

There is no other way other than to stand up to operate the rear weapon because it has to be over the roof/rollbar to clear the front passenger compartment, and that the weapons are normally portable/semi-portable heavy weapons that are mounted via adapters rather than designed for use on the vehicle only. The only possible purpose built solution to this would be an overhead remote weapon system which would be too heavy for LSV because its chassis is of space frame design for lightweight and rigidity and not so much for strength (but is high strength enough for normal crew served weapons)Originally posted by SpecOps87:Well the LSV is supposed to be a fast-riding,hard-hitting "stallion".And they are supposed to be moving so friggin fast over open terrain that by the time the enemy gunner aims and fires,the LSV will be in another place liaoz.Besides,in Iraq got lots of complain that Humvees capabilities all bulls**t.
But anyway,in my view,i find tt the LSV has a defect.The rear-gunner cannot fire unless he is standing up.I'm not too sure if its only those fitted with the ATM Spike or Mistral,but if you have a .50cal behind or 40mm AGL behind and the firer has to stand up when the vehicle is moving,den there is a major cockup in design.
Anyone care to comment?

Originally posted by zenden9:In the first place, should not use the LSV as a base reference vehicle when you want to apply the operation context like that in Iraq/Somalia/Bosnia etc where the main operating terrain is in BUA.
Maybe ST shall develop a new Multiple-purpose vehicle that offer all round protection and size fit for our terrain! Land Rover cannot take the kind of punishment demanded from LSV.But the idea of sitting inside a open military vehicle makes me insecure! Imagine a big rounds landed quite far away from yr vehicle but the fragment fly at u or enemy armed with a pistol is able to kill or injured u in an ambush! Even Humvee cannot take rifle shot but at least can block a pistol round. Or maybe we don't develop a indigenous one but buy from other countries! Below r a good example of all rounded protected multi-purpose vehicle from UK!
[b]The MLV is designed for tactical mobility with a high level of protection against anti-tank and anti-personnel mines[/b]
I agree with u on the specs and function of LSV! LSV is meant to be strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower.But if u have read my first posting.This LSV is also used for peace-keeping mission in East Timour as patrol vehicle! If the militant is half as ferocious as Iraqi one. Nobody will dare to sit inside this vehicle. Fortunately,none of fatalitites happen as the militant is only paper tiger!Originally posted by panzerjager:In the first place, should not use the LSV as a base reference vehicle when you want to apply the operation context like that in Iraq/Somalia/Bosnia etc where the main operating terrain is in BUA.
LSV as it's name suggests is already meant for strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower. These attributes are in direct conflict with the level of protection that is required for vehicles used for peace containment missions in BUA with heavy concentration of hostiles just like in Iraq
So in essence the LSV serves its job adequately if not surpassing its equivalents (compare US Humvee fitted out for the same role). The Humvee should fare better if adequately protected but then it will never become an acceptable strike vehicle in any sense. With the armour that is available today, there can never be a heavily armoured, well protected LSV - you just have to accept it.
The LSV was used by SAF in E.Timor simply because they did not have a better vehicle to do the job. Mobility was the fundamental requirement becaused of the tough terrain over there - Rovers wouldn't be able to do it once laden down. The onboard firefpower of the Flyer compared with standard Rovers in SAF is also a crucial factor.Originally posted by zenden9:I agree with u on the specs and function of LSV! LSV is meant to be strike missions - surprise/stealth, speed/agility, overwhelming firepower.But if u have read my first posting.This LSV is also used for peace-keeping mission in East Timour as patrol vehicle! If the militant is half as ferocious as Iraqi one. Nobody will dare to sit inside this vehicle. Fortunately,none of fatalitites happen as the militant is only paper tiger!
But wisdom of using this LSV as patrol car for peace-keeping is questioned. Plus if there is future peace-keeping mission other than iraqi require SAF patrol team on road that demand it to handle rigid terrain and protection. What is SAF going to offer?
Different requirementOriginally posted by eurofighter:There was this black spider LSV which is believed to be for India on displayed at AA04. Compared to the other versions, it seems to be more armoured as shown in the fitting of windshield and other stuff.
We could probably get that?
I find this entire thread rather strange. I cannot see the relationship between LSV/Humvee and protection. Neither LSV nor Humvee was designed on the basis of protection to their occupants. The fact that the Humvee was used for the wrong purpose (or in the wrong context) in Somalia does not reflect on the vehicle itself. Imagine using an axe to cut tofu - do you blame the axe for not giving a clean cut or do you blame the person using it?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:The vulnerabilities of the Hummer was already apparent in Somalia during 1993, looks like they didn't work on it in the nearly ten years they had to correct any flaws in the design.
Actually,Humvee is a multi-purpose vehicle which can use as a attack(Tow II ,25mm bushhammer or 0.5 fit on top),military armour patrol(US MP use it as patrol car)and other purpose.It is meant to withstand small arm firing and protect the personnel inside but in recent conflict like the iraqi show its inadequate. Armour vehicle is definitely able to handle small arm and even 0.5 MG but for patrolling, the long and wide body to move in narrow urban street will reduce its effective use! The US just need to produce a humvee II with better armour and suspension and it will perfect it.I had mention some new humvee type multi-purpose vehicle in my previous article which may have handle better than present humvee in all areas.Originally posted by dragonstar:I find this entire thread rather strange. I cannot see the relationship between LSV/Humvee and protection. Neither LSV nor Humvee was designed on the basis of protection to their occupants. The fact that the Humvee was used for the wrong purpose (or in the wrong context) in Somalia does not reflect on the vehicle itself. Imagine using an axe to cut tofu - do you blame the axe for not giving a clean cut or do you blame the person using it?
If protection is needed, then used a properly designed armoured vehicle. Even then, they will be vulnerable to some forms of attack.

we have armoured land rovers liao lehOriginally posted by zenden9:The new US Humvee II is out! The design is quite futuristic especially the door look very artisitic with smaller side door window! Hope this one can really stop AK-47 and M-16 rounds and SAF can consider buying some of it.
maybe cuz of different doctrines we have no need for them?Originally posted by zenden9:The land rover is no way going to compete against this humvee in terms of cross country and power abilities.Plus handling of more different variety weapon.Humvee is going to do a better job as it demonstrate from firing TOW II,25mm Bush hammer machine gun to small M60 GPMG. As previous thread has already indicated.