View Single Post
  #13  
Old 09-04-2016, 10:52 AM
Apache6 Apache6 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 213
Default More advantages

The operational mobility and fuel consumption of the LAV-25 is excellent compared to anything else in the US. The Stryker was adopted largely based on the successes of the LAV-25 series vehicles. But it's heavier and more thristy.

The LAV-25 gun and sights are equal to the Bradley. They have VERY good thermal sights now. In the first generation T2K they would have only had very good thermal sights. The 25mm and 7.62mm coax can reliably engage mansized targets at 1500m while moving at speed. This is part of the qualification tables.

Fuel consumption is far less then Bradley. And you don't have that TOW system that makes your vehicle commanders think they can take on a MBT. LAV-25s are recon vehicles after all.

Operational employment, not the vehicle, but the Marines in LAV-25s are far more likely to dismount and really scout then the Soldiers assigned to Bradley units, either cav or "mech infantry." The rear "top hatches" for the LAV-25 allow the Marines in the back good situational awareness and the ability to use their weapons. Including Javelins, from the protection of the vehicle.

I'll +1 what someone said about the wheeled chasis being better against mines and IEDs. A tracked vehicle hits a AT mine or large IED, you are more likley to become immobile and more likely to have a armor penetration. The LAV-25 does not have a "proper V-hull" but it's 'boatshaped' and one tire hits a mine it's designed to blow off, and to be relatively easily replaced.
Reply With Quote