Favorite T2K-era APC/IFV

[swaghauler]

The IDF is at it again... Here's the new APC based on the Merkava tank chassis.

https://youtu.be/BfDPulPKY8Y

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

The IDF is at it again... Here's the new APC based on the Merkava tank chassis.

https://youtu.be/BfDPulPKY8Y

Not really all that new. Back before the Great Recession, the IDF was in talks with Lima Army Tank Plant to build 300 of them for them since they didn't have the manufacturing capacity to build them as well as the Mk4's they wanted to build at the same time. When the Recession hit, something had to give budget wise, and the Namer was pushed back.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Well, if Chalkline is going to choose a vehicle purely on the notion of being a special snowflake then I'm going to do it to!

I choose...
Ratel 20 IFV

Where am I going to get one besides South Africa?
Morocco took delivery of around 70 (two variants, the Ratel 20 and the Ratel 90) during 1981-1982.

I don't intend going swimming with it so a lack of amphibious ability isn't too much of a concern, I don't intend hunting anything carrying a gun larger than a .50 cal. with it so the APC level of armour shouldn't be too much of a concern. Like Chalkline mentioned about his choice, it's a bus with some minor protection and a bit of fire support.
It's tall, tall like the OT-64 SKOT, which makes it great for seeing over the long grass of the veldt but maybe not so useful in Europe and you probably want to avoid street fighting.

But...
It has a range of approximately 1000km with 530 litres of fuel and can travel at speeds up to 105kph on roads. It also comes fitted with two 50 litre drinking water reservoirs.
Comes standard with 3 doors, left & right sides with the third at the rear and also has four large roof hatches plus a smaller hatch at the rear for AA defence.
Armament consists of a 20mm autocannon in the turret plus additional 7.62mm MGs on pintle mounts as required.
3 crew and 9 passengers, lots of storage space.

Now I just got to get it from Morocco, through Spain and into Central Europe!
So yes, I could avoid all the problems if I just decided on the OT-64 instead (plus the -64 is amphibious) but I really, really, really like the Ratel



Rear access (vehicle is the ZT3 ATGW version and not the Ratel 20 but the basic hull is identical)


Side doors

[Raellus]

The Ratel also just looks cool.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The Ratel also just looks cool.

Yes indeed!
When I saw pictures of the Ratel for the first time, it seemed futuristic compared to the military vehicles I was used to seeing in the 1980s. That appeal might have changed in theme over time but it has never diminished, the Ratel just looks too "cool" to forget!


Gratuitous Ratel 90 images:
90mm gun

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Yes indeed!
When I saw pictures of the Ratel for the first time, it seemed futuristic compared to the military vehicles I was used to seeing in the 1980s. That appeal might have changed in theme over time but it has never diminished, the Ratel just looks too "cool" to forget!


Gratuitous Ratel 90 images:
90mm gun

First thing that jumped out to me, is how do you close the view port/window shields with out exposing your self to fire?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by CDAT

First thing that jumped out to me, is how do you close the view port/window shields with out exposing your self to fire?

I take it you mean the firing ports below each window? As I understand it they are fitted with a simple, cylindrical block that's controlled by a lever, to allow you to open or close the port.
The picture below of a Ratel 90, shows them in various staged of being "open".
I believe that sometimes they were left open to increase airflow through the vehicle while travelling (however that was passed on to me second-hand so treat it as anecdotal).




EDIT: OH! I just realised you probably meant the protective shields over the driver's windows. I think they have to be closed by someone on the outside of the vehicle but considering that they were another layer of protection for when things got really hairy, the doctrine probably states to close them before going into combat.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I take it you mean the firing ports below each window? As I understand it they are fitted with a simple, cylindrical block that's controlled by a lever, to allow you to open or close the port.
The picture below of a Ratel 90, shows them in various staged of being "open".
I believe that sometimes they were left open to increase airflow through the vehicle while travelling (however that was passed on to me second-hand so treat it as anecdotal).




EDIT: OH! I just realised you probably meant the protective shields over the driver's windows. I think they have to be closed by someone on the outside of the vehicle but considering that they were another layer of protection for when things got really hairy, the doctrine probably states to close them before going into combat.

Yes, I was talking about the driver's windows, and that was what I was guessing (that it needed to be done it before), I thought that it was nice to give the option of added protection, but did not see anyway that you could put it up if you were surprised.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Yes, I was talking about the driver's windows, and that was what I was guessing (that it needed to be done it before), I thought that it was nice to give the option of added protection, but did not see anyway that you could put it up if you were surprised.

Yeah it took me a little while to realise that but I got there eventually!
Interestingly, for all the pictures I've seen of Ratels apparently in combat or during combat training, I don't recall ever seeing any of the vehicles with those shields raised.
Obviously the driver's windows are some pretty heavy duty armoured glass but they must have been particularly effective because it appears that those protective shields were not often used or... there just aren't many photos available showing the Ratel actually in combat.
The few times I've seen pictures of the shields raised is vehicles on static display at shows etc. etc.

However because I am intensely curious... this post has taken me many minutes longer than it should because I was searching the net for pictures...
I did find this image of a Ratel apparently hit by enemy aircraft and it appears as though the shields were in the raised position.



Image from here: - https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/390124386456757714/

[Targan]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

However because I am intensely curious... this post has taken me many minutes longer than it should because I was searching the net for pictures...
I did find this image of a Ratel apparently hit by enemy aircraft and it appears as though the shields were in the raised position.

I think that's just gravity at work. They look like they're just hanging there, not latched closed.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Targan

I think that's just gravity at work. They look like they're just hanging there, not latched closed.

I thought so too but when you look at the shield for the right-hand side, it's also upright and not hanging as could be expected if they were unsecured.
The shields have a pretty minimalist type of latch to keep them secured in the upright position so it's probably not unexpected that if the shields in that photo where in the upright position when the vehicle rolled over, that they wouldn't necessarily be securely fixed into position - although I suspect that stiff hinges probably help a lot as well.

This pic of the Ratel AT version, provides a somewhat better view of the shields and their latches.


This image and also the other two showing the ZT3 ATGW equipped Ratel are from the following site: -
http://www.sa-transport.co.za/milita...ehicles_3.html

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Not really all that new. Back before the Great Recession, the IDF was in talks with Lima Army Tank Plant to build 300 of them for them since they didn't have the manufacturing capacity to build them as well as the Mk4's they wanted to build at the same time. When the Recession hit, something had to give budget wise, and the Namer was pushed back.

Yeah, Namer entered service in 2008, but in very low quantities - by 2014, there were only 120 in service. The goal is to reach around 530 in service so they can replace the M113s still in use.

2016 saw the decision to add Trophy to Namer as a hard-kill anti-missile defense. In 2017 they showed a prototype with an uncrewed 30mm turret, but AFAIK that hasn't entered production.

The new Israeli IFV is Eitan.

[bash]

Meant to post this earlier but sort of forgot. I voted "Other" because my favorite IFV in T2K is the Toyota Hilux (or other 3/4 ton pickup). In my Red Dawn-ish game pickups were the main player vehicles. They had pintle mounts welded to roll bars for M2s and M60s. Their main defense was GTFO rather than stand up fights.

This repeated in an East Europe game. The players preferred the lower profile of civilian pickups over military trucks or APCs. Two characters with dirt bikes that would scout ahead of the truck convoy to avoid encounters with heavier vehicles. They also camouflaged the trucks to look like locals driving beaters so as to not draw attention when they couldn't avoid an encounter.

[Ursus Maior]

I voted for the Bradley, I loved that thing as a model for wargaming. I would have voted for the Marder 1, if it had been available, because that's what I rode.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Ursus Maior

I voted for the Bradley, I loved that thing as a model for wargaming. I would have voted for the Marder 1, if it had been available, because that's what I rode.

I think the Marder on the list is meant to be a 1A1, it could easily be a typo that left out the A and made it 11?

Edit: Looking at the poll again it's not Marder 11 it's definitely Marder II so that is a bit of a problem. I believe the Marder II was a WW era tank destroyer.
Still, I can't help thinking that the Marder on the poll is meant to be the IFV

[Ursus Maior]

I think the poll meant the Marder 2, a prototype vehicle of the 80s, which was supposed to deliver an IFV side-kick to the then-new Leopard 2.

I think, I remember it appearing in an older T2k publication.

Link to German Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marder_2

[Raellus]

The poll option refers to the Marder IFV. I typed "Marder II" in error (I was probably reading about WW2 at the time). Sorry for the confusion. I think it's too late to edit the poll, but I'll check, just in case.

-

[Ursus Maior]

Thanks for the clarification!

[Fallenkezef]

Just realised that the Spartan isn't on the list. Poor thing always gets forgotten about

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Fallenkezef

Just realised that the Spartan isn't on the list. Poor thing always gets forgotten about

Nor was the FV432

[Raellus]

Although it hasn't received a single vote, I think a strong case could be made for the OT-64/SKOT in a Poland (or Czechoslovakia) based campaign.

Pros:

• Amphibious
• Diesel engine (more fuel efficient, and less combustible than gasoline)
• Large capacity (2+ 10-18 passengers, depending on model)
• Spare parts not uncommon
• Decent armament (KPV and PKT coax, or DShK)
• Thicker armor than BTR series

Like most wheeled APCs, the big cons are relatively thin armor, and less cross-country mobility than a tracked APC. Being mistaken for a PACT vehicle could be a pro or a con depending on where the vehicle is operating.

-

[Raellus]

Would anyone change their vote to or away from the M2 Bradley, based on its recent combat performance in Ukrainian service?

IIRC, the Bradley received a lot of criticism from the moment it was selected by the US Army. "They" said, "its armor was inadequate, it was too tall, carried too few infantry", etc. Its reputation improved a bit during the Gulf War and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Obviously, it's received a number of upgrades since the 1990s, although some of those garnered additional criticism at the time (e.g. more armor makes it heavier/less mobile). The Ukrainians have praised its crew/passenger survivability, optics, and firepower.

If you ever want to change your poll answer, let me know and I will change it for you manually. I just changed mine from LAV-25 to OT-64/SKOT 2.

Also, I'm adding the Swedish CV90, as Sweden has become a WWIII combatant in 4e T2k (and a NATO member IRL). Incidentally, the Ukrainians are also fans, IRL.

-

[ChalkLine]

The problem with the Brad is that while it's great for a war it's not so hot for T2K, Like anything not an MBT it can be popped frontally by an RPG-7V and these are not uncommon in the T2K environment. If this is the case it's a fire support vehicle with a 25mm gun and you may as well have a LAV-25 for that because it's less thirsty and can swim.

Recently I've really gotten into 4x4 APC/IFVs, I think a game where each player had something like a LAV-150 or a BRDM would be cool because you could have a short crew meaning each player had one NPC as a driver. I really should develop this more.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by ChalkLine

The problem with the Brad is that while it's great for a war it's not so hot for T2K, Like anything not an MBT it can be popped frontally by an RPG-7V and these are not uncommon in the T2K environment. If this is the case it's a fire support vehicle with a 25mm gun and you may as well have a LAV-25 for that because it's less thirsty and can swim.

That's a good point. I prefer the LAV-25 as well. One thing that the Bradley has that the LAV-25 doesn't is the twin TOW II launcher. With it, the Bradley is capable of taking out even the newest (in the T2k timelines) Soviet MBTs. IIRC, a Ukrainian Bradley destroyed a Soviet T-80 with a TOW shot.

-

[Red Diamond]

I was light infantry and never served with mech so take my opinion for what it's worth. I know many of western IFVs are high quality (Warrior, Marder, etc) but I really don't know enough about them. The M2 has proved itself over and over. Now, most recently in Ukraine. I think the M2 would do even better with experienced and trained crew working in a true combined arms environment- and I say that with all respect to the Ukraine armed forces punching way above their weight.
The BMP-3 seems to be the only IFV that is comparable to the M2 on the WARSAW Pact/ USSR side for the T2K time period, and I can say that with some knowledge.
LAV 25 a close second!