Page 49 of 148 FirstFirst ... 3941424344454647484950515253545556575999 ... LastLast
Results 721 to 735 of 2218

Thread: Afghanistan - Germany's contingent (56k be gone) !!!

  1. #721

    Default

    Especially against mines. We saw what happend as that Dingo drove over stacked Mines, the engine was completely blown away and everything was brunt but the hull was still intact!

  2. #722
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Germany, deep down south
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I know about the better protection of the Dingo. Still, I disagree with the whole concept of Dingo/Eagle. The Duro, I agree, might be a different matter and is quite a usefull vehicle.

    First of, the RCWS on all vehicles decreases situational awareness a whole lot. Nothing beats manned machine guns when it comes to sit.awareness and the possibility to quickly engage on the move!

    Secondly, Dingo doesn't even offer more than one hatchet in the roof. Emergency exits, shooting out of hatchets and communication with the outside is barely possibly.

    Thirdly, and most importantly is patrol setup.
    For instance:
    one force protection platoon, a Cimic team, a BAT, a bunch of WBV 'soldiers' for shopping

    Now, cram all those people into 'their' vehicles..
    FP Platoon: 3squads, 2 Dingos each, 1 c2 dingo for the platoon commander
    Cimic team: 1 eagle/wolf
    BAT: 1vehicle
    WBV: another Dingo
    That's a total of 8 Dingos and 2 other vehicles, column length of well above 300meters. It's just hard to control, ineffective to lead and has a much higher chance of one vehicle breaking down and halting the column.

    I always preferred small setups:
    f.e. my FP platoon in 3 Füchsen, the Wbv/comic guys and my platoon leading section in another Fuchs(no need to use a c2 version..) and the BAT in their own vehicle. It's tight, easy to control and I just have one combat ineffective vehicle in my column, the column has half the size and twice the speed.

    A Fuchs offers significantly better mobility over a Dingo and it practically has the same size.

    Dont get me wrong, I'm all in love with Dingos good level of protection - but not at that price.
    I rather have 10 soldiers in one less protected vehicle with way better situational awareness than 5 perfectly sheltered soldiers in 2 vehicles, slow to move and respond and totally isolated from the world outside.

    Scrap the GFF, concentrate on:
    Wolf MSA, Mungos and Wiesel for airborne
    Wolf SSA, Fuchs and Fuchs with a 20-30mm BMK
    Wolf SSA, Boxer and Boxer with 30mm BMK
    That simple.

    Edit: Oh, and I'm totally aware that this is never going to happen with the Bundeswehr. Props to the French with their VABs, armed VAPs and VBLs.

  3. #723
    Member nickless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Schleswig-Holstein meerumschlungen
    Age
    32
    Posts
    526

    Default

    Thank you for your insight, seems to make sense.

    Just one thing, you proposed the Mungo as a patrol vehicle like it is used now. Do you really think it is suitable for that task?

  4. #724
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Germany, deep down south
    Posts
    105

    Default

    I didn't really propose the Mungo as a patrol vehicle, but you're right, my post wasn't very clear about that. Also, I'm not much of an expert concerning the Mungo, I just don't have too much experience with that vehicle.

    Still, in my opinion the Mungo is a damn fine vehicle and close to perfect for what it was designed for:

    Transport
    - as many fully equipped boots as possible
    - under the best protection possible
    - for up to 50km
    - after air-insertion by helo/c160.

    However, as a general patrol vehicle and with special regard to it's constantly breaking axles in A'stan, it's just not suited for such kind of missions.
    But like I said in my above post, I'd still choose a few Mungos over a dozen Eagles if the terrain doesn't allow anything bigger. And as long as there's enough supplies rolling in and the mechanics are fast to fix the vehicles, I couldn't care less if I'd get a new axle every two weeks.

  5. #725

    Default

    Nah, problem with the mungo is that the armor just goes up to chest level.
    They use the IdZ Sk4 vests for extra armor AFAIK!
    But I agree with you. Sad that the 20mm BmK Füchse never got realised.

  6. #726
    Senior Member JoaMei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Magna Germania
    Posts
    4,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CptGonzo View Post
    Nah, problem with the mungo is that the armor just goes up to chest level.
    They use the IdZ Sk4 vests for extra armor AFAIK!
    But I agree with you. Sad that the 20mm BmK Füchse never got realised.
    Seriously, a 20mm BmK is useless against the current IED threat. It only helps in possible ambushes after the explosion. Most important is to have protected Vehicles for every movement outside the Base in Afghanistan.

  7. #727
    Member nickless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Schleswig-Holstein meerumschlungen
    Age
    32
    Posts
    526

    Default

    Sadly, there is a lack of usable vehicles for that.
    The new Eagle IV is not really smaller than a Dingo, so there will be few places that you can reach with it where you couldn't already go with a Dingo.

    With the problems in finding a suitable vehicle for the GFF class 1 (less than 5.3t), the Bundeswehr is stuck with the different Wolf vehicles or the Mungo which are either mostly unprotected (Wolf MSS, MSA), unarmed (Wolf SSA) or only partially armored and ****e to break down or turn over (Mungo).
    And then, even the armed vehicles in that class don't have a 360 degree traversable gun mount, so the machine gunner can't lay suppresive fire during an ambush ... really not a great situation.

  8. #728

    Default

    Are there any possible solutions for that?

  9. #729

    Default

    Recent pictures as compilation



    A bit off-topic.
    A few hopefully unknown pictures from DSO-Congo

  10. #730
    Member Alpha-17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    On a C-130 with 75lbs of equipment between my legs
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Very nice. I love the Congo video, and several of the pictures from the A-stan video were new to me.

  11. #731
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Why are they new for you? The most pictures of the A'stan vid, can you find in this thread...

    glück ab!

  12. #732

    Default

    Not everyone has the time adn the will to view the whole thread.

    BTW Timelefty, your AS vid is great.

  13. #733
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Thanks! I am glad to hear it.

    glück ab

  14. #734
    Member ramthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Deep in the Blue Ridge
    Posts
    623

    Default From the Quadriga - Frohe Weihnachten

    [IMG]http://i33.*******.com/2eyudfmdotjpg[/IMG]
    AP Photo

    13 mins ago: The traditional Christmas tree in front of the Brandenburg Gate is illuminated on Sunday evening, Nov. 30, 2008.

  15. #735
    Senior Member Mackie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Stuttgart
    Posts
    7,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim292 View Post

    Scrap the GFF, concentrate on:
    Wolf MSA, Mungos and Wiesel for airborne
    Wolf SSA, Fuchs and Fuchs with a 20-30mm BMK
    Wolf SSA, Boxer and Boxer with 30mm BMK
    That simple.

    Edit: Oh, and I'm totally aware that this is never going to happen with the Bundeswehr. Props to the French with their VABs, armed VAPs and VBLs.
    But these Fox must be upgraded to A8 variants.
    The Fox was never designed to resist IEDs. Adding additional armor plates is
    different from a advanced hull.
    The 20-30mm turret needs place and capacity and a manned machine gun needs to explain the gunner than he will die in a massive IED attack (KE).

    There are 2 things we can do to improve security on patrols.

    1. New platforms
    IED attacks are not only a temporary problem.
    We need new platforms like the Grizzly or the F2 (3x3, crew:11)

    2. Modern RCWS
    Detecting enemy fire automatically and adjusting the RCWS in that direction, avoiding friendly fire, fully stabilized....
    Using the RMK recoilless gun to save weight and improve the hull. Integrating the turret in the hull is a waste of security on transport vehicles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_concentration)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •