Every comment saying it can't go toe to toe with heavy mbt's because of it's thin armor, this isn't warthunder. With a 120mm it's whoever get the first.
This comment is ironic because no armor is best armor in high tier modern era War Thunder gameplay. Even a lower caliber APFSDS round can end a MBT's day if the flanks are exposed. Some are far more vulnerable than others such as the T-72 etc but the point still stands - in war thunder AND real life the victor in mechanized or aerial combat is the one who acquires and fires first usually. Usually - it depends on your opponent. I would suggest the PK of a 1st Gen Strela against say an AH-64E is 0.001 due to technology. But if you manage to fire that Strela at the absolute bare minimum arming distance and MAWS fails, who know what could happen...
With 120mm APFSDS-T rounds this mean you are equal with the MBT but you are on the wheel this mean you can using mobility and surprise element to attack the enemy !!!.
Nice video host, thank you for sharing. Wow an IFV chassis mounted with a 120mm Smoothbore cannon, a weapon mount which primarily installed for an MBT. Was mounted to a non tracked platform, i find it very innovative and very so impressive.
The concept seems similar to a tank hunter, able to be used to contain breaches by enemy armoured elements. Few contemporary militaries have thus far seen a wheeled vehicle with an IFV level protection as a solution to this specific job, perhaps because anti-tank foot patrols are effective in this as well and as mobile when motorized. What this kind of vehicle would add is protection from enemy infantry and small arms fire, which is not absolutely central to the main job of a tank destroyer, but also from conventional, unguided artillery an anti-tank foot patrol would be vulnerable to if its position is found or correctly anticipated by the enemy. It remains to be seen if there emerges the demand of armoured vehicles configured like this in the future or if this niche is too marginal in the time of highly developed ATGMs and other affordable guided AT munitions, which often can be also be installed on less specialized configurations of the mobility platform.
No, its a Force Recon. Go have a look for enemy formations, retreat from most but if it come across anything it *can* deal with like other scouts or gets the chance to put a round or two into squadron command tank and retreat it has the option. The other role is when infantry in low intensity combat need a hole in a wall for a breach and clear or a pesky hardened position its got a gun to do it, which is better suited and cheaper than an ATGM.
No tank destroyers came to service since WWII. Maybe a few designs made during or right after WWII. MBT is a tank destroyer. No tank destroyers other than those vehicles fitted with some huge rocket launching battery - multi-missile platforms plugged into combined advanced detection spheres. Based on manned/unmanned air recon, radar networks, land scout and recon units, digital centralized management systems that combine it all together. Way off from the tank destroyer assignment.
I need one of these. Blast my way through morning traffic, ram other cars out of my parking spot, arrive in style... Maybe pick up a bunch of my workmates in full kit with briefcase and umbrella along the way.
@@wtfronsson They were in helicopter. it fell and all died. no assassination evidence has been brought up.. but this kind accident is good way to hide those actions.
it cant beacuse (i think) the structure of the vehicle wich is a canadian lav 3 without the auto cannon turret (its even built in canada the stryker that is if i remeber correctly) cant handle the recoil and impulses of the 120. It already has problems enough with the 105 of the mgs in recoil and ammo capacity and dont start talking about the mobility as the stryker is a semi useful overweight garbage can basically
I think many people in the comments fail to understand what an APC is.. this one carries 8-12 passengers aka soldiers + crew. Though i cant say for certain if mounting that cannon reduces passenger capacity or just increases weight. Generally only few would mount the cannon and other APC would have lighter stuff mounted.
AMV Patria takes 6-8 soldiers + 3-crew. With this turret + with ammo, it won't take more than 4 soldiers. Turret and basket are lighter and smaller with 30mm cannon than those with 120mm gun. An additional case is that the turret with small cannon in all new KTO Rosomak and AMV Patria for Slovakia will be unmanned.
Any turreted variant of the AMV is more like a wheeled IFV than anything. With a tank cannon such as in this variant it is clearly a combat vehicle that can go toe to toe with whatever it encounters. The main mission of anything with a 120mm gun would not be troop transport anyhow.
The french used a similair vehicle in counter-insurgency in the middle east, and where very happy with its capabilities. This kind of vehicle is faster and has a greater range then normal mbt's. The large caliber of the gun means its great against soft targets and can also engage targets with armor. Its doesnt replace mbt's but is great for an army that needs speed and range.
I'm confused? South Africa locally developed the Rooikat 8x8, which was an extremely capable vehicle... so why would SA be purchasing the Badger? Sounds like yet another case of state sanctioned thievery
The Rooikat and the Badger are to different classes of vehicles. The Rooikat is a scout vehicle and the Badger is an IFV. The Rooikat cannot carry troops.
@@2011Crafter Fair comment, but I still find it odd that a locally developed platform could not have been grown to fill the role. South Africa used to be a world leader in armoured vehicles, but now everything's been sold off or driven into bankruptcy. Sad.
@@celtisafricana4984 Considering that the Rooikat was never intended to have a crew compartment, it would have been rather costly to adapt the design. And the Badger is still incorporating a lot of South African technology, the entire turret was developed by Denel.
So what's the purpose of buying a cheap 8x8 platform which then if equipped with APS would get its price skyrocket levels. You cant cover it with heavy armor, you can't cover it with ERA armor, you can't make it as low as the MBT. Still, I have no problem with such vehicles. The generals, MODs, and headquarters do have when they purchase it. In their minds, it is not serving as a powerful infantry support unit but rather in the role of MBT for a 25% of the regular tank price.
@@Kevin-fj5oe Fire support. To support the INFANTRY. No such thing as tank destroyer since WWII! Aside from multi missile launching batteries. MBT is a current tank destroyer, medium tank, and heavy tank! Go back to playing games...
@@HanSolo__ man, literally the Italian army still use tank destroyer in form of The Centauro, also the PLA. Also, this type of vehicle wouldn't be used as the same role as MBT, its most likely either in Infantry support role or tank destroyer because the potential of the 120mm, which literally a tank gun
Like Patria AMV, wheeled military vehicles usually have "run flat devices", Patria AMV can still move 50 km with flat wheels. How about tracked vehicles, if track gets broken, what then? Mine protection is STANAG 4a/4b (10kg TNT) and protection can be further upgraded from this level. STANAG 4569 10 kg (explosive mass) Blast AT Mine: 4a - Mine Explosion pressure activated under any wheel or track location. 4b - Mine Explosion under center. Ballistic shot protection level is K5+, which deflects 25-30 mm APFSDS from 500m (frontal arc to centerline) or 155mm artillery fire from 10-25m. So there is some protection but this is APC/IFV/Ambulance/Tank Destroyer/Mortar System, not a tank. Anyway, not even tanks are safe on battlefield (loads of T-90s destroyed in Ukraine).
Probably for the same reason we only use for the paper we produce. There is no use producing much anything in this a small country without foreign demand .There's still hundreds of those outdated xa-180s used in other countries too. I don't think Finland really has a need for a wheeled tank destroyer, but many other countries do.
Why is everyone still fantasising about tank destroyers? What tanks do you think we will be facing in the near future? The more important use case for this type of vehicle would be as direct firesupport for the mech infantry it should be shadowing. Leave the tin can opening to the ATGMs. Give the infantrymen a cannon with a ton of HE to blow up enemy personnel and entrenchments.
I disagree: watching the Centauro 2 providing fier support to the FRECCIA APC demonstraded me the option to mount a 120mm cannon on a 8x8 APC is extremely uselful for a number of reasons: 1) ATGMs are EXPENSIVE as fuck, while a good HE shell usually costs a 10th of the price and training rounds cost even less making training and long term peacekeeping economically affordable. Most peacekeeping missions fail because of budget. 2) 120mm shells are REALLY good at destroing pillboxes, watchtowers and small fortifications in a single hit, with, again, a fraction of the price of an ATGM. In modern day guerrilla the ability to crush roadway outposts quickly and safely is a god send. 3) range: a 120mm shell can travel many times the distance of your average 30-25mm autcannon while hitting high priority targets. This means SAFETY, distance is better than any armor you can come up with, especially when RPGs are involved (and nowdays they usually are) you don't want your vehuckes near enemy infantry, even with modern day hard kill active protection systems. 4) ATGMs slow down the rythm of the battle (you need to keep the enemy on sight for seconds) and can be UNRELIABLE (visibility, electronics and weather conditions can impact an ATGM performances pretty heavilly). Meanwhile a good 120mm cannon is pretty much always reliable and once fiered you can relocate immediately or even shoot while moving fairly fast, and belive me, mobility is a key factor. 5) Ammo count. ATGMs are usually mounted in twin linked tubes meaning you have only 2 shots availabke to destroy an anemy MBT or AFV while with a 120mm cannon you have the options to lock down sectors for hours if you are in the right position because the enemy cannot deplete your anti tank ammo so quickly. 6) you are probably thinking "well, all this can be done by an MBT 120mm autocannon" but keep in mind a MBT cannot keep up with the speed of the average APC, they would fall behind and leave it without the fier support they need in hit and run fast missions where speed is key. I agree that today it's very uncommon to fight a MBT in modern guerrilla situations, but the 120mm cannon it's an incredible swiss knife that can solve a number of solutions that the autocannon/ATGM combination would struggle with or failcomplaetely. I also agree that the average APC should be armed with 25-30-35mm autocannons that can DEMOLISH enemy infantry like a jackhammer and maybe some ATGM for anti tank emergencies, also because that leaves actual space in the APC to transport troops. But ATGMs are an "afterthought" for emerency situations where you got cought off guard by the presence of a MBT-AFV. EVERY NATION's army should have a 120mm MGS in the future to provide a type of fire support the average unit needs.
@TJ Murphy that doesn't seem to be a relevant issue. Most of the cost is still in the gun and electronics. Most militaries that can afford this type of technologically advanced vehicle have the money to afford MBTs. Those that don't, buy old tanks anyway.
@@IlhamDefraN This type of vehicle is classed as tank destroyer! It carried as many crews as an MBT, gunner, commander, driver or even loader! This is not APC or IFV where they are equipped with smaller guns but capable of carrying more troops.
@@i_nameless_i-jgsdf it its inherently for troop transport, in this particular video is variant with 120mm gun, idk if it still has space for passenger or not, maybe just 4-6 seat
Neat. But what would you do with it? I doubt you would want to try and take on a MBT with it (it can only stand up to 30mm fire). It's kind of like an old battlecruiser - a battleship gun with cruiser armour. And the British learned at Jutland how that idea worked out.
It really depends on the situation, a turret with a gun this big proves that this vehicle is perfect to replace the Ratel ifv system here in South Africa. It just proves that Denel can manufacture a new turret and gun to help replace the Ratel 90mm.
@@agentmonde1 Yeah, but the South Africans did not use the Ratel as a MBT replacement. It was for the mobile infantry. The gun is pointless. This AMV will get obliterated if it goes toe-to-toe with other MBT's due to it's thin armour. So what is the gun for? To scare them away? The Swedes for years have tried to peddle their version of this - the CV90120-T. And apparently they have sold zero so far. Probably because the world is saying what I am...the huge gun is cool, but pointless.
Obviously you don't understand modern warfare. A wheeled armored gun system/tank destroyer gives lighter units heavy firepower. You keep haranguing on it fighting mbt's but you seem unaware that this vehicle would use different tactics that trying to fight it out toe to toe with tanks. And against lighter armored vehicles and infantry, the vehicle would accel. As it would against fortifications. Even tanks are vulnerable on the modern battlefield, crews have to use terrain and concealment to survive. The fact that only the stingray light tank has sold overseas does not negate this concept. Getting heavy firepower onto and off the battlefield quickly is always a good thing. Doing it at a fraction of the cost is even better.
JoeDurobot Nope it can’t carry 12 troops I don’t know where the fuck you got your info ,it could carry only 2 soldiers besides the crew of 4 ,even Israeli Merkava which classify as MBT can carry more troops..
It is not a tank. Light chassis relative to the gun. It is wheeled. It won't handle the recoil that well when firing on the move. The vehicle will bounce around when firing. A modern MBT has speed and gun dexterity to fire on the move. A tank is about the maneuver. Calling it a tank is like calling an assault gun a tank.
structurally and technologically VERY different vehicles from very different times made to meet very different demands. The AMV is a troop-transport, the AMX is a reconnaissance vehicle first of all. all these vehicles share in common is that they are both wheeled.
Not sure how modular AMX-10-RC was, but Patria AMV stands for Armoured Modular Vehicle. Different models/configurations include at least 16 different versions: 1) Basic model - Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) with e.g. Kongsberg Dual Protector RWS (M2 Browning 12.7. machine gun and Javelin anti-tank missile) - Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) 20+mm cannons e.g. Mk 44 Bushmaster II 30mm autocannon, BAE E35 35mm autocannon, Northrop Grumman XM913 50mm autocannon, Rosomak 57 mm cannon etc - Command Vehicle - Reconnaissance Vehicle - Medical Evacuation Vehicle - Anti Aircraft Vehicle with e.g. Crotale NG - Anti-Tank Guided Missile Vehicle (ATGM) with e.g. 9M113 / Spike / Denel MCT Missile - Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Vehicle (CBRN) - Armoured Repair and Recovery Vehicle (ARRV) - Engineering Vehicle - Radar Vehicle - Electronic Warfare Vehicle - Turreted Mortar System / Indirect fire, e.g. 1 x 120 mm Patria NEMO mortar system 2) High roof model (34cm higher than basic model) - Command and Control/C4I Vehicle - Ambulance - Workshop Vehicle 3) Heavy weapons model (for large caliber weapon systems) - Tank Destroyer / Direct fire 105/120mm cannons, e.g. Leonardo HITFACT 120 mm cannon - Turreted Mortar System / Indirect fire, e.g. 2 x 120mm Patria-Hägglunds AMOS mortar system Some Spec comparison: AMX-10-RC - 6x6 wheels - Main Armament: F2 BK MECA L/47 105mm cannon - Secondary Armament: 7.62mm NF-1 machine gun, 12.7mm M2HB AA machine gun - NATO compatible shells: No - Engine: 280 hp Baudouin Model 6F 11 SRX - Range: 800 km - Max Speed: 80 km/h - Amphibious: Yes, 7.6 km/h (No after modernization to AMX-10-RCR) - Weight: 16.000-22.000 kg - NBC protection: Yes - IED protection: No, added via SEPAR kit - Ballistic threats: Front armor 23mm from 300m - Mine protection: No, added via SEPAR kit - Low radar and thermal signature: No Patria AMV XP - 8x8 wheels - Main Armament: Leonard HITFACT 120 mm cannon / Patria AMOS 2 x 120mm mortar system - Secondary Armament: Kongsberg Protector RWS - NATO compatible shells/rounds: Yes - Engine: 540 hp DC 13 Scania Diesel - Range: 1000 km - Max Speed: 100 km/h - Amphibious: Yes, 10 km/h - Weight: 16.000-32.000 kg - NBC protection: Yes - IED protection: Yes - Ballistic threats: K5+, 30mm APFSDS - Mine protection: STANAG 4a/4b, scalable above this - Low radar and thermal signature: Yes
Its hard to make tank that can take hits from modern tank guns and anti tank missiles. AMV is not meant to survive anything else than heavy machinegunfire, so those are much much easier and cheaper to design. Alone designing main battle tank must cost billions.
@@shaminy Well, modern AMV's are designed to take way harder hits than just machine guns =D But you are right, it is expensive. Maybe as joint production it could be done but not alone.
This is a modular design that can be fitted for multiple purposes. It doesn't need to be the best on market for every purpose to still make sense. And if it gets outdated for some purposes it will still be usable for others. But when an MBT gets outdated as an MBT... well, its scrap metal. Even if you get everything right in the design, the risk of sales never even covering the development costs is stellar.
