PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   US Army Bradley Replacement (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/500617-us-army-bradley-replacement.html)

ORAC 16th Nov 2012 15:17

US Army Bradley Replacement
 
Payload of C-17: 170,900lb = 85 short tons.

Better not pack any in-flight rations or have to go very far....

Bradley Replacement to Outweigh Abrams Tank

The Army’s high-priority battle wagon, the Ground Combat Vehicle, is likely to weigh as much as 84 tons, making it the heaviest armored vehicle on the battlefield.

The new weight estimate, released by the Congressional Budget Office, mean that the service’s replacement for the outdated Bradley fighting vehicle would be heavier than an M1 Abrams tank and weigh more than two current Bradleys.....

Wensleydale 16th Nov 2012 15:39

The figures probably include the weight of the crew.....

Lonewolf_50 16th Nov 2012 15:51

Just how many brigdes in the world will support those vehicles?

Something isn't adding up. :ugh:

VinRouge 16th Nov 2012 15:58

Someone has designed by the looks of it with the intention of staying in afghan. I would say we were coming to the end of our Silly little obsession with coin so why no go for something less armoured and more manoeuvrable?

Pontius Navigator 16th Nov 2012 16:45

Wasn't weight the achilles heel of the Conqueror tank? Biggest gun, biggest tank, biggest army and TOO heavy at 65 tons and heavier even than the Challenger 2.

racedo 16th Nov 2012 17:40

Another movie gotta be in the offing then as saw the original involving the story of the Bradley and was funny.

The Pentagon Wars (TV 1998) - IMDb

Given how they screwed up the development of the Bradley I don't see this new vehicle in action before 2020 and even then it will sink into anything other than a reinforced road................infantry get ready to get out and push.

JFZ90 16th Nov 2012 18:27

An 84 ton APC for 9 troops.

Basically, I don't understand, at all.

What threats are driving such a mass? Isn't the future with innovative design & hard kill das etc.?

NutLoose 16th Nov 2012 20:01

Sort of self perpetuating, more armour means need for bigger engine and larger fuel tanks to haul it around and give it the range.... that means a larger vehicle to fit it in, which of course means more armour and weight and that means.....

I thought they were looking at a redesign built on the Bradley's chassis, or a tracked version of the Stryker that was in the offing.

5645andym 17th Nov 2012 03:25

I seem to remember that the designer of the A4 Skyhawk, Ed Heinemann, came up with a 1-10 rule for aircraft design i.e. every extra kilo of equipment would add 10 kilos to the final design weight.

I wonder if there is a similar rule for tank/afv design. . .

Buster Hyman 17th Nov 2012 04:14

Ha! And the M113 will soldier on down here until 2050!


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:47.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.