LAV25 Pros and Cons

[Rockwolf66]

Ok, since the last time I was in a LAV25 was back in 1999 and I don't think that we have a thread on them.

What are the pros and cons of the LAV25 in both real life and for Tw2K?

Pros:
It's relatively fast.
It's easier to maintain than a tracked vehicle.

Cons:
Cramped interior.
Light armor

[Raellus]

PRO: Versatile main gun- can engage soft-skinned and light armored targets, and structures. The coax alone makes the vehicle a mobile pillbox. If they're working, the optics are pretty handy to have too.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Light armor good versus splinters and most of what militia etc. would be throwing at you. Uses standard automotive parts. As mentioned, electronics. NBC sealing, I think. Can haul some cargo on and in.

Cons would be fuel consumption (but then what doesn't face that), light armor (if you're big enough then you might be worth an ATGM or ATR), large profile.

[LT. Ox]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

Light armor good versus splinters and most of what militia etc. would be throwing at you. Uses standard automotive parts. As mentioned, electronics. NBC sealing, I think. Can haul some cargo on and in.

Cons would be fuel consumption (but then what doesn't face that), light armor (if you're big enough then you might be worth an ATGM or ATR), large profile.

As above Pro; add on swim. super good idea in a number of cases.
the tight space neg is one shared by all other USA types. ( my Op)
Neg that could be big, no tow system as on the Bradley.
Over all and in most game situations. I would take the 25 over the tracks in a poor supply environment.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

Cons would be fuel consumption (but then what doesn't face that), light armor (if you're big enough then you might be worth an ATGM or ATR), large profile.

In fact, the LAV 25 is about the same size as the M-4 Sherman ...

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Rockwolf66

Pros:
It's relatively fast.
It's easier to maintain than a tracked vehicle.

Parts commonality with 5ton and 7ton diesels.

The 6V-53T is a common 5.2 liter diesel found in 1ton pickups and some heavy equipment. If in the U.S. parts would be fairly common as would mechanics with experience working on them. This also means that much better filters are available courtesy of the commercial market.

Hit a mine.... lose one wheel, one suspension unit, keep moving.

18tons dry weight means nearly all bridges and roads will support the V.

Amphibious seals and motive systems are a bonus in ETO with significant rivers and canals.

All munitions are NATO common.

Dismounts exit the rear under cover.... can exit while V is in motion.

Originally Posted by Rockwolf66

Cons:
Cramped interior.
Light armor

Six dismounts isn't a full squad.

Dangerous roll over hazard on curves.

Two man turret..... Gunner/Commander

720 rounds of main gun ammunition goes fast.

Main gun cannot penetrate modern MBTs.

No ATGM. Crew must dismount a separate launcher.

HUGE side profile is an inviting ATGM target.

Hot muffler high on the body is very visible to thermal imagers.

Wrecker support to change a flat tire.

Packs, duffles, etc must be stowed externally..... a fire hazard.

[LT. Ox]

good post thanks

[Olefin]

definitely would prefer the Bradley for the TOW system - the LAV is a nice vehicle but run into anything bigger than a BMP and you are in big trouble fast - with the Bradley, at least as long as you have TOW's, you can take on a tank and have a good chance at surviving

the LAV-AT gives you the ability to take on tanks but then you only have a pintle mounted 7.62 for everyone else

For me its not the vehicle I want to be in for Europe or Iran where you are still looking at a good possibility of meeting tanks if I have to settle for a 25 mm cannon on the vehicle

[StainlessSteelCynic]

If you're in ANY sort of light armour, you should never even think of trying to take on a tank. Instead, you get the hell out of Dodge.
Even if you're in medium armour e.g. a Bradley or Warrior, you should not be thinking about taking on a tank.
The problem with the TOW on the Bradley is that it made some people (politicians, armchair commandos and some army upper ranks) think that it could take on a tank all by itself. As part of a layered defence/offence, yeah it's really good to have but for a single vehicle (as in the case of a PC group), discretion is the better part of valour.

[Raellus]

I agree with Cynic. If the tank's got one in the chamber and spots the Bradley first, the Brad's toast. The TOW takes at least a few seconds to deploy and the missile's flight time is longer than that of a tank shell. The Bradley would need to have the drop on the tank to stand a chance of winning that duel.

The best way for light armor to deal with tanks is to avoid them.