrown668 this may have less to do with the 30mm round of the GAU-8 itself, and more to do with GAU-8's accuracy and the platform it's mounted in.
Whenever the A-10 fires it's gun the whole plane vibrates, and where ever the pilot is aiming, realistically there's s 20 meter area around that point where the bullets will land (which is why F-111s and F-15Es did better at killing tanks, using laser guided missiles and bombs).
Performance is probably much better when fired on a stabilized, land-based platform with a much lower fire-rate that can actually, accurately hit the parts of the tank it can actually pen.
@@nicholasbrown668 the A10 is more effective against armor as a missile platform. The whole 30mm cannon thing is way overblown. That’s why they’re phasing out the A10. I’ve heard F16s can do just as well with their cannon in the infantry support role.
@@barrag3463 I mean its also the round itself, it just doesn't have the penetrating power to kill a tank, of the rounds that landed on the T55 in testing, next to none of them were able to pierce the top armor and only a handful were able to pierce the armor on the rear top of the tanks engine compartment
The GAU8 is a great anti infantry weapon in open settings, but it's not a heavy armor killer like the USAF wanted it to be
One minute ago is DIABOLICAL, thank you T&P
Your channel is TopGear for Military gear
that would be that one russian guy
I hope they go with the German RCh155 wheeled artillery system for the US Military along with the Patria Nemo that would make a awesome fit for the US Military and maybe throw in a couple hundred modern GMars that have double the capacity of rockets then the older wheeled himars which is still capable but who doesn't want more missiles on a similar platform especially when you have newer prism missiles coming into service
I've read that anti-tank mines can customize the AMPV to any custom configuration or shape you didn't know you needed, but ended up with anyway.
M113-2 electric boogaloo
Legit tho, if they can make sure it generates enough power for future systems and manage similar modularity to the M113, it's a very good system.
I love all the cool rundown of the gear and tech and weapons on these things from him 👌...
Cappy, that mortar deserves a video of its own. Pretty please.
Beet saying “Nothing!” Pure Gold Cappy
Loyally watching your ads to keep your advertisers coming and support your channel.
An APC with IFV-level protection, and an IFV with APC-level passenger capacity. So you get the best of both worlds.
also ModUlAriTY
BAE CV90 is a good example of how to do modularity properly.
@@LeonardTavastor the Boxer
Yeah, that's been the design philosophy of the IDF for decades, with the Namer and Eitan. The one downside is that the logistics can be difficult, as that sort of vehicle typically requires more tech support and fuel. However, this isn't really an issue for the US, as we are the undisputed kings of logistics.
@@MaticTheProto the boxer isnt on an ifv level but has the potential to be the future of lighter formations. you can fill pretty much every role with a boxer variant for a reasonable price.
@ the boxer can be used as an ifv actually
Finally. I was waiting for another video to listen to. Thank you
Amazing work! This all new to me. Outstanding!
This content had me subscribing in a few minutes. Excellent.
Much respect, this is a well developed overview my man.
Thanks! Love your content!
0:37 that’s a wild thing to put into the video 😭🙏
Regarding monolithic hulls.... I'm not sure of the complete wisdom of such an approach. Yes, it theoretically saves cost and improves survivability.... for the first shot. Most of the time, armored vehicles aren't completely destroyed following an engagement. Instead, they take minor damage where they've been hit. Traditionally, repair meant swapping out the damaged panel for a new one. But if it's all one piece, that means the vehicle can't be as easily repaired or even need to be scrapped and replaced in its entirety.
Same here. I think that with some clever thinking and repair kits, it might be patched up in "adequate" manner in the field, but some thinking and testing shoudl be done. On the other hand - more components survive, get them out put on new hull from storage. Usually, it's the components that take time to make and are most expensive.
Indeed it is utterly stuoid to make a single piece instead od replacable parts. Who woykd build a car like this?
It is not so simple, swapping damaged panels in all fine and dandy but the vehicle has to survive long enough to be repaired. Also if it is a "troop transport" type vehicle then the #1 priority is the survival of the troops inside. Yes, Damage to the hull could potentially "total" the vehicle but if it uses a version of the Bradley hull then there is nothing to worry about. it will be more than simply metal, it will be layered, and if we are learning like we should, then a form of reactive armor on top of that. It could potentially be more expensive, or it could save millions because we aren't having 200+ of them destroyed along with the crew and the equipment inside. The US military knows that the better quality the technology you can give the warfighter the more effective they are. Period. Keeping troops alive is cheaper and quicker than training new ones. Period.
