Viper Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

[python-000]

we can convert this.

into this.

 

[Great Janjua]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1551973596238839808

I like where this is headed investing in local ideas and not giving up is the black diamond of traits.

@PanzerKiel @Signalian @RescueRanger @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[RescueRanger]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1551973596238839808

I like where this is headed investing in local ideas and not giving up is the black diamond of traits.

@PanzerKiel @Signalian @RescueRanger @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Love it.

 

[Super Falcon]

Hit wasting time and money on 80s era system no Technolocal advantage in them sitting ducks look German lynx an these stupid vipers 100 years difference

What Turkish FNSS producing and hit making jokes of itself keep redesigning m 113 with fancy presentation won't change much in war

 

[Signalian]

Hit wasting time and money on 80s era system no Technolocal advantage in them sitting ducks look German lynx an these stupid vipers 100 years difference

What Turkish FNSS producing and hit making jokes of itself keep redesigning m 113 with fancy presentation won't change much in war

Theirs is a thrifty approach amalgamated with PA's mechanized doctrine of APCs. Inclusion of 25 mm or 30 mm or bigger cannon, an ATGM and also lesser seating capacity plus the protection systems and sensors on a single platform is what PA is looking for ? I still doubt if PA would pitch thin skinned (than MBT) at FEoB. Secondly, 125 mm holds the biggest punch, is it necessary to provide back up with 30 mm cannon ? and then isn't ATGM carrier with a 120 mm or 152 mm caliber missile a better weapon for one shot one kill scenario coupled with a longer range than a 30 mm cannon. 12.7 mm still mows down infantry, 30 mm is an over kill. Lots of factors be to debated.

 

[Signalian]

we can convert this.
View attachment 814729
into this.
View attachment 814730View attachment 814731

There are 2-3 types of Mech battalions in PA.

The regular MIBs and then LATs and HATs. There are also mechanized transport elements in an armored regiment like M-113s derivates.

MIBs have the usual strength of ~770 troops. They are assigned roughly 50 x M113s. Each M-113 has carrying capacity is 13 troops including driver and commander/gunner. Where as an IFV will take 6 troops and 3 crew (driver, loader, commander/gunner). Where will the extra 4 troops go ? Cost issue- assign more IFVs means more fuel requirement and maintenance, assign more missiles for launcher and ammunition for 25 or 30 mm. Or cut down MIB troop strength, that means all Ops will need to be over hauled as Brigade and Division commander options will be limited. Almost a company strength in MIB has ATGM capable M-113.

Now if you cut strength then you come towards the LAT and HAT, around 550-600 troops. Again 48 - 50 x M-113s, but more than half strength are ATGM carriers M-113. Previously CJ-3, CJ-5 and defenders had 4-5 troops on every 4x4, now its 4 -5 troops on M-901 or Maaz.

MIBs work in conjunction with Armored Regiments, M-113s trail behind MBTs and then deploy infantry to support Armor, where as LATs and HATs are extremely mobile and are required to provide heavy firepower against infantry as well as armor. LATs and HATs deploy their weapons just like an Armor regiment deploys MBTs, but MIBs deploy troops, just like normal/regular infantry regiment. Both types of units have different roles.

LATs also had recon role or scout role previously, Im not sure if the role is still maintained, so a scout IFV like M3A3 Bradley?
Now change the doctrine and try to fit in IFV like Bradley or VIPER in MIB and LAT/HAT.

 

[Super Falcon]

What ever armour you add on these their performance only decrease due to engine power limitations powerfully armour make them even worst due to extra weight their engines will decrease the speed time for pak to get them out asap even with rpg launchers these can be defeated easily and against loitering munitions they don't even stand a chance risking lifes