It's all about mobility and precision. Shoot 'n Scoot. Hide. For MBTs to have a snowballs chance in hell of breaking through, they need helluva lot of support and they sure as hell do not drive in neat lines. This could be one form of direct fire support.
Не убеждён насчёт хорошего, если говорить именно про ту модификацию, что видим здесь. Давать такое серьёзное вооружение как 120мм пушку и при этом иметь лишь лёгкую броню - путь к братской могиле. @@pkostenko1996 th-cam.com/video/pGaV5ADa07M/w-d-xo.html
@@SuperRip7 "If you can't afford an MBT with both Good Firepower and Armor at the same time, then why not buy something cheaper with greater firepower" is what i think he said. im unsure
@@SuperRip7 yeah actually, i agree. Caterpillar tracks does not work better on concrete roads or solid surface, inflated/rubber wheels are more favorable in this kind of terrain.
120 mm? Please don't tell me this is Rheinmetals or krupps 120 that's used by every NATO force? Thanks Russia for going outside the proverbial box and using 125
The gun on this vehicle is similar to the Rheinmetall 120 but it's lighter, has superior recoil control and uses the same ammo, this is a major bonus as it is superior to the 105mm guns mounted on similar vehicles and it shares ammo compatibility with modern western MBT's making logistics a lot easier.
@TJ Murphy lol. Really? I know things that will blow your mind. I was 17 years old and after Taking the ASVAB test, the Army corp of Engineers sent me a recruitment letter before I was 18. Facts. I don't brag, and I dont pretend to know everything. I do however know this- The ONLY weapon I need Is God. If you dont claim God and Jesus....you are of the alternative the devil. These ARE the end times! Thank God I am alive NOW to witness it all Go down. Israel became a country again after ww2....Just like the bible said it would. Now as of 4 days ago, Israel recieved rights to the temple mount/dome of the rock. Now they can build the third temple....just like the bible says. I can care less what you think I know about anything. I only have the truth. The truth is you commented on some old comment I left. The only thing you did was showed me how you think. You like to compare yourself to others and draw conclusions about people based on some random comment. Only, it shows me where your heart is....its of the Earth. My heart is of God. With that said....You attempted to Judge my knowledge.....But you only Judged yourself. If you ever want an intelligent conversation there are better ways to do it, like explaining why you assume I dont know whatever it is you claim I dont know. I hope you have a good day.
Every comment saying it can't go toe to toe with heavy mbt's because of it's thin armor, this isn't warthunder. With a 120mm it's whoever get the first.
It is the case even in war thunder
This comment is ironic because no armor is best armor in high tier modern era War Thunder gameplay. Even a lower caliber APFSDS round can end a MBT's day if the flanks are exposed. Some are far more vulnerable than others such as the T-72 etc but the point still stands - in war thunder AND real life the victor in mechanized or aerial combat is the one who acquires and fires first usually.
Usually - it depends on your opponent. I would suggest the PK of a 1st Gen Strela against say an AH-64E is 0.001 due to technology. But if you manage to fire that Strela at the absolute bare minimum arming distance and MAWS fails, who know what could happen...
With 120mm APFSDS-T rounds this mean you are equal with the MBT but you are on the wheel this mean you can using mobility and surprise element to attack the enemy !!!.
It is a modern combination of light tank/ armoured car with a equal firepower of mbt.
Nice video host, thank you for sharing. Wow an IFV chassis mounted with a 120mm Smoothbore cannon, a weapon mount which primarily installed for an MBT. Was mounted to a non tracked platform, i find it very innovative and very so impressive.
The concept seems similar to a tank hunter, able to be used to contain breaches by enemy armoured elements. Few contemporary militaries have thus far seen a wheeled vehicle with an IFV level protection as a solution to this specific job, perhaps because anti-tank foot patrols are effective in this as well and as mobile when motorized. What this kind of vehicle would add is protection from enemy infantry and small arms fire, which is not absolutely central to the main job of a tank destroyer, but also from conventional, unguided artillery an anti-tank foot patrol would be vulnerable to if its position is found or correctly anticipated by the enemy.
It remains to be seen if there emerges the demand of armoured vehicles configured like this in the future or if this niche is too marginal in the time of highly developed ATGMs and other affordable guided AT munitions, which often can be also be installed on less specialized configurations of the mobility platform.
Cute little cameo jacket.
Awesome 👍
Hello from Poland:))))
I think purpose of this vehicle is similar to m10 tank destroyer, ambush vehicle that is deployed with reserves to ambush advancing enemy heavy armour
No, its a Force Recon. Go have a look for enemy formations, retreat from most but if it come across anything it *can* deal with like other scouts or gets the chance to put a round or two into squadron command tank and retreat it has the option. The other role is when infantry in low intensity combat need a hole in a wall for a breach and clear or a pesky hardened position its got a gun to do it, which is better suited and cheaper than an ATGM.
@@Tuberuser187 true, these multipurpose vehicles are nice
attack helicopter is the modern tank destroyer
@@emomales5782 yes and no 😊 😄
No tank destroyers came to service since WWII. Maybe a few designs made during or right after WWII. MBT is a tank destroyer. No tank destroyers other than those vehicles fitted with some huge rocket launching battery - multi-missile platforms plugged into combined advanced detection spheres. Based on manned/unmanned air recon, radar networks, land scout and recon units, digital centralized management systems that combine it all together.
Way off from the tank destroyer assignment.
Lots of TH-cam experts on here, I suspect they are Facebook experts too!!
Croatian Army needs these
I need one of these. Blast my way through morning traffic, ram other cars out of my parking spot, arrive in style... Maybe pick up a bunch of my workmates in full kit with briefcase and umbrella along the way.
If that is what you need it for, you need AMOS version of it =D
Does it come in blue?
Let it go, let the storm rage onnnnnnnnn!
Good idea
A patria salesman from Finland got assassinated on a business trip to Uganda. Further evidence of the APC's capability.
Source?
@@wtfronsson They were in helicopter. it fell and all died. no assassination evidence has been brought up.. but this kind accident is good way to hide those actions.
@@simo805 Indeed. Fairly "popular" cover up method for assassination, I believe.
Normal stuff. Russians die when they Day stop WAR
I have Christopher Foss's book!
That thing looked VERY top heavy
It should be noted that it is a 120 mm low pressure ...
Is this same like the 120mm RUAG compact tank gun on the CV90120-T.
Yeah!
Yeah but its bigger and wheeled this time.
How come the Stryker cant seem to work with a 120mm cannon? I think it can, US Army just doesn’t want it to.
it cant beacuse (i think) the structure of the vehicle wich is a canadian lav 3 without the auto cannon turret (its even built in canada the stryker that is if i remeber correctly) cant handle the recoil and impulses of the 120. It already has problems enough with the 105 of the mgs in recoil and ammo capacity and dont start talking about the mobility as the stryker is a semi useful overweight garbage can basically
Is the main gun stabilised?
I think many people in the comments fail to understand what an APC is.. this one carries 8-12 passengers aka soldiers + crew. Though i cant say for certain if mounting that cannon reduces passenger capacity or just increases weight. Generally only few would mount the cannon and other APC would have lighter stuff mounted.
AMV Patria takes 6-8 soldiers + 3-crew. With this turret + with ammo, it won't take more than 4 soldiers. Turret and basket are lighter and smaller with 30mm cannon than those with 120mm gun. An additional case is that the turret with small cannon in all new KTO Rosomak and AMV Patria for Slovakia will be unmanned.
Any turreted variant of the AMV is more like a wheeled IFV than anything. With a tank cannon such as in this variant it is clearly a combat vehicle that can go toe to toe with whatever it encounters. The main mission of anything with a 120mm gun would not be troop transport anyhow.
How many can fit aboard A400M and C-17 transports .
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
It´s definately cool, but what is it´s combatrole?
The french used a similair vehicle in counter-insurgency in the middle east, and where very happy with its capabilities. This kind of vehicle is faster and has a greater range then normal mbt's. The large caliber of the gun means its great against soft targets and can also engage targets with armor. Its doesnt replace mbt's but is great for an army that needs speed and range.
For asian country full of jungle and tropical forrest a lighter vehicle is better
Probably medic
@@Kevin-fj5oe this vehicle is made for harsh conditions like finland tahts why (cold harsh conditions)
And there was slovenia sign up there🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮😂😂🇸🇮🇸🇮❤️❤️🇸🇮🇸🇮
What type of camoflauge covering is in the vehicle behind the spokesman?
So THAT'S where the arma 3 Rhino got ripped from
I'm confused? South Africa locally developed the Rooikat 8x8, which was an extremely capable vehicle... so why would SA be purchasing the Badger? Sounds like yet another case of state sanctioned thievery
The Rooikat and the Badger are to different classes of vehicles. The Rooikat is a scout vehicle and the Badger is an IFV. The Rooikat cannot carry troops.
@@2011Crafter Fair comment, but I still find it odd that a locally developed platform could not have been grown to fill the role. South Africa used to be a world leader in armoured vehicles, but now everything's been sold off or driven into bankruptcy. Sad.
@@celtisafricana4984 Considering that the Rooikat was never intended to have a crew compartment, it would have been rather costly to adapt the design. And the Badger is still incorporating a lot of South African technology, the entire turret was developed by Denel.
Would it surprise anyone to discover? Obviously some cash switched hands somewhere.
I quess the Badger id a variant of the Finnish Patria AMV?
when war thuder will add this vehicle?
looks like an mbt80 turret
Can you buy soft tank form my 3d can be?
I see look like Centuoro from Spain
If you can fit an Active Protection System, then it is good.
It can be fitted with AMAP-ADS.
So what's the purpose of buying a cheap 8x8 platform which then if equipped with APS would get its price skyrocket levels. You cant cover it with heavy armor, you can't cover it with ERA armor, you can't make it as low as the MBT.
Still, I have no problem with such vehicles. The generals, MODs, and headquarters do have when they purchase it. In their minds, it is not serving as a powerful infantry support unit but rather in the role of MBT for a 25% of the regular tank price.
@@HanSolo__ a fire support/tank destroyer
@@Kevin-fj5oe Fire support. To support the INFANTRY. No such thing as tank destroyer since WWII! Aside from multi missile launching batteries. MBT is a current tank destroyer, medium tank, and heavy tank! Go back to playing games...