It's hard to repair a panel when you are a flaming body inside the twisted metal sarcophagus left over because people are still building these things when $10 cardboard drones can completely obliterate them.
The Soviet's best.
Happy to see you back ❤
Great ep, Cappy! Putting that knowledge in my skull sponge and having me laugh while you do it. Thanks!
Great episode! Glad to see the M113 being put out to pasture. It was getting downright embarrassing to see these still fielded. The design was almost 30 years old when I went in; and that was 35 years ago. They're antiques. And they weren't all that to begin with. As for its modularity of this new vehicle, we've heard that before. But based on this video it looks like they might be on to something this time. When you mention 30 different turret designs, the first thing that came to mind was training, as every version will have its learning curve for the soldiers operating it. If you're just dealing with a handful of options, like on the Stryker and Bradley, that's not so bad. But 30? Of course, you have to consider logistics is supporting all the variants' ammunition needs as well. All that aside, it still looks pretty good and might be what we need.
I think that with M113 just to have some fixed and held in "high readiness reserve" could still have its uses. Think of it as tracked Jeep / basic Humvee for rough terrain. Box to move things in bad conditions (weather, terrain) but in relatively uncontested rear.
There’s a Colonel Cannon in the Armour corps 🎉
I think it will just have a handful of system templates, but being modular means new design/ systems can be integrated much easier to fight against new tactics, much like the Ukrainians throwing hate with FPV and mini drones after Bayraktar TB2 was ineffective after the first few months.
FINALLY! This looks like the best "Modular" program I have seen. The point is to have a single platform with several build-outs being used to their strengths. Not an All-In-One vehicle. The past attempts at common/modular platforms for vehicles, boats and planes have been executed...interestingly
just buy boxers. its a proven and capable platform and already has a 155mm and a good AA variant.
@@nox5555 Boxer is really good and does the modularity thing very well, but it is wheeled and does not fit into all roles of tracked vehicles
@@LuLu-ip4zb It can go everywhere a tracked vehicle of this size should go.
You had my attention at airburst 30mm auto cannon.
That's actaully very cool system using same 30x117LF ' - land appliation of Apache gun.
KICK ASS JOB BROTHER,OOOHHWAAAHHH!! ILOVE LOVE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE PUT OUT TO WATCH. KEEP IT UP!!!❤❤❤❤❤
Finally a video I can watch and not a members only one.
That same chassis was used in the M270 MLRS launcher. Super fun to drive, and the ability to get gone made Me feel like a stealthy hippo.
Jesus, that mortar, no more farting about with baseplates and sights, just unpack the lawnchairs and beer cooler and let the system do its work.
We’ve had that in service since 2006 here in Finland.
The double barreled version though, Patria AMOS 😅
Great if this prompts more sales!
I heard about this 10 years ago when i was in the army using a M113.
There was always a program to update the M113. Most of them failed or the government/army lost interest in them.
@emileblanche5868 im talking about this program specifically
Thanks for your continued reporting😊
Damn man. I remember when you had a couple hundred followers. Good for you Chris
Maybe those old m113s could be given to resupply teams, as they don't really need lots of firepower but precisely the cheapest way to deliver stuff to combat?
They could be pretty rad project for making them completely unmanned.
I feel like the single piece hull design may be a double edged sword.
On hand, yes, it's always great to be able to reduce weight and improve protection. On the other hand, these types of vehicles are regularly damaged while still being recoverable and then easily repaired in the field. Haveing what essentially amounts to a "unibody" will mean that even in cases where the extra protection wasn't needed, the damage is bad enough to mean that A: The chassis is scrapped taking the vehicle out of the fight or B: They fix it with welds and replacement panels, leading to a false sense of security and the negating of the benefits in the first place.
If the unibody is just the "frame" of the hull with the armor and suspension added on later, that *might* (not always) meant that such repairs aren't as big of an issue for integrity, but it certainly will complicate repairs.
It certainly is going to be patch repaired I think, at least some of the time. Being able to just replace the whole thing sounds great, and with our current logistics system we might be able to do the transportation to the front part, but the issue will be production needing to scale up in the event of a real war. (Much like how we were suddenly running into production capacity issues just selling ammo to Europe and Ukraine).
