AMV = Armored Modular Vehicle

Why?

Much lighter than MBT = can cross most of our existing bridges

Higly configurable = unlike the MBT, the AMV can be reconfigured for anti-aircraft, anti-tank, IFV, infantry carrier, ambulance, mortar, command, amphibious, recon, etc. roles. The entire AFP land forces can be organized around this single type of armored vehicle, thus, simplifying logistics and minimizing maintenace costs

C130 transportable = no MBT can fit inside our C130

Easy adaptability = PA has been fighting for decades with wheeled armored vehicles, support sytems and tactics are already in-place.

There's really no reason why the AMV should not be in the list of future acquistions for the PA and other units in the AFP.

Sample of AMV:

Patria AMV

That is good sir. :thumb: But this AMVs are designed for fire support, not for tank warfare. It is really difficult to win a armor warfare without an MBT. I would to see both AMVs and MBTs in the PA inventory.

By the way, the PA should buy this Finnish AMV because it can fit almost every role. This could help win the war against the insurgencies.

You dont need to put 'instead' since we can have both.

The AMV is not just for fire support, it can become a very effective tank destroyer - just add the appropriate anti-tank missiles and voila - a single AMV tank destroyer variant can kill up to 8 MBTs simultaneously.

This is just one reason why more and more countries are acquiring AMVs than MBTs.

But as discussed earlier, as a wheeled vehicle. it tends to get stuck in the mud more than tracked vehicles.
Also like the Patria would have dificulty in offensives against AT equiped bunkers and MBTs.

I think the 8x8 wheeled armored vehicles are no longer prone to getting stuck in mud, I even read an article about Abrams tank bogged down in Iraq marshes while the LAVs operated by US Marines made it through.

Both types of AVs can get stuck in mud.

Search the net and you find many pics and videos of wAVs and MBTs stuck in mud. The AMVs, being lighter, is easier to pull out of the mud. Another major advantage is the AMV can cross deep rivers in an instant while MBTs cannot.

A Patria equipped with tank busting missiles will have no extreme difficulty defeating AT bunkers and MBTs.

Expanding on Iron Dragon's post - imagine a Patria AMV anti-tank variant equipped with a twin-turret Milan missile launcher capable of targeting minimum of 4 MBTs (no MBT can do this with its main gun unless it has 4 guns) at the same time and which can also deploy infantry AT crews armed with Milan ADT/ERs. Now who needs MBTs. :armywink:

The idea is nice but the fact that its a wheeled vehicle limits its capabilities. A MBT gets stuck due to its weight penalty. If this AMV is tracked then not only is it light it can also distribute its weight more evenly and be more effective in urban areas. What's the best turning radius of a wheeled vehicle? Is there any as good as a tracked one? None.

MBTs are still effective machines. The reason why a lot are going for AMV types is because of the lesser chances of a world war wherein nation is pitted against another. AMVs or their like are more suited for peacekeeping and anti-terrorism roles.

Do not believe too much too on the hype that a missle equipped machine can defeat lots of MBTs at once. Those are just press releases. Just look at the Patriot missile which was said to score high during the first offensive against Saddam.

Besides, how much does one missile cost? Will you use such a sophisticated item to bust a bunker used by the MILF? A good cannon will do the job more effectively and less costly. And if there's no cannon around then let's invest in something cheaper - man portable multiple rocket systems.

Deploying troops with impressive but outdated equipment such as the Milan should not be our next idea for modernization needs. Remember, optical guided missiles are old technology and both the West and East have developed counters to such. One example is the laser blinding technology of the ChiComs. We should keep abreast with the latest developments and not be fooled by salesmen out to make a buck.

You are right though that what we need is an armored vehicle with great mobility and deployability. But a wheeled one is not the proper solution. I already posted pixes of an 8-wheeled armored vehicle getting stuck and so too its recovery vehicle. One had to be torched as it was hopelessly damaged. A tracked one can do a better job especially if its doesn't have severe weight issues.

Sir, the Milan is not outdated technology, in fact its latest operational iteration the Milan ADT/ER as mentioned by sir Kampilan is cutting edge technology:

more info

Older Milan missiles were credited to have destroyed Israeli Merkava MBTs in Lebanon along with Russian-made Kornet missiles.

As for the debate between wheeled and tracked vehicles, I agree with sir Kampilan's position that wheeled AVs are more suited to our terrain and tactics than MBTs as long as we procure the modern AMVs. But if the higher ups insist on tracked vehicles, there are also tracked AMVs available. The Hagglunds SEP modular armored vehicle has both wheeled and tracked versions.

BAE Systems Hagglunds SEP 8x8
[dohtml]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/obgAYvLI2Zw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/obgAYvLI2Zw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/dohtml]

Patria AMV
[dohtml]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TSzCuVtk5CQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TSzCuVtk5CQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/dohtml]

Old tech pa rin kahit sabihin pang upgraded Milan yan. Note na its still optically tracked ang guided tapos may fiber optic wire pa rin. How can such upgrades defend the missile and user against the likes of the ChiCom blinders? Maybe it has scored some kills with present technology equipment but its not wise to invest in something that has already been studied by the enemy.

There are many options available to us. Kung anti-tank capability rin lang naman then go for the high-speed guns like those mounted on old Israeli Shermans that were sold to Chile (which had the guns moved to the replacement platforms). More compact, more ammo, less chance to be defeated by anti-missile defenses.

The problem too with missiles is not only with its weight but the need to keep its sensitive fuel and electronics at proper levels. Ditto goes for the launcher. How many missiles can a missile team carry on foot? The French have introduced a new man-portable and man-fireable mortars and yun gamit ng US is like a recoilless rifle na imbes of a missile. And in war ilang missiles ang kaya natin ma-produce versus rounds for a cannon? Mas mabilis ma-produce yun latter and easier to train conscripts too. If we want smart weapons we can introduce those concepts sa projectiles rin considering the advances in technology today. The idea of a smart bullet isn't far from reality. If others are already making a breakthrough with EM Guns then what more in other fields.

Admittedly, we need missiles but I'd go for those for air and naval use more. Just like what Britain did, we need to stop them before they set foot on our soil not when they land na.

What we need to explore on is the ability to produce our own AMVs na pwedeng wheeled or tracked depending on the need. Although modern tracked vehicles are already road friendly unlike the old ones and could run silent too.

Great video of the Patria :thumb: amazing capabilities.

sir c. hunter,

its precisely because of the fiber optic guidance that the Milan owes its anti-jam capability.

http://www.deagel.com/Anti-Armor-Weapons-a...a000881002.aspx

Laser guidance can be jammed by ChiComm jammers as you said but not fiber optic guidance, unless you can post a link to a reliable site that states otherwise.

yea we should get AMV instead of MBT, kickazz

sir city hunter, I think youre wrong about the americans using recoillessrifle for its portable antitank weapon, i did a search and this came out:

Javelin anti-tank missile

The Javelin is a manportable, fire-and-forget, anti-tank missile employed by dismounted infantry to defeat current and future threat armored combat vehicles. It is replacing the Dragon system in the Army and the Marine Corps.

The Javelin consists of a missile in a disposable launch tube and a reusable Command Launch Unit (CLU), with a trigger mechanism and day/night-sighting device for surveillance, target acquisition, and built-in test capabilities. The missile locks on to the target before launch using an infrared focal plane array and on-board processing, which also maintains target track and guides the missile to the target after launch. A full-up system weighs 49.1 pounds. The Javelin Training System consists of three devices, each fulfilling a specific role. The Missile Simulation Round is used to familiarize the gunner with the physical characteristics of the Javelin. The Basic Skills Trainer (BST) is used to develop the basic tactical and technical gunnery skills to operate the Javelin. The Field Tactical Trainer (FTT) is used to refine the gunner's ability and enable the gunner to participate in both range training and force-on-force exercises. The two FTT configurations are designated FTT(Range) and FTT(Force-On-Force (FOF)).

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/lib.../99javelin.html

so its still a missile



















1

Wheeled armored vehicle or AMV is a very nice idea and totally suitable for an archipelagic country like ours, as long that Wheeled Armored Vehicle or AMv is integrated with enough firepower that can be used effectively for Fire Support to our foot soldiers and Tank Killer..

Another positive thing about Wheeled armored vehicle or AMV is the flexibilty to configure it into many uses or variants as what the author has said before.

We tend to believe that MBT is a the most powerful piece of weapon for land warfare but on what situation?
There is no such a perfect weapon and MBT for the Philippines is not necessary because we dont have any land borders with other country.

Besides MBT has a lot of vulnerable spot that can be easily destroy by a single ammo of russian RPG, like the side and rear or the running gear of the MBT.

cheers :armycheers:

city Hunter,

We complain about the ability of wheeled vehicle as lesser in performance than Tracked in term of turning radius, but the agility and speed still belong to those wheeled Armored Vehicle.