@@HanSolo__ man, literally the Italian army still use tank destroyer in form of The Centauro, also the PLA. Also, this type of vehicle wouldn't be used as the same role as MBT, its most likely either in Infantry support role or tank destroyer because the potential of the 120mm, which literally a tank gun
Buy it loads
Is it a French armored personnel carrier?
Finnish
Why patria use rubber wheels not ironmetal chain wheels how if patria get mine or balistic shoot is have protection?
Like Patria AMV, wheeled military vehicles usually have "run flat devices", Patria AMV can still move 50 km with flat wheels. How about tracked vehicles, if track gets broken, what then?
Mine protection is STANAG 4a/4b (10kg TNT) and protection can be further upgraded from this level.
STANAG 4569
10 kg (explosive mass) Blast AT Mine:
4a - Mine Explosion pressure activated under any wheel or track location.
4b - Mine Explosion under center.
Ballistic shot protection level is K5+, which deflects 25-30 mm APFSDS from 500m (frontal arc to centerline) or 155mm artillery fire from 10-25m.
So there is some protection but this is APC/IFV/Ambulance/Tank Destroyer/Mortar System, not a tank. Anyway, not even tanks are safe on battlefield (loads of T-90s destroyed in Ukraine).
na tym nośniku można montować 120 mm
Love how we have just a few patria amvs in Finland and use the outdated xa-180 and others while other countries got hundreds of these 😂
Probably for the same reason we only use for the paper we produce. There is no use producing much anything in this a small country without foreign demand .There's still hundreds of those outdated xa-180s used in other countries too. I don't think Finland really has a need for a wheeled tank destroyer, but many other countries do.
Gaijin pls
This destroys everything.
Why is everyone still fantasising about tank destroyers?
What tanks do you think we will be facing in the near future?
The more important use case for this type of vehicle would be as direct firesupport for the mech infantry it should be shadowing.
Leave the tin can opening to the ATGMs.
Give the infantrymen a cannon with a ton of HE to blow up enemy personnel and entrenchments.
I disagree: watching the Centauro 2 providing fier support to the FRECCIA APC demonstraded me the option to mount a 120mm cannon on a 8x8 APC is extremely uselful for a number of reasons:
1) ATGMs are EXPENSIVE as fuck, while a good HE shell usually costs a 10th of the price and training rounds cost even less making training and long term peacekeeping economically affordable. Most peacekeeping missions fail because of budget.
2) 120mm shells are REALLY good at destroing pillboxes, watchtowers and small fortifications in a single hit, with, again, a fraction of the price of an ATGM. In modern day guerrilla the ability to crush roadway outposts quickly and safely is a god send.
3) range: a 120mm shell can travel many times the distance of your average 30-25mm autcannon while hitting high priority targets. This means SAFETY, distance is better than any armor you can come up with, especially when RPGs are involved (and nowdays they usually are) you don't want your vehuckes near enemy infantry, even with modern day hard kill active protection systems.
4) ATGMs slow down the rythm of the battle (you need to keep the enemy on sight for seconds) and can be UNRELIABLE (visibility, electronics and weather conditions can impact an ATGM performances pretty heavilly). Meanwhile a good 120mm cannon is pretty much always reliable and once fiered you can relocate immediately or even shoot while moving fairly fast, and belive me, mobility is a key factor.
5) Ammo count. ATGMs are usually mounted in twin linked tubes meaning you have only 2 shots availabke to destroy an anemy MBT or AFV while with a 120mm cannon you have the options to lock down sectors for hours if you are in the right position because the enemy cannot deplete your anti tank ammo so quickly.
6) you are probably thinking "well, all this can be done by an MBT 120mm autocannon" but keep in mind a MBT cannot keep up with the speed of the average APC, they would fall behind and leave it without the fier support they need in hit and run fast missions where speed is key.
I agree that today it's very uncommon to fight a MBT in modern guerrilla situations, but the 120mm cannon it's an incredible swiss knife that can solve a number of solutions that the autocannon/ATGM combination would struggle with or failcomplaetely.
I also agree that the average APC should be armed with 25-30-35mm autocannons that can DEMOLISH enemy infantry like a jackhammer and maybe some ATGM for anti tank emergencies, also because that leaves actual space in the APC to transport troops. But ATGMs are an "afterthought" for emerency situations where you got cought off guard by the presence of a MBT-AFV. EVERY NATION's army should have a 120mm MGS in the future to provide a type of fire support the average unit needs.
@TJ Murphy that doesn't seem to be a relevant issue. Most of the cost is still in the gun and electronics.
Most militaries that can afford this type of technologically advanced vehicle have the money to afford MBTs.
Those that don't, buy old tanks anyway.
@@revolverDOOMGUY i don't believe you disagree with me at all.
"What tanks do you think we will be facing in the near future?" T72s maybe
@@dimmazeen i promise you tgere will be more infantry, fortifications, BMPs and BTRs to fight with light tanks than T-72s
I will never understand why these ''lightly armored'' vehicles are so fcking huge! They are as huge as an MBT, and as tall if not taller!
the mass is half of the MBT, tank armor is denser while vehicle like this is designed to have space for passenger
Yeah and this is small compared to the Boxer. Not so good for small urban environments and rickety bridges.
They are huge because they are built on a multipurpose chassis.
@@IlhamDefraN
This type of vehicle is classed as tank destroyer! It carried as many crews as an MBT, gunner, commander, driver or even loader!
This is not APC or IFV where they are equipped with smaller guns but capable of carrying more troops.
@@i_nameless_i-jgsdf it its inherently for troop transport, in this particular video is variant with 120mm gun, idk if it still has space for passenger or not, maybe just 4-6 seat
Neat. But what would you do with it? I doubt you would want to try and take on a MBT with it (it can only stand up to 30mm fire). It's kind of like an old battlecruiser - a battleship gun with cruiser armour. And the British learned at Jutland how that idea worked out.
It just depends on the situation. I’m sure it would be very effective in the Syria-Iraq conflict zone, and in Africa, but not so much in Europe.
It really depends on the situation, a turret with a gun this big proves that this vehicle is perfect to replace the Ratel ifv system here in South Africa. It just proves that Denel can manufacture a new turret and gun to help replace the Ratel 90mm.
@@agentmonde1 Yeah, but the South Africans did not use the Ratel as a MBT replacement. It was for the mobile infantry.
The gun is pointless. This AMV will get obliterated if it goes toe-to-toe with other MBT's due to it's thin armour. So what is the gun for? To scare them away?
The Swedes for years have tried to peddle their version of this - the CV90120-T. And apparently they have sold zero so far.
Probably because the world is saying what I am...the huge gun is cool, but pointless.
@@SuperCommunityLP I would think Africa is not a hard-target rich environment, and an autocannon with rpg dismount would do just as good.
Obviously you don't understand modern warfare. A wheeled armored gun system/tank destroyer gives lighter units heavy firepower. You keep haranguing on it fighting mbt's but you seem unaware that this vehicle would use different tactics that trying to fight it out toe to toe with tanks. And against lighter armored vehicles and infantry, the vehicle would accel. As it would against fortifications.
Even tanks are vulnerable on the modern battlefield, crews have to use terrain and concealment to survive. The fact that only the stingray light tank has sold overseas does not negate this concept. Getting heavy firepower onto and off the battlefield quickly is always a good thing. Doing it at a fraction of the cost is even better.
So...this is basically a light tank ,what’s the point calling this machine an APC?
At 32 metric tons, it's NOT light... by WW2 standards, it would be a medium tank ;-)
*It can carry up to 12 troops, it's an APC, not a tank.*
JoeDurobot Nope it can’t carry 12 troops I don’t know where the fuck you got your info ,it could carry only 2 soldiers besides the crew of 4 ,even Israeli Merkava which classify as MBT can carry more troops..
It is not a tank. Light chassis relative to the gun. It is wheeled. It won't handle the recoil that well when firing on the move. The vehicle will bounce around when firing. A modern MBT has speed and gun dexterity to fire on the move. A tank is about the maneuver. Calling it a tank is like calling an assault gun a tank.
@@eliasborsov8188 Crew of 3 + 8 personnel.
'
great germany made the cannon gun 120mm...
same as M1A1 tank
Natural choice since we have Leopards as MBT's
What if the enemy shot the wheels to deflate the tyres
It fires back with equal firepower.
It can move 50km with empty tyres
Amphibious?
They are.
120mm? That would be overkill
Lol
how heavy is it ?
We finnish are so angry that you all call us small :D
@@gasdorficmuncher9943 in the video, they say it, in this config is 32t
GLITZ. TOP. NOTCH
Christopher F randomly starts slurring, sometimes dropping up to four syllables in a row, like he just gave up talking.
French AMX-10-RC!
The French Foreign Legion Tank Hunter from 2nd Gulf War Ops
All they did was add 2 wheels.
structurally and technologically VERY different vehicles from very different times made to meet very different demands. The AMV is a troop-transport, the AMX is a reconnaissance vehicle first of all. all these vehicles share in common is that they are both wheeled.
Not sure how modular AMX-10-RC was, but Patria AMV stands for Armoured Modular Vehicle. Different models/configurations include at least 16 different versions:
1) Basic model
- Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) with e.g. Kongsberg Dual Protector RWS (M2 Browning 12.7. machine gun and Javelin anti-tank missile)
- Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) 20+mm cannons e.g. Mk 44 Bushmaster II 30mm autocannon, BAE E35 35mm autocannon, Northrop Grumman XM913 50mm autocannon, Rosomak 57 mm cannon etc
- Command Vehicle
- Reconnaissance Vehicle
- Medical Evacuation Vehicle
- Anti Aircraft Vehicle with e.g. Crotale NG
- Anti-Tank Guided Missile Vehicle (ATGM) with e.g. 9M113 / Spike / Denel MCT Missile
- Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Vehicle (CBRN)
- Armoured Repair and Recovery Vehicle (ARRV)
- Engineering Vehicle
- Radar Vehicle
- Electronic Warfare Vehicle
- Turreted Mortar System / Indirect fire, e.g. 1 x 120 mm Patria NEMO mortar system
2) High roof model (34cm higher than basic model)
- Command and Control/C4I Vehicle
- Ambulance
- Workshop Vehicle
3) Heavy weapons model (for large caliber weapon systems)
- Tank Destroyer / Direct fire 105/120mm cannons, e.g. Leonardo HITFACT 120 mm cannon
- Turreted Mortar System / Indirect fire, e.g. 2 x 120mm Patria-Hägglunds AMOS mortar system
Some Spec comparison:
AMX-10-RC
- 6x6 wheels
- Main Armament: F2 BK MECA L/47 105mm cannon
- Secondary Armament: 7.62mm NF-1 machine gun, 12.7mm M2HB AA machine gun
- NATO compatible shells: No
- Engine: 280 hp Baudouin Model 6F 11 SRX
- Range: 800 km
- Max Speed: 80 km/h
- Amphibious: Yes, 7.6 km/h (No after modernization to AMX-10-RCR)
- Weight: 16.000-22.000 kg
- NBC protection: Yes
- IED protection: No, added via SEPAR kit
- Ballistic threats: Front armor 23mm from 300m
- Mine protection: No, added via SEPAR kit
- Low radar and thermal signature: No
Patria AMV XP
- 8x8 wheels
- Main Armament: Leonard HITFACT 120 mm cannon / Patria AMOS 2 x 120mm mortar system
- Secondary Armament: Kongsberg Protector RWS
- NATO compatible shells/rounds: Yes
- Engine: 540 hp DC 13 Scania Diesel
- Range: 1000 km
- Max Speed: 100 km/h
- Amphibious: Yes, 10 km/h
- Weight: 16.000-32.000 kg
- NBC protection: Yes
- IED protection: Yes
- Ballistic threats: K5+, 30mm APFSDS
- Mine protection: STANAG 4a/4b, scalable above this
- Low radar and thermal signature: Yes
M
"Pentagon Wars" in real life.
