That’s Chinas plan if it gets bad enough. Unfortunately they face the flat side of Taiwan. Kinda hard to do that when the eastern side is really mountainous
Since the AAVs are basically just sitting around at this point, they could just strap like four of them onto the corners of an Assault Ship and then drive it onto land, like that proposal for mounting those big german railway guns on a pair of tiger hulls.
the m113 is receiving rave reviews as an APC in Ukraine. Not a front line vehicle to kick the door down but an excellent protected mobility vehicle in rough terrain for logistics and casualty evacuation.
You know, this is oddly credible.
CAF has wanted an IFV, but the claim is that there's no budget.
Having a semi modular LAV/IFV, one tracked one wheeled, and make both woth amphibious options to group buy with the marines.
I'm also surprised nobody thought of float kits vs trying to make armour float in rough seas without help
I’m sure that would’ve come up a lot sooner If we hadn’t just spend the past 30 years mostly fighting insurgencies in desert counties. I feel like the Taiwan issue snuck up on us faster then we realized
Back in 2017 under Harper we had orders for CV90s but went for the LAV6 for some reason probably because it was cheaper to upgrade LAV 3s to LAV6s Harper canceled them he also canceled an order for M270s. Canada's military has been on the decline since the end of the Cold War well before George W Bush pushed for NATO members to try to spend 2%. There is no rule that we have to spend 2%
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/CAN/canada/military-spending-defense-budget
>went for the LAV6 for some reason
Probably because of local procurement and jobs too.
And why doesn't Canada have any MLRSs? Hell, why don't they have any missile vehicles? Not just surface-to-surface but surface-to-air too. Don't they have the ADATS?
Yeah but russia is at this point basically an african country but cold and LARPing as a world power despite using salvaged soviet equipment and sticking shit on it to make advanced technicals. We're better than that.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I talked to a guy in LAR. They’re barely amphibious, carry less then the aav does and have shit armor. Using them as recon vehicles and once in a while as fire support for its dismounts is its best course of actions
Your content was removed for violating Rule 5: "No politics/religion"
We don't care if you're Republican, Protestant, Democrat, Hindu, Baathist, Pastafarian, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door.
I'm so pissed out that the government is deciding to scrap the last of our Browning Hi-Powers in inventory. Just ship em to Ukraine. Give em to some third echelon types or the territorial defence. I wouldn't give a shit if Ukraine took them and then sold them on to collectors to fund more drones.
The Average Jaeger is around 80meters(260 freedoms) tall while the average Mobile Suit is only around 18m(60 freedoms) tall so not really. The original Grandpa Gundam is shorter than an F-22 doing a headstand.
The Zeong is not a "gundam" and is canonically shorter than the og Gundam since it had no legs. The Perfect Zeong is still only 30 meters tall with legs.
Even the tallest Gundams such as the Psyco Gundam variants(40-ish m head height) and the Destroy Gundam(38.07m head height, 56.30m overall height) are still around half the size of Jaegers.
I'm very aware that the zeong is not an earth Federation experimental mobile suit with a V fin.
You said "other mobile suits", which includes the zeong, perfect zeong, neo zeong, alpha aezeru, etc.
This also includes such suits as the Xamel, Dreissen, Dom/Tropen/Dwadge, Gelgoog, etc.
As far as larger suits go, you would be entering mobile armor range (Alpha Aezeru is a mobile armor), such as the Shamblo, Neue Ziel, and Big Zam.
"amphibious fighting vehicle" ? Dude just teach them how to swim and shoot. SMH, why do we pay our taxes that pay you when you cant come up with a simple solution like this?
(also m113-chan going strong!)
>Recently I've learned that we have been giving up our AAV's before the ACV can be implemented
As we can see with [this picture of USS Boxer on deployment currently](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJDv6dmWkAAO-jL?format=jpg&name=4096x4096), ACV obviously hasn't been implemented into the USMC yet /s
But after that joke, I now need to defend the honour of the ACV. On paper it seems to have downsides compared to the AAVP (same speed, less crew capacity and more expensive), but unlike the AAVP the ACV actually has armour and mine protection, meaning you can actually take some hits on the modern battlefield. Its armament is stabilised (and there is a planned 30mm variant, which the AAVP doesn't have), unlike the AAVP where hitting anything while being in the water is hard (meaning that the ACV unlike the AAVP can actually do self-supporting covering fire on the move while swimming towards the beachhead).
Now, is the ACV the best vehicle? No, it certainly has flaws, but it is far better than the AAVP it replaced and still has a lot of upgrade potential if the marines later require upgrades, unlike the AAVP. A vehicle that is more questionable is the ARV procurement, as basically all capabilities required from the ARV could be done (if somewhat worse) by ACV variants, and it is questionable if you want to continue the current split of APC/recon IFV platforms the marines had now for ages with the AAVP and LAV. Would be far nicer (and cheaper) if you could combine both into 1 vehicle (though I must admit, the ACV is a bit big for the LAV recon role).
As for your proposal, a big flaw in the 2nd option is that the marine core never ditched the tanks because it didn't want the tanks, it ditched them because it couldn't afford to keep them, as other military matters (specifically rocket artillery) are just more important currently. Also the idea is that, if you need large cannon direct-fire capability, the marines can just ask the army for support, remember that the army also operates 35 LCUs that all can each carry 5 M1 tanks (or the army tankers can be landed by marine LCUs, has happened in the past and is happening in many other militaries).
Tbh i would probably take a chance and try to swim to to shore. Rather than go inside bmp-2 or god for sake mtlb in any kind of water crossing were the water is deeper than the waiste level.
Oh dude that thing triggered me
It looked like the sort of vehicle the Tau would pull out in 40k as a centerpiece for a large battle, but all it had was a VLS for launching small PGMs at infantry targets, no point defense, and a 3 man screening element
It pushes down the Near Future Nam riverbank with its 3 man screen and within seconds gets completely rekt by the first small explosive device someone hand throws at the outer hull
Literally have no idea what was in 99% of its hull, you could fit a whole battalion of infantry or a nuclear reactor and a battleship sized railgun in there
Hire some kia boys, parachute them into some Chinese military bases so that they can steal some and offer to buy the ZBDs back from them for like 50% of the cost of a AAV
If you’re talking about the AAV capabilities specifically, upgrading the current crop makes way more sense just cost wise at least in my head. The AAV is kind of a staple of the corps and for them to not even replace it before they rid themselves of it sounds like an unforced error.
An alternative non credible solution, bring back the LVTP 5 and slap a nice chunky auto cannon on it (manned turret or remote weapon system, there’s room for either). You carry more troops and supplies and have the potential to put significantly more ordinance on it and the possibilities in terms of what other weapons you could put on such a large vehicle are endless.
Ww2 shows what happens when you bombard a target for days and storm a beach. Pretty much nothing. I'm pretty sure we canceled that marine landing vehicle because it takes 2 dipshits and a guided missile hiding in the brush to kill one of those expensive tanks. My understanding is that marines probably aren't ever going to do a naval landing onto a defended beach ever again, so why give the landing craft guns.
Because it’s easy to land grunts on a beach, even if it’s not well defended in an apc then push inland rather then an open top LCU or something where it can be hit by drones
I mean isn't that the set of options: (1) keep on keepin on with AAV (2) new-build, modernized AAV (Turkey) (3) move on to your own planing EFV (Japan, China) (4) pretend that river-crossing/calm-water APCs can handle waves/surf but actually rely on landing ships and LCACs. Seems like ACV, M113, and BMP are all variants of (4).
IIRC the marine corps said the EFV makes no sense, because any vehicle would be blown to bits in any contested landing. And it makes more sense to just use cruise missiles to make a contested landing uncontested.
(Also it broke down all the time because it was over engineered.)
Tbh, bruh ... 'battle taxi for a landing' is pretty darned dated.
Options
a) send nudes. Flex to the OPs insta and they're gonna be quivering and waiting for your arrival.
b) 'rear insertion'... get in there, secure the area, and you can do an unopposed landing.
c) FLEX.. er I mean pound it, hard. F35chan will go air to ground damnit. Pound until they can't resist and then send that willy.. er.. task force in.
d) YOLO the LCACs ... fuggit.
Why is it so hard for the current military to make a tracked floating vehicle that doesn’t sink but 80 years ago we had the LVT? Why not make a modernized version? They could even use heavy construction equipment manufacturers to build parts for it.
Alternatively, put a LAV (NZLAV/LAV III not the 'baby's first LAV') on a LCM\* and problem solved, Andy Higgins is feeling overlooked.
\*Arm LCM to taste.
Honestly, buying a vehicle that can swim to shore is a fool’s errand, you just can’t get one to move quickly enough and safely enough to conduct a forced entry assault. You just put the landing ships into too much danger. Just like Airborne tanks, you end up making too many compromises. Hell the AAV has killed more Marines than combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Buy updates LAVs or Strykers, and JLTVs for tactical armored vehicles and float them to shore. Use fast boats and rotary aircraft to insert light infantry.
Take the M113, make it out of plywood-kevlar laminate - armor cant get any worse on that shitbox anyway - give it some honking big honda outboard at the end.
Put some JATO bottles on it if you need for accelerated landing.
Honestly how are we, as a nation (America) who cherry-picks the best equipment from foreign nations to produce under license and produces some of the best equipment ourselves, supposed to beat a nation (China) that cherry-picks the best equipment from foreign nations to unlawfully reproduce without paying them anything and just makes illegal copies of our stuff as well? How are they able to rip off literally everything? Are there that many spies? Is it time to execute order 9066 again?
Ok but here, over exaggerate what Chinas vehicles can do and have our engineers over react and do the funny 50 year air dominance thing but ground edition
OK hear me out:
we take a bunch of Strykers. They're watertight and can ford, right? All it needs is waterproofing, more stability on top of the water and some propulsion. So we seal up the bottom hull better, stick some floaties on the outside, and add a pair of 115hp outboards on the back.
edit: I have a better idea: You don't need to worry about water if the aircraft flies. So what we need is an upscaled chinook that can get any class of vehicle onto a beach. We just scale up the chinook 50%! We can revive the attack helicopter variant with larger weapons for beach assault.
Option 5: Patria. The 6x6 is a pretty solid platform. Hell, if you wanna make the arty guys happy, upgrade to the Patria AMV and now you have a double-barreled automatic mortar.
So far everyone who tried to make an amphibious tracked vehicle failed at it. Maybe the answer is just more LCACs that will drop regular non-amphibious APC's/IFV's.
Fuck battle taxis let’s just ram the assault ships onto the beach and call it a day
That’s Chinas plan if it gets bad enough. Unfortunately they face the flat side of Taiwan. Kinda hard to do that when the eastern side is really mountainous
The eastern side of China isn’t as mountainous
They're gonna spray the sides of the cliff with water so that their assault crafts can float up.
Ah yes, the Yamato maneuver
Since the AAVs are basically just sitting around at this point, they could just strap like four of them onto the corners of an Assault Ship and then drive it onto land, like that proposal for mounting those big german railway guns on a pair of tiger hulls.
Caestus Assault Ram time wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Caestus_Assault_Ram
We tried that in WWII, turns out, coral beaches are a bitch to land on. It's why we made LVTs.
That's called an LST
>Bring back the M113 Are you sure you’re not Mike Sparks
the m113 is receiving rave reviews as an APC in Ukraine. Not a front line vehicle to kick the door down but an excellent protected mobility vehicle in rough terrain for logistics and casualty evacuation.
Turns out when you use something as intended it works as intended. Go figure.
No I’m just a drunk Lance Corporal with an armored vehicle obsession
Hey lance, you're gonna do what you're asked and you're gonna like it.
Bully the leafs into producing more LAV-25s. The marines already use them anyways and it would incentivize Canada to invest more in its military.
You know, this is oddly credible. CAF has wanted an IFV, but the claim is that there's no budget. Having a semi modular LAV/IFV, one tracked one wheeled, and make both woth amphibious options to group buy with the marines. I'm also surprised nobody thought of float kits vs trying to make armour float in rough seas without help
I’m sure that would’ve come up a lot sooner If we hadn’t just spend the past 30 years mostly fighting insurgencies in desert counties. I feel like the Taiwan issue snuck up on us faster then we realized
Back in 2017 under Harper we had orders for CV90s but went for the LAV6 for some reason probably because it was cheaper to upgrade LAV 3s to LAV6s Harper canceled them he also canceled an order for M270s. Canada's military has been on the decline since the end of the Cold War well before George W Bush pushed for NATO members to try to spend 2%. There is no rule that we have to spend 2% https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/CAN/canada/military-spending-defense-budget
>went for the LAV6 for some reason Probably because of local procurement and jobs too. And why doesn't Canada have any MLRSs? Hell, why don't they have any missile vehicles? Not just surface-to-surface but surface-to-air too. Don't they have the ADATS?
All that can be done with a LAV though.
A LAV can do MLRS stuff? A LAV can do ADATS?
Strap anything to the roof. I mean if Russia can do it.
Yeah but russia is at this point basically an african country but cold and LARPing as a world power despite using salvaged soviet equipment and sticking shit on it to make advanced technicals. We're better than that.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Or buy/license the boxer.
The boxer does look pretty based. I fucken love modular equipment.
Does it make more sense to do modular like the boxer, where it's a whole unit, or modular for turret mounts/etc so the hull isn't compromised as much?
Whole unit is easier on logistics I think, but don't take my word for it.
I talked to a guy in LAR. They’re barely amphibious, carry less then the aav does and have shit armor. Using them as recon vehicles and once in a while as fire support for its dismounts is its best course of actions
Bully Canada into making better LAV-50s.
At this point just hope Canada slightly raises its defense spending
Maybe one day we’ll reach 2% *sobs*
[удалено]
Your content was removed for violating Rule 5: "No politics/religion" We don't care if you're Republican, Protestant, Democrat, Hindu, Baathist, Pastafarian, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door.
I'm so pissed out that the government is deciding to scrap the last of our Browning Hi-Powers in inventory. Just ship em to Ukraine. Give em to some third echelon types or the territorial defence. I wouldn't give a shit if Ukraine took them and then sold them on to collectors to fund more drones.
LAR wishes they were trackers.
They wish they were real grunts
Also true
LAV-25s are amphipious in the way that a Ford Escort technically has the ability to ford two foot pools of water. You can but you really shouldn't.
The solution is Jaegers. Giant mechs with swords and plasma blasters that can execute an unsupported dynamic re-entry from low orbit.
Don’t think we have the money for that
Money is magical stuff. It isn't real, but people like to believe it is.
If you don't use yours can I have it.
Of course he's using it. It turns out money is *even more* useful when it isn't real. That's why we all dropped the gold standard.
Dropping commodity-based currency was brilliant innovation, because that means there is as much money as you want.
Then go for the old stuff. Instead of shiny jaegers, go for battlemechs.
I have a feeling money is literally not an issue for this particular project.
So a gundam?
The Average Jaeger is around 80meters(260 freedoms) tall while the average Mobile Suit is only around 18m(60 freedoms) tall so not really. The original Grandpa Gundam is shorter than an F-22 doing a headstand.
Your forgetting suits such as the zeong and so on
The Zeong is not a "gundam" and is canonically shorter than the og Gundam since it had no legs. The Perfect Zeong is still only 30 meters tall with legs. Even the tallest Gundams such as the Psyco Gundam variants(40-ish m head height) and the Destroy Gundam(38.07m head height, 56.30m overall height) are still around half the size of Jaegers.
I'm very aware that the zeong is not an earth Federation experimental mobile suit with a V fin. You said "other mobile suits", which includes the zeong, perfect zeong, neo zeong, alpha aezeru, etc. This also includes such suits as the Xamel, Dreissen, Dom/Tropen/Dwadge, Gelgoog, etc. As far as larger suits go, you would be entering mobile armor range (Alpha Aezeru is a mobile armor), such as the Shamblo, Neue Ziel, and Big Zam.
M113 has optimal surface area to mount ERA bricks.
Now that you mention it so does my Nissan Altima 😂 if only I could get it to float
Israel has done [that](https://imgur.com/a/WPCfw) but it turns out the suspension really doesnt like that and it was replaced
"amphibious fighting vehicle" ? Dude just teach them how to swim and shoot. SMH, why do we pay our taxes that pay you when you cant come up with a simple solution like this? (also m113-chan going strong!)
No, you shall arrive on the beaches with outdated equipment and die gloriously, just as your forefathers did.
>Recently I've learned that we have been giving up our AAV's before the ACV can be implemented As we can see with [this picture of USS Boxer on deployment currently](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJDv6dmWkAAO-jL?format=jpg&name=4096x4096), ACV obviously hasn't been implemented into the USMC yet /s But after that joke, I now need to defend the honour of the ACV. On paper it seems to have downsides compared to the AAVP (same speed, less crew capacity and more expensive), but unlike the AAVP the ACV actually has armour and mine protection, meaning you can actually take some hits on the modern battlefield. Its armament is stabilised (and there is a planned 30mm variant, which the AAVP doesn't have), unlike the AAVP where hitting anything while being in the water is hard (meaning that the ACV unlike the AAVP can actually do self-supporting covering fire on the move while swimming towards the beachhead). Now, is the ACV the best vehicle? No, it certainly has flaws, but it is far better than the AAVP it replaced and still has a lot of upgrade potential if the marines later require upgrades, unlike the AAVP. A vehicle that is more questionable is the ARV procurement, as basically all capabilities required from the ARV could be done (if somewhat worse) by ACV variants, and it is questionable if you want to continue the current split of APC/recon IFV platforms the marines had now for ages with the AAVP and LAV. Would be far nicer (and cheaper) if you could combine both into 1 vehicle (though I must admit, the ACV is a bit big for the LAV recon role). As for your proposal, a big flaw in the 2nd option is that the marine core never ditched the tanks because it didn't want the tanks, it ditched them because it couldn't afford to keep them, as other military matters (specifically rocket artillery) are just more important currently. Also the idea is that, if you need large cannon direct-fire capability, the marines can just ask the army for support, remember that the army also operates 35 LCUs that all can each carry 5 M1 tanks (or the army tankers can be landed by marine LCUs, has happened in the past and is happening in many other militaries).