Mas mahirap tamaan at mas mahirap na target yung meron advantage sa agility and speed., together with counter measures like smokescreen to blind the enemy of your position then Wheeled Armored Vehicle/AMV with strong gun on it is perfect for our situation.

as i said, there is no such perfect weapon and MBT with the best turning radius has still a lot of vulnerable spots.

Remember the MERKAVA tank that has been destroyed by RPG rocket.
Did the turning radius of MERKAVA tank save it's own ass from the Un-sophisticated Hezboolah who only use older weapons design.??

PLS.Read
http://searchingforthetruth.typepad.com/se..._the_great.html

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/112828

It has proven and tested that it is the users that counts to the effectivity of any weapon whether old design or sophisticated one.

cheers bro :armycheers:

At first glance I thought you can interchange turrets – auto cannon, mortar, or remote weapon system. Checking on the orders by countries buying, the Patria is similar to other IFVs & APCs that have several variants like units with a 30 mm gun, units with AMOS mortar, and units with RWS. Its main advantage to say, an M113 could be its reported success against RPGs, resistance to mines, IEDs and 10 passenger capacity excluding 3 man crew. For acquisition purposes, the M113 variants will have the edge on account of familiarity, parts availability, protection improvements, weight, and it’s a tracked vehicle. Against tanks, basic requirement for success is that it surprises the tank and is equipped with anti-tank missiles or large caliber gun. Otherwise, it will be better for it to carry an anti-tank squad, drop it on a good ambush position and be ready to back them up or extract them. It is not wise to expose the vehicle & crew to something that outguns them, could go through uneven terrain at least as well as they are, if not better, & can crash through structures almost with impunity.

Let’s acquire the Patria if possible, but let’s use it for what it is built for.

Problem is the M113 is no longer manufactured brand new as is.

YEAH, BUT IT CAN BE UPGRADED AND CAN HAVE THE SAME ABILITITIES OF AN WHEELED AIFV... CAN BE MULTI-PURPOSE TOO...

:headbang:

AMV's are the same as older APC,or the AIFV,IFV,AFV
what the PA might be looking for is an all-around flexible
vehicle.

1.safe transport
2.additional firepower
3.can operate in extreme conditions or terrains
4.lightweight,fast,extremely mobile,
5.which also has better radio communications
to coordinate operations

The existing APC's in the AFP are already good enough.
What the PA should concentrate on is utility/combat helicopters that have
night flight capabilities.

:crawling:

I would opt for such vehicles:

Serbian Lazar (finished 2009)

The Serbian Lazar is very slow,heavy,cumbersome, the armour
i don't know how it can withstand mines/RPG'S
:banana:

Lazar BVT-SR-8808

Speed is at 90 km/h

compare that to our current V-150!

:headbang:

Its not the Javelin that I was referring to that is used by the US as a portable anti-tank weapon.

With regards to speed, yes the wheeled machine may have an advantage but speed is just one aspect to consider. What must be learned from the Merkava lesson is the ability to really work with others. This is where the demand to really integrate abilities in the field to make things work. No longer is it sufficient that a tank has troops to protect but also other assets.

I doubt too that it was an ordinary RPG warhead that was used against that Merkava. A lot of those misfits are funded by major powers to try out their creations. Remember, a lot of countries there don't like Israel and anything that can be used to weaken the advantage of the Israelis in combat must be tried. Recall too that some Abrams were mysteriously disabled in Iraq by a weapon that makes a small hole and the hits were usually near the engine compartment where armor is weaker. If I recall it right this happened after they took Iraq away from Saddam.

What would indeed be nice to see that our boys get to use is a mix of these plus more assets that are mentioned in other threads. It doesn't take much of an imagination to make this a reality. Only the will of the people to force the so-called "honorable" men and women in power to act upon it.

I for one would be glad if we have AMVs to support our defense and civic needs may it be wheeled or tracked. With Pinoy ingenuity I wouldn't discount the thought that a solution can be arrived to remedy any shortcoming.

To end my argument, dapat hindi lang yun off the shelf ang maging solution natin sa mga needs natin. Very much like the Israelis ay dapat we need to adapt things to suit our demands. I doubt that the Israelis aren't coming up with a solution for that Merkava experience. Tiyak may remedies na sila in mind and maybe even testing now.

The AFP gets all it's weapons from the U.S. Army.....
The Serbian Lazar is in Europe not with the U.S.
:banana: