You dun have to shoot at the wheels, in a lot of cases, wheels that tried in run flaming barricades which tracks would have just breezed through found their tires on fire and reduced to running on rims. And they are moving nowhere near top speed...Originally posted by |-|05|:flats perfrom perfectly fine....apart from erm the fact that u'd damge the inside and suspension will be a bitchanyway they are bullet proof tires meaning their made of kelvar,very very thick(like 3inches) and are double layered.A tire within a tire so to speak.Chances of them getting blown by normal bullets is low....well the 50cal frm an M-89 could blow the tire but normal bullets wont.
totally agree that they're complementary... i mean... SAF would be STUPID to choose one OR the other right???Originally posted by laser51088:thx |-|05|.
and check out this page:
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-vehtlav.htm
note the 'complimentary not competitors' point. .. hmmmmm, changed my view of view of wheeled vehicles. .. so they are useful after all, but then i still think fighting should be left to the tracked ones. .. though wheeled vehicles have their role to play too
Actually, actual field experience has shown that tracks actually require less maintaince... yes, driving around on drunken tours in peacetime on wheels means that you will have to maintain them little, while tracks need constant care. The thing is, the amount of maintainence for tracks remains more or less little changed when the use increases, if a wheel gets put into actual field use (could be even driving extended preriods at speed), their reliability drops dramatically. US Marines found that out the hard way when they had to change the wheels of their LAVs once every two weeks in the field while a tracked Gavin treads could survive 2 months under the same conditions with little maintaince, though you officer would probably be after your butt by that time.Originally posted by laser51088:Combat wise, tracks are better. . .
but maintenance and for long distance, i think wheels are better. . .tracks prob also wear out faster. . .
but then again, in war, if each of ur vehicle has 8 tyres, erm, how many spares do u need? and u will need to change the whole wheel not just the tyres i think, cos ur rims and all will prob get damaged running on 0 pressure in the tyres. . .and because proponents of wheels give the ability of wheels to 'run flat' as an advantage it has over tracks, we also have to factor in how run flats perform against tracks. . .are they faster even after they tyres are blown?
ill - fated Terrex?? What happen, cancelled? I've seen the Terrex and been inside. It has far more internal volume and space than the V200s. The sitting arrangement is also more comfortable. One has to be really carefull when closing the hatches on the V200. One slip and there goes your fingers. On the other hand, the Terrex has a large ramp like the M113 for easier access.Originally posted by bigballs11:Looks like we have to stick to our vintage V200 commando 4 wheelie armour vehicle for another 20 years. 55 years of usage for a piece of equipment, looks like our army is going to get the most cost efficient award of the year. Too bad for ST Kinetics and it's ill-fated terrex 8 wheelie armoured vehicle.
Anyway, I still find the V200 looks great despite it's age, must really praise that US hull designer. However at 400,000 a pop for an upgrade, I would rather suggest the decision maker buy 2 new mercedes saden instead, more comfortable.
today's chinese papers came out a report on the recent upgrade to the v200. IMO, i also think getting new wheeled AFV to replace the present ones then convert the v200 into static targets for live firing, or maybe as platforms for an experimental unmanned recon vehicleOriginally posted by bigballs11:Looks like we have to stick to our vintage V200 commando 4 wheelie armour vehicle for another 20 years. 55 years of usage for a piece of equipment, looks like our army is going to get the most cost efficient award of the year. Too bad for ST Kinetics and it's ill-fated terrex 8 wheelie armoured vehicle.
Anyway, I still find the V200 looks great despite it's age, must really praise that US hull designer. However at 400,000 a pop for an upgrade, I would rather suggest the decision maker buy 2 new mercedes saden instead, more comfortable.
check this interesting site regarding stryker's performance!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?