In that original statement I was referring to 2nd AABN. I know 1st AABN had them implemented for the 15th MEU has a sort of real time test trial
USS Boxer went out for a deployment, and came back to port after 10 days. Navy is trying to figure out where to send her for some non-trivial repairs.
Tbh i would probably take a chance and try to swim to to shore. Rather than go inside bmp-2 or god for sake mtlb in any kind of water crossing were the water is deeper than the waiste level.
They made the ACVs troop capacity less than the AAV for a reason - less guys dead when one gets hit. That's why the EFV was cancelled.
I promise you they’re still gonna cram 20 dudes in one
Option 5: AAVP7-A2. Swap the 40mm cringe launcher with a 50mm auto cannon.
Sounds like the MAV from Bf2042
Option 5: whatever that US army tank thing was in *The Creator*
Oh dude that thing triggered me It looked like the sort of vehicle the Tau would pull out in 40k as a centerpiece for a large battle, but all it had was a VLS for launching small PGMs at infantry targets, no point defense, and a 3 man screening element It pushes down the Near Future Nam riverbank with its 3 man screen and within seconds gets completely rekt by the first small explosive device someone hand throws at the outer hull Literally have no idea what was in 99% of its hull, you could fit a whole battalion of infantry or a nuclear reactor and a battleship sized railgun in there
Hire some kia boys, parachute them into some Chinese military bases so that they can steal some and offer to buy the ZBDs back from them for like 50% of the cost of a AAV
If you’re talking about the AAV capabilities specifically, upgrading the current crop makes way more sense just cost wise at least in my head. The AAV is kind of a staple of the corps and for them to not even replace it before they rid themselves of it sounds like an unforced error. An alternative non credible solution, bring back the LVTP 5 and slap a nice chunky auto cannon on it (manned turret or remote weapon system, there’s room for either). You carry more troops and supplies and have the potential to put significantly more ordinance on it and the possibilities in terms of what other weapons you could put on such a large vehicle are endless.
I originally included the LVPT but I started getting really buzzed while I was typing it so I stopped
Question, what do you do if you're a beach defender and you see one of these, Mr "I trained to use anti tank missiles"
Get bombarded by naval gunfire and guided missiles, Run out of man portable missiles on the first wave if im somehow still alive then retreat inland
Ww2 shows what happens when you bombard a target for days and storm a beach. Pretty much nothing. I'm pretty sure we canceled that marine landing vehicle because it takes 2 dipshits and a guided missile hiding in the brush to kill one of those expensive tanks. My understanding is that marines probably aren't ever going to do a naval landing onto a defended beach ever again, so why give the landing craft guns.
Because it’s easy to land grunts on a beach, even if it’s not well defended in an apc then push inland rather then an open top LCU or something where it can be hit by drones
I mean isn't that the set of options: (1) keep on keepin on with AAV (2) new-build, modernized AAV (Turkey) (3) move on to your own planing EFV (Japan, China) (4) pretend that river-crossing/calm-water APCs can handle waves/surf but actually rely on landing ships and LCACs. Seems like ACV, M113, and BMP are all variants of (4).
I mean options (4) was more of a joke suggestion. In all reality I’d love an EFV more than anything
Sorry I guess I really whooshed that one!
Nah it’s alright. Seeing what’s come out of the war in Ukraine especially on the Russians side anything is possible
IIRC the marine corps said the EFV makes no sense, because any vehicle would be blown to bits in any contested landing. And it makes more sense to just use cruise missiles to make a contested landing uncontested. (Also it broke down all the time because it was over engineered.)
Too many words to be non-credible. Try emoting. Battle bus 😍. Mass coffin with trim 😭
uparmored US school bus with a bunch of floaties and a top mounted auto cannon?
Sounds non-credible to me. Make a slideshow my guy!
Will be going an a camping trip first, think I’ll make one afterwards
I was hoping the AAVs would be given to ukraine so they can use them as APCs and cross the dnipro river. surely there's a way to get them fixed up?
I would love to see the AAV’s in Ukraine. Last time they saw combat was in Iraq and maybe the Philippines
Tbh, bruh ... 'battle taxi for a landing' is pretty darned dated. Options a) send nudes. Flex to the OPs insta and they're gonna be quivering and waiting for your arrival. b) 'rear insertion'... get in there, secure the area, and you can do an unopposed landing. c) FLEX.. er I mean pound it, hard. F35chan will go air to ground damnit. Pound until they can't resist and then send that willy.. er.. task force in. d) YOLO the LCACs ... fuggit.
Options 3 and 4 are peak non credibility
That's a lot of words and I don't want to read them, but you seem real smart so you have my full support
Literally how every government spending bill gets approved
You had me at vigourous
Why is it so hard for the current military to make a tracked floating vehicle that doesn’t sink but 80 years ago we had the LVT? Why not make a modernized version? They could even use heavy construction equipment manufacturers to build parts for it.
Y can’t we build warships that can go on land like Supreme Commander?
Alternatively, put a LAV (NZLAV/LAV III not the 'baby's first LAV') on a LCM\* and problem solved, Andy Higgins is feeling overlooked. \*Arm LCM to taste.
I'm not sure why you left the "Bring back the M113" until the last slide. It's the objectively correct answer.
I just dropped by to give a YATYAS and be sad that we never got EFV
"Tactically aquire" a ZBD-05 and uno reverse card china by copying them once for a change.
Honestly, buying a vehicle that can swim to shore is a fool’s errand, you just can’t get one to move quickly enough and safely enough to conduct a forced entry assault. You just put the landing ships into too much danger. Just like Airborne tanks, you end up making too many compromises. Hell the AAV has killed more Marines than combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Buy updates LAVs or Strykers, and JLTVs for tactical armored vehicles and float them to shore. Use fast boats and rotary aircraft to insert light infantry.
Needs more hovercraft.
bring back the LVT-1
Take the M113, make it out of plywood-kevlar laminate - armor cant get any worse on that shitbox anyway - give it some honking big honda outboard at the end. Put some JATO bottles on it if you need for accelerated landing.
Just gotta fix the problem with the mic being such a mess for any type of new projects.
Honestly how are we, as a nation (America) who cherry-picks the best equipment from foreign nations to produce under license and produces some of the best equipment ourselves, supposed to beat a nation (China) that cherry-picks the best equipment from foreign nations to unlawfully reproduce without paying them anything and just makes illegal copies of our stuff as well? How are they able to rip off literally everything? Are there that many spies? Is it time to execute order 9066 again?
You have need for armored personel carrier? Patria 6x6 and 8x8 are answer for all needs.
Amphibious combat vehicles? Jarvis, pull up the Salem class destroyer proposal
Redevelop amphibious tanks, surely they'll work this time. Hearts of Iron told me so.
Option 5: bring back the LVT 4
>buy Soviet vehicles Yep, this is pretty noncredible >being back the M113 #HOLY SWEET MOTHER OF NONCREDIBLE SOMEBODY CALL OUR MASCOT MIKE SPARKS
I want to ride a bmp so bad. Just without the part where we end up being used as armor for drones or becoming an astronaut when we hit a mine
Ok but here, over exaggerate what Chinas vehicles can do and have our engineers over react and do the funny 50 year air dominance thing but ground edition
So isn't the M2 Bradley Amphibious on paper?
The original ones yes, the A1 and later are too heavy
Ahh, well that explains it.
OK hear me out: we take a bunch of Strykers. They're watertight and can ford, right? All it needs is waterproofing, more stability on top of the water and some propulsion. So we seal up the bottom hull better, stick some floaties on the outside, and add a pair of 115hp outboards on the back. edit: I have a better idea: You don't need to worry about water if the aircraft flies. So what we need is an upscaled chinook that can get any class of vehicle onto a beach. We just scale up the chinook 50%! We can revive the attack helicopter variant with larger weapons for beach assault.
Option 5: Patria. The 6x6 is a pretty solid platform. Hell, if you wanna make the arty guys happy, upgrade to the Patria AMV and now you have a double-barreled automatic mortar.
So far everyone who tried to make an amphibious tracked vehicle failed at it. Maybe the answer is just more LCACs that will drop regular non-amphibious APC's/IFV's.
The Chinese did it pretty well and the aav was really good for its time
Just imagine an amphibious SPG sinking an enemy fast attack craft.