Wheels or tracks?
-
Yah. . . Thats the idea...
Would you rather enter combat riding in a wheeled armoured vehicle or tracked armoured vehicle ? Not restricted to vehicles used in saf here. . .
US army got their LAV-III stryker but grunts are complaining they want the M113, don't trust wheels. . .
Do you think the argument is justified or is it a classic case of the military being conservative? -
Depends - is the vehicle suppose to perform the IFV or APC role?Originally posted by laser51088:Yah. . . Thats the idea...
Would you rather enter combat riding in a wheeled armoured vehicle or tracked armoured vehicle ? Not restricted to vehicles used in saf here. . .
US army got their LAV-III stryker but grunts are complaining they want the M113, don't trust wheels. . .
Do you think the argument is justified or is it a classic case of the military being conservative?
I would prefer the IFV to be tracked, like in the armour units. The IFV moves in with the supporting armoured infantry. The vehicle is generally heavier, better armoured, and is expected to fight at the front in tactical battles.
The basic APC role can be done with wheeled amoured vehicle. Much better protection is provided than the 3 or 5 tonners used by infantry units, but still less than tracked ones. The wheeled APC provides transport, support fire (from a fire base) and vehicle patrols.
Malaysia, for example, uses a lot of wheeled APCs to transport its infantry units. The wheeled APCs provide very good strategic mobility across the North-South highway. Only recently has the focus shifted to armoured units with tracked IFVs.
IFVs and APCs perform different roles, and in many countries, both tracked and wheeled vehicles are used. Problems occur when wheeled APCs are used as IFVs, in my opinion. -
Wheels in large AFVs are a poor choice, because they raise the center of gravity, require extensive maintainence (wheel change once every two weeks), and are easy mobility kills. The US armed forces complaining about their LAVs are based on quite real reasons. The LAV was chosen over the Gavin, but it turned out that it was too tall to fit into a C-130 and the tires had to be deflated. It also has stability problems and the armour protection, to put it likely, is a misnomer to be called protection. The Gavin is a far superior system.
-
ahh...the perenial debate: Wheels vs Tracks??!!
Speed or versatility??
well it all depends on the primary role of the amoured vehicle...rite?
likewise in SAF we got both for different purposes...though the empathsis seems to be favouring tracked over wheels...
juz a little juicy infor... not that relevant in this thread but ever wondered wat an LSV looked like with tracks???
seen it in person...thank goodness they scrapped that idea!!?? looks like a freak machine man!!! though was pretty impressed in its climbing ability and maintainance of speed compared to the wheels
-
what does it look like? got picture?
-
Woh, quite impressed wif the technical jargons and knowledge of the combat vehicles used by the American muscle. Personally, I do prefer track over wheel. Cos esp combat time, u dun have the luxury to manovuer ur combat veh on road isn't it? It's too much at risk involve. So, tactically is wiser to use track veh bcos it can grip the ground better and it's more stable wif it's lower center of gravity even while speeding though u have to spare the comfort.
-
sorry man no pics it was yrs ago...the only remaining pics r in the unit office..saw it again when i went back for reservist.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:what does it look like? got picture?
but imagine each wheel being replaced by a "wheel" of triangle tracks....
-
remember a few years back while i was taking a break from incamp training, i went online inside mindef's internal server sites and stubled upon some ST news.
apparently they had design a new LSV. the design was quite impressive compared to the LSV we presently have.
then these few years i tried finding the pic again but cannot find liao. -
as ah san pointed out, depends, and not only on the role of the vehicle but also the role of the unit.
as far as i understand, the Stryker LAVIII was chosen for the US Army to equip the Brigade Combat Teams, which are supposed to be deployed anywhere around the world within 96 hours. The idea is to provide advance elements with greater generic firepower, protection and mobility which erstwhile rapid-deployable units (like 82nd and 101st) do not enjoy. wheeled APCs are preferred over tracked clearly because of the relatively lighter weight and greater speed. [aside: too bad ST didn't seems to get the drift by contesting with the Binoix; in fact, only the Turkey other than ST contested with tracked APCs while all other contenders like Cadillac Gage etc put in wheeled ones]
tracked armour units (M1s & Bradleys) are still retained within the US Army TOE to reinforce the bridgeheads established by the wheeled BCTs though at a slower speed.
my 2c worth -
as mentioned by others, tracks wheels, generally depends on the function/operation role of the vehicle.
For a fast/rapid deployment force, you need something that's light weight, generally the wheel vehicles.
For the heavy power force, tracks would be a better choice.
Each has its limitations and advantages, personally for wat I view for our local forces, track is still the way to go be it for AFV or APC.
as for ST's contesting using the Binoix, i think its a good effort and try but the operation needs are different..... -
Yah, SG army's needs and USA's army's needs are different.. Afterall, we are concentrating mainly on defensive and they are concentrating on attacking anywhere in the world in the shortest time possible....
-
The point is that the M113s can roll-off a C-130 ready for combat. Whereas for the Stryker, which is heavier and taller, wheels have to be deflated and its fuel tank cannot be filled totally cos of weight restriction. Its is even possible to fit 2 M113s into 1 C-130 if it is necessary. In the case of the Stryker, u need preparation before it can be used after it is transported by C-130.
Another point, M113 can be airdropped from C-130, Stryker cannot. . .
And about speed, if a Stryker blows its tires, it'll still move, but much slower than an M113, and whats the point of armour when the enemy, given enough time, can shoot at ur tires to immobilise the whole vehicle anyway? -
The very pple complaining about the Stryker are the pple using it, the top brass who aquired it however, were all rosy about it and have apparently overlooked user feedback.
-
Hmmm, maybe a good force structure in singapore will be one based largely on tracked vehicles, with one standard type of wheeled armoured vehicle chassis used in tank destroyer, IFV and APV form, esp. since Singapore itself full of roads, the wheeled ones can do the roads and policing work after most of war is fought
the tracked tanks and apcs will do the actual fighting in the first stages of war. . . -
Hmmm, maybe a good force structure in singapore will be one based largely on tracked vehicles, with one standard type of wheeled armoured vehicle chassis used in tank destroyer, IFV and APV form, esp. since Singapore itself full of roads, the wheeled ones can do the roads and policing work after most of war is fought
To sum it up, tracks or wheels depends on where you want to go and how you want to get there...
the tracked tanks and apcs will do the actual fighting in the first stages of war. . . -
Get there alive: Tracks
Get there dead: Wheels -
IMO it's not entirely true.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Get there alive: Tracks
Get there dead: Wheels
Wheels definately score better on urban areas
Tracks rules in mud tracks and cross-country terrain -
Wheels definately also have higher road speeds which means that they can travel at a much shorter time to their objectives. They are often used in armoured recce roles. An example is the use of LAV25 by the ADF for armoured recce role. Wheels are usually also quieter than tracks. Also a plus. Furthermore, most wheels are amphibious, only some tracks are.Originally posted by Silenthunter:IMO it's not entirely true.
Wheels definately score better on urban areas
Tracks rules in mud tracks and cross-country terrain
I believe that wheels have their roles especially in more urbanised theatre. You will soon find that wheels will actually benefit SAF as they can give SAF the agility and mobility to transport troops quicker. I won't replace tracks with them. I would see more on a complementary role where the guards will also have some wheel APCs (40/50)and AFVs (25mm & 105mm) in their ORBAT, plus 42 SAR with some wheels Terrix for armoured recon roles. -
Actually, some infantry or guards based PDF units are already using the V200s as light armoured transports (APC). These will likely be replace by the Terrex AV81 in future I guess. These wheeled APCs are used to transport troops closer to the battle, with better protection when compared to the 3 or 5 tonners. They also carry MGs and cannons that provide the infantry units with support and covering fire, which the 3 or 5 tonners do not have. Most are found in second line units for local defense and protection.Originally posted by Joe Black:Wheels definately also have higher road speeds which means that they can travel at a much shorter time to their objectives. They are often used in armoured recce roles. An example is the use of LAV25 by the ADF for armoured recce role. Wheels are usually also quieter than tracks. Also a plus. Furthermore, most wheels are amphibious, only some tracks are.
I believe that wheels have their roles especially in more urbanised theatre. You will soon find that wheels will actually benefit SAF as they can give SAF the agility and mobility to transport troops quicker. I won't replace tracks with them. I would see more on a complementary role where the guards will also have some wheel APCs (40/50)and AFVs (25mm & 105mm) in their ORBAT, plus 42 SAR with some wheels Terrix for armoured recon roles.
The roles are different from that of the armour units. -
Rubber tracks and road wheels like those used on the ATTC are supposed to be quieter than other tracks, it is possible to use more of these future for noise reduction.Originally posted by Joe Black:Wheels definately also have higher road speeds which means that they can travel at a much shorter time to their objectives. They are often used in armoured recce roles. An example is the use of LAV25 by the ADF for armoured recce role. Wheels are usually also quieter than tracks. Also a plus. Furthermore, most wheels are amphibious, only some tracks are.
I believe that wheels have their roles especially in more urbanised theatre. You will soon find that wheels will actually benefit SAF as they can give SAF the agility and mobility to transport troops quicker. I won't replace tracks with them. I would see more on a complementary role where the guards will also have some wheel APCs (40/50)and AFVs (25mm & 105mm) in their ORBAT, plus 42 SAR with some wheels Terrix for armoured recon roles.
Wheels are faster, but even in urban conditions, with all sorts of things lying in the streets like cars, loads of debris, concrete, etc, wheels may be limited.
The point is that wheel vehicles have a very vulnerable point: the wheels itself, to get a mobility kill, enemy just has to shoot at the wheels. -
What's the best defense against Molotov cocktails from rooftops? For both MBTs and other vehicles wheeled or otherwise.......
Just curious. Please enlighten. -
wheeled and tracked AFVs have their respective roles in SAF. as already hinted at by some, our combined arms divisions have tracked armour units in their orbat to conduct ops that mostly require greater firepower, higher protection, amphibious ability, cross-country ability, etc.
wheeled AFVs, like V200, are employed not as generic armour units per se but in auxillary roles in secured areas, such as air defence and security of higher HQ, key installations, LOC, etc, where their mobility across roads could be exploited.
i wonder whether we should be saying too much, this being a public domain
-
yup.. its the ASU aka Armoured Support Unit from the 2 PDF. U from Clementi camp?Originally posted by bcoy:Actually, some infantry or guards based PDF units are already using the V200s as light armoured transports (APC). These will likely be replace by the Terrex AV81 in future I guess. These wheeled APCs are used to transport troops closer to the battle, with better protection when compared to the 3 or 5 tonners. They also carry MGs and cannons that provide the infantry units with support and covering fire, which the 3 or 5 tonners do not have. Most are found in second line units for local defense and protection.
The roles are different from that of the armour units. -
best defence against molotov cocktails? Use umbrellas lor...have every AI equipped with a flame-retardent umbrella...lolOriginally posted by buzz:What's the best defense against Molotov cocktails from rooftops? For both MBTs and other vehicles wheeled or otherwise.......
Just curious. Please enlighten.
Seriously, there's no real solution to that...to have AIs combat-locked within the vehicle is suicide too, since they'll will lack visibility. One thing is that at least every APC has a fire extinguisher within the crew compartment and one for the engine.
I would personally prefer to have a wheeled vehicle for urban terrain. I recognize the difficulties though; Mogadishu was one example where Malaysian Condors were destroyed in the street battles. However, wheeled vehicles can make a faster getaway...that's what I feel...if the tires get hit? no prob...its run-flat tires anyway....for tracked vehicles, one mighty hit on the tracks and the crew would have to abandon their vehicle and face the nightmare of bullets flying everywhere from every other building.
-
yah but the possibility of tires getting blown or punctured is much much much much much higher than tracks getting damaged till they can't function. . . u prob need an rpg or anti tank missile to blow the tracks, but a well placed bullet will screw a tire.Originally posted by Tango1:best defence against molotov cocktails? Use umbrellas lor...have every AI equipped with a flame-retardent umbrella...lol
Seriously, there's no real solution to that...to have AIs combat-locked within the vehicle is suicide too, since they'll will lack visibility. One thing is that at least every APC has a fire extinguisher within the crew compartment and one for the engine.
I would personally prefer to have a wheeled vehicle for urban terrain. I recognize the difficulties though; Mogadishu was one example where Malaysian Condors were destroyed in the street battles. However, wheeled vehicles can make a faster getaway...that's what I feel...if the tires get hit? no prob...its run-flat tires anyway....for tracked vehicles, one mighty hit on the tracks and the crew would have to abandon their vehicle and face the nightmare of bullets flying everywhere from every other building.
i'd rather go with the idea of wheeled vehicles as second line vehicles.
oh yah, and errrr, does anyone know how run flats perform? ths in advance for replies
my two cents