https://i.imgur.com/5NAI4Bw.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/YWrzOwN.jpg
Bradley AMPV field testing
Looks good. Kinda like the British APC that I seem unable to recall the name of at current time. FVsomethingsomething.
Warrior
i dunno about you but i always enjoy seeing our swat-esq police units geared in jeans and nikes
i know it's all about quick response times but this just tickles my fancy
No the M113-analouge. The squat-looking box
FV432 with Bulldog upgrade kit
Exactly! Also fun to see Bradley finally used for its original purpose.
It only took three decades.
Are there any advantages to having a mortar towed behind an APC as opposed to a mortar built into an APC ala M106 or that CV-90 variant the Norwegians have now? Or is there really no reason not to have the latter?
I don't really think many people, if anyone, tows mortars with APCs. Towed mortars are usually just pulled by light vehicles.
I'd guess the benefit of towing a mortar versus having it built into your vehicle would be that you can pull a bigger, larger caliber mortar than you might be able to fit inside of an armored vehicle, and you have more room for ammunition inside if the mortar is a separate object.
Though having a mortar built into your vehicle probably means that it takes less time to set up.
Well...
https://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/europe/netherlands/light_armoured/ypr-765_prmr/pictures/ypr-765_prmr_liight_tracked_armoured_vehicle_mortar_tractor_dutch_army_Netherlands_001.jpg
https://www.dafyp408.nl/images/kentekens/86-30_rvp_1L.jpg
That's why I was asking. My country's military used to do this and I can't really think of a reason why, except for that a mortar probably wouldn't fit in the YP-408 (the vehicle in the second photo). But I don't really know why a mortar carrier variant of the YPR-765 (the vehicle in the first photo) was never ordered. I guess ammunition could be a reason, like you say.
Well a good reason would be that they already have towed mortars and APCs, so they might as well combine the two. Purpose-built mortar carriers are expensive compared to just towing the existing mortars you already have.
Not sure what country it is, but if they're not really fighting a war then there's probably not much reason to spend the extra money when they already have the towed mortars and APCs to tow them in inventory.
At the time the Dutch I Corps was expected to defend the North-German plain against the Soviets, though. The army was like 3 or 4 times the size it is now and they had (relatively) way more budget. They had around 440 Leopard 2's and 450+ Leopard 1's, among other expensive things. It's quite interesting that dedicated mortar carriers never got there despite that. It worked well enough, I guess.
Might be something to do with doctrine, also. If you used to have mortars towed by jeeps or trucks, then replacing that with an APC doesn't really change the dynamic too much.
A lot of militaries just do things in very specific ways because of the way they're organized and a reluctance to change.
Might be a matter of "why build this specialized vehicle that can only be used by one type of unit when the general purpose one that can be used by pretty much everybody is almost as good?"
I mean, think about it. You go with mortar carriers for your weapons companies, you've gotta keep a stock of them in vehicle depots along with your standard tracks. Sticking with standard tracks for everyone simplifies the logistics behind replacing breakdowns and combat losses.
Of course, I don't know how much difference there is between a mortar carrier and a standard M113. For all I know it's just a matter of bolting a mounting kit into the passenger compartment and installing sighting equipment, but it could also be a matter of needing to cut a hole for an overhead hatch. I forget if the standard version has an overhead hatch.
Well would you look a that a possible replacement for the M113 only half a century later. Also the Bradley doesn't look like dogshit now, congrats US Army!
The standard has a rectangular hatch, but not nearly big enough to make for any sort of mortary duties. There's no real reason to not have a carrier as opposed to towed, since all carriers also carry baseplates anyway, so if you want to dig into a more permanent position, you just park and camouflage the carrier just as you would the tower, and then dig your hole to stuff the tube in.
The standard 113 does have a roof hatch, but the mortar carrier version is enlarged. Since the YPR and AIFV were both designed to have turrets, and the 113 wasn't, it could be the turret assembly would have interfered with enlarging the hatch. I genuinely don't know anything about the YP 408 so as far as I know it might not even have a roof hatch.
Also something to consider is that M106 mortar carriers did come with a mortar baseplate lashed onto the side so the mortar could be fired dismounted if need be.
Also also, the Netherlands aren't entirely alone in having mortars towed by APCs, the French do it too
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/French_MO-120-RT-61_and_Véhicule_de_Tracte_Mortier_120_during_Operation_Desert_Shield.JPEG/1280px-French_MO-120-RT-61_and_Véhicule_de_Tracte_Mortier_120_during_Operation_Desert_Shield.JPEG
It's called the RT F1 mortar, they tow it around behind AMX10Ps and VABs.
The YP-408 had roof hatches for the infantry inside, you can see it in this photo of the inside of the ambulance variant:
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/114808/701477ff-07f9-402c-8dbe-fd8f867ca3eb/AKL045532.jpg
(Beeldbank Nederlands Instituut voor Militaire Historie)
And a TOW variant with a large top hatch was made:
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/114808/64c656f4-833c-42d6-a77f-428f3b30c914/AKL061179.jpg
(Beeldbank Nederlands Instituut voor Militaire Historie)
I'm not sure there would've been enough room for a mortar though.
Also, I don't think we have armored vehicles towing mortars anymore. Fenneks and several other jeeps carry or tow the mortars now, I believe.
And yeah, the Dutch army also used that exact French mortar, towed behind YPR's and YP-408's:
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/114808/ad96cb71-3135-44a6-939b-5f71e764d954/AKL061380.jpg
(Beeldbank Nederlands Instituut voor Militaire Historie)
https://youtu.be/0_IwA0aR3p8
That APC reminds me of the combine apc
I don't really see the advantage of putting the mortar inside the APC. It's not supposed to be in range of direct enemy fire anyway. With the mortar outside, the mortar crew has a lot more space to work with once they're ready for firing, while there is also more room inside the APC. I suppose the APC-mounted mortar can be deployed and packed up faster, that's a plus.
Yeah that's generally the idea, a dedicated mortar carrier can set up and/or pack up faster, especially in rough terrain; but a towed mortar can carry more ammo and is less cramped for the crew. Then also an infantry mortar can go pretty much anywhere a weapons crew can go.
And then of course the daring and foolish can use their rifles as mortars
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/2016/05/img369-1.jpg
The fun thing about M7 rifle grenade launchers is they could launch just about anything.
http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/img_6626.jpg
The pinnacle of early 80s infantry technology
Here have more flamethrowers:
The soviets older ROKS series flamethrowers are very interesting, they made the projectors look like rifles and issued large backpacks to put the fuel tanks in so that the Germans would have a hard time knowing who had a flamethrower and who didn't as flame troops were high value targets due to soldiers not wanting to be burned alive'n such.
I wish I knew how the lighter mechanism works but all I can gather is that they used a specialized incendiary pistol round likely used in a similar fashion to the m2's mini road flare system
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7394/11232116394_fd8bec2d84_b.jpg
They're usually not classified as weapons at all, but as farm tools.
https://www.drpower.com/productimages/image.axd/i.28871/w.515/h.515/large+weed+torch+w++handle+++valve_r.jpg
This, you gotta remember, is also a flamethrower.
If it wasn't for the fact that someone in my state is constantly getting arrested for using flamethrowers to clear snow, I'd buy one.
FOUR BILLION TONS OF WHITE BULLSHIT
Well, at least it's better than the guy using a Panther tank to get around in the snow.
The M16 + boxy handguard M203 is my favorite M16.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