"We know it is an Armoured personnel carrier but does the enemy? "
Why dont finns just make their own tanks if they can make this?
It's a lot cheaper and less risky to buy 100 used, combat-proven tanks than design and manufacture them yourself
Its hard to make tank that can take hits from modern tank guns and anti tank missiles. AMV is not meant to survive anything else than heavy machinegunfire, so those are much much easier and cheaper to design. Alone designing main battle tank must cost billions.
@@shaminy Well, modern AMV's are designed to take way harder hits than just machine guns =D But you are right, it is expensive. Maybe as joint production it could be done but not alone.
This is a modular design that can be fitted for multiple purposes. It doesn't need to be the best on market for every purpose to still make sense. And if it gets outdated for some purposes it will still be usable for others. But when an MBT gets outdated as an MBT... well, its scrap metal. Even if you get everything right in the design, the risk of sales never even covering the development costs is stellar.
It's all about mobility and precision. Shoot 'n Scoot. Hide. For MBTs to have a snowballs chance in hell of breaking through, they need helluva lot of support and they sure as hell do not drive in neat lines. This could be one form of direct fire support.
Разрабатывают хорошие вооружения а в серию ничего не идёт,это европа)
Не убеждён насчёт хорошего, если говорить именно про ту модификацию, что видим здесь.
Давать такое серьёзное вооружение как 120мм пушку и при этом иметь лишь лёгкую броню - путь к братской могиле.
@@pkostenko1996 th-cam.com/video/pGaV5ADa07M/w-d-xo.html
Ошыбаешся сейчась "ПАТРИЯ ХР" будет выпускана для Польши. Из польской фабрыки по лицензии
Poor man's MBT.
Not exactly.
@@SuperRip7 "If you can't afford an MBT with both Good Firepower and Armor at the same time, then why not buy something cheaper with greater firepower" is what i think he said.
im unsure
@@potatoraider7320
I want to think of it as an "urban tank". When wheels really count.
@@SuperRip7 yeah actually, i agree.
Caterpillar tracks does not work better on concrete roads or solid surface, inflated/rubber wheels are more favorable in this kind of terrain.
Extra b.s
Little more than an Infantry support vehicle its life span without Infantry protection would be minutes.
And? It is it's purpose, to move and support soldiers =D Though it can take beating, few RPG's don't mean anything to it.
The life span of ANY armored vehicle without infantry support is minutes.
120 mm? Please don't tell me this is Rheinmetals or krupps 120 that's used by every NATO force? Thanks Russia for going outside the proverbial box and using 125
The gun on this vehicle is similar to the Rheinmetall 120 but it's lighter, has superior recoil control and uses the same ammo, this is a major bonus as it is superior to the 105mm guns mounted on similar vehicles and it shares ammo compatibility with modern western MBT's making logistics a lot easier.
@TJ Murphy lol. Really? I know things that will blow your mind. I was 17 years old and after Taking the ASVAB test, the Army corp of Engineers sent me a recruitment letter before I was 18. Facts. I don't brag, and I dont pretend to know everything. I do however know this- The ONLY weapon I need Is God. If you dont claim God and Jesus....you are of the alternative the devil. These ARE the end times! Thank God I am alive NOW to witness it all Go down. Israel became a country again after ww2....Just like the bible said it would. Now as of 4 days ago, Israel recieved rights to the temple mount/dome of the rock. Now they can build the third temple....just like the bible says. I can care less what you think I know about anything. I only have the truth. The truth is you commented on some old comment I left. The only thing you did was showed me how you think. You like to compare yourself to others and draw conclusions about people based on some random comment. Only, it shows me where your heart is....its of the Earth. My heart is of God. With that said....You attempted to Judge my knowledge.....But you only Judged yourself. If you ever want an intelligent conversation there are better ways to do it, like explaining why you assume I dont know whatever it is you claim I dont know. I hope you have a good day.
So you don't want people to have universal ammo? So when a country is attacked nobody can send supplies because they are not compatible
This is 120mm RUAG compact tank gun.