We could make a positive speculation though, maybe they'll have stacks of unibodies and you just pull the parts from the damaged AMPV, green the spares for what got junked and slap it on a new frame.
Maybe it's just quicker, cheaper and easier to just discard bent frames.
Training certainly would be cheaper, as their job is make the AMPV Legos go, no need to train up expensive metal fabricators as it's more like a factory line than repair shop
Yeah, great point. Why build something cheaper lighter and stronger?
12:25 once again Command and Conquer predicts the future. This is just the Guardian IFV.
so under-rated for its predictions.
* hunter-seeker drones
* cyber-attacks
* IFVs and Brads dominating the light armor of the 90s and early 21st century
* non-state actors being viable as military/geopolitical threats
* twin towers getting hit
* commie china being a major global threat
* live overhead battle direction by commanders
* impending ecological collapse due to reliance on one of the world's key energy resources...
Dang, cute Chris' videos just keep on improving, gotta subscribe.
Good job Cappy. Take care of self, family, country first. Perhaps start a journal. Keep up the quality content! You are needed!
This video truly speaks to me. Thanks for sharing!
Also worth noting that the AMPV could just eliminate the need for the OMFV/XM30 while using the ideas paid for in the XM30 development (as the US Army has the rights to ALL that is developed in that project and even made it clear that XM30's could be built using both the Rheinmetall and GDLS parts ... like the Rheinmetall Lynx hull and the GDLS turret...) That means the unmanned functionality developed for the XM30 could easily placed within the AMPV too. Same with some of the drone and weapon ideas. And the AMPV could mount an autoloading and quick firing 50mm (or even 75mm, like the one first shown in the 1970's) cannon as there is no reason to believe such turrets would be too big for the platform.
I wanna see more militaries use CTAI's 40CTC 40mm Cased Telescope Cannon.
Those things are bad ass
No it wouldn't-the AMPV has the same issues that the Bradley has that is currently driving the development for the XM30.
If you replaced the Bradley with an AMPV with a turret, you'd basically have a Bradley again. It would be a lateral move with no meaningful improvement
@@sherminator981XM193 brings considerably more hate and discontent per serving vs. 25 Mike. Obviously less total ammo capacity, there are trade-offs for everything.
Assuming equivalent sensors and fire control systems you'd get increased range, payload and effectiveness against various threats( such as UAV's)
@@sherminator981 What do you believe can only be incorporated into an XM30? Gun? No. Electric drive? No. Missiles? No. Drones? No. Unmanned driving? No. Sensors? No. Modularity? No. All those things and more are doable... NOW, with the AMPV platform with the incorporation of the same tech (and BAE should have been the 3rd competitor for OMFV and still has all the tech and skills they developed for that program available.)
Frankly, the AMPV, with the various turrets, addresses plenty of the shortcomings people note about the Bradley at a significant cost saving. Is it really worth paying 20x more for a vehicle that is, at best, 10% better?
@@DarkHorseSki
Yes it is because your still using a platform that was designed nearly 50 years ago that shares the same shortcomings as its predecessor. The Army spelled out that the Bradley already has hit its max headroom for protection, power generation and other things so it is no longer viable for future missions it wants to do.
Buying AMPVs to replace Bradley's is nothing more then a lateral move and once you start adding the things your talking about to an old design its going to drive the price up and your still dealing with the limitations of a footprint of something that wasn't thought about 40-50 years ago engineering wise. You have limited space/power to do it. They are already struggling putting an Anti Missile defense system on the Bradley because of that.
As for pricing, your numbers are completely made up-the Army expect the XM30 to cost only 3x what the M2A4 is, but also don't forget that the XM30 will need a whole new logistics trail to support it with new training and maintenance support to keep it functional, so that accounts for the price increases. Plus I'm not even sure if the M2A4s are completely new vehicles-they might be remanufactured units also.
Love that the new Army has essentially just adopted the Rhino from 40k and will use it for everything
If only they'd call it the RH1-N0
Just as the god emperor intended
It's "For the Trumperor" now i guess 🤷♂️
Look, Rhinos. RHINOS! Our enemies hide in metal bawkses the cowards, the fools!
We ... we should take away their metal bawkses!
Cappy’s on fire! Informative and hilarious!
Thank you for this show.
You’re building something special. Keep moving forward!
history has always shown that "multi purpose" use military vehicles usually come with high casualties as well. you have to give up something to do everything. that balance triangle applies still
Care to elaborate? I’m not too familiar with multi purpose vehicles.
@ozone-xv7hk “Jack of all trades, master of none…”
However I’d argue this isn’t really the case, as is two separate modules. The base is designed for one thing: be an armored cargo box, whether that cargo be people, supplies, or weapon systems. The top is also specialized to its job
You should be forced to work in a bauxite mine like a dog for that horrendous take
Cappy, do a video on CTAI's 40CTC autocannon.
Its APFSDS round will punch through 140mm of RHA
It's standard round goes through 210mm of concrete, dry round to point penetrate or airburst
And it's Anti Aerial Airburst for drones etc
Reach out up to 8.5km
And fits where regular 30mm bushmaster does (or even 25mm). However - uncommon ammo and expensive as faq.
Wow!! It even has a Direct TV dome, outstanding!!
Task & Purpose is the best blog on TH-cam. Get well soon
The M113 may be as old as me but I wouldn’t throw one out of my garage.
Bout to eat a bowl of corn flakes to this
I'm drinking tobasco sauce.
And eating pickled onions.
@MostlyPennyCat to each his own I guess
@@thebestof3132
Will not for breakfast.
I was snacking on onions in the evening.
Wait, do Americans not eat pickled onions?
@MostlyPennyCat I'm african I don't known about them
BTW, did you know that BAE is now more American than British? They do more business in the USA, than in any other country.
Did you know they actually made a movie about the search for getting a new SP mortar system for the US Army? It's called "Finding NEMO"
Its British, 44% of its revenue comes from USA sales, the USA is a customer. Over 50% of Apple, Google, Ford, Mcdonalds, Nike etc's sales are outside of the USA. Does that make them non-American? No.
Ur on fire with this video
Fantastic video; thank you 👍
@14:00: "modular". Just sayin for those who were waiting for it...
Tks Cappy!
So basically what Sweden has done with CV90 30 years ago or Finland with PATRIA 20 years ago
But never tested in war and were seen as crap. Good on paper.
They need 30mm cannons with airburst ammo for small drone defense.
Too expensive and slow. Need something smaller and cheaper
@@gregoryfilin8040 Give it a co-axle Mossberg 590a1
Yup it's at 13:00, a variant with radar with airburst 30mm. I think this will become required drone defense
😮 wow. Thanks 👍😊. Cappy
So glad to hear that you are mentally stable Chris, just like me! 😊
New light tank be dope AF
Great video. I'm an ex- 11HE9 (11 Hotel Echo Niner) mechanized infantry guy, 1st Infantry Division. 2 years at Ft. Riley, KS and 2 years in Boblingen, West Germany, 1984-88. I operated the M901 ITV (Improved TOW Vehicle). Essentially a M113A1 w/ a TOW turret on top. Good to see the Army getting smart to replace the old 113 platform. Our vehicles were Vietnam era 113's, poorly maintained at the depot level, beat up and under-powered. Of course the 901 has long been replaced by the M2 Bradley. The many versions of the AMPV make perfect sense.
I really hope the top minds in the US military are finding ways to defend against cheap drones.
That’s the air-burst 30mm rounds, plus a lot of jamming.
Everyone in the private sector is seeking solution. Drones feel like the tank during WW1 where they didn't have any effective options besides improv and early anti-tank rifles until later on with proper development.
@@ilililil490 That's how things work. New innovations always take some time to iron out and figure out how to best use.
I love his humor and show.
Thank you for all that you do!! Great stuff!!
The military more than likely wanted people not to notice for opsec reasons
lol!! Sure thing
The "Op" being getting the budget passed without civilian protests. It has been public information since 2014 - literally everyone in the world except the average US civilian knows about its existence. The recent push to pay for the program means that republican lawmakers will need to justify helping Ukraine when they have been very loudly hating on any help given to Ukraine at all. Liberals hate all military and the conservatives have been programmed by their leaders to hate assistance for Ukraine.
its one of the most public widely disclosed programs in military history. no ones talking about it because it didnt have a 30mm autocannon until last year and was considered boring until now