Infantry Vehicles

[markppcli]

Thats their firewood. Lol

Of course, following the Spanish army night fighting doctrine

 

[Fabius]

not to deviate this thread away from Coastal Artillery to much, but I thought looking at how France is resigning its infantry would lead to some interesting discussion.

A lot of interesting things happening with the French infantry.

Some miscellaneous observations.

I appreciate the layering of AA systems that they have with the sub units. Akeron, NLAW and AT4 with Aimpoint FCS, gives them a good balance of weight, range etc. I wonder how many FCS will be held in a sub unit. The NLAW is a key weapon I think due to the arming distance of the Akeron, 150m is quite long in complex terrain. The NLAWs 20m makes siting a bit easier. Interestingly arming distance is routinely forgotten I find, when weapons are being sited or used.

It’s interesting that they are going heavy on ATGMs at the expense of GPMG. I wonder if that is due to threat assessment or manning or due to the Griffons having a 7.62 RWS and them accepting some risk.

The focus on firepower to include 120mm mortars is interesting overall.

In terms of the Recce Pl, Intelligence Pl, etc. it will be interesting to see how those develop. Same is true for the overall Scorpion family of networked vehicles.

I would be curious to see what the delta is between the on ground reality and the shiny brochure.

 

[markppcli]

A lot of interesting things happening with the French infantry.

Some miscellaneous observations.

I appreciate the layering of AA systems that they have with the sub units. Akeron, NLAW and AT4 with Aimpoint FCS, gives them a good balance of weight, range etc. I wonder how many FCS will be held in a sub unit. The NLAW is a key weapon I think due to the arming distance of the Akeron, 150m is quite long in complex terrain. The NLAWs 20m makes siting a bit easier. Interestingly arming distance is routinely forgotten I find, when weapons are being sited or used.

It’s interesting that they are going heavy on ATGMs at the expense of GPMG. I wonder if that is due to threat assessment or manning or due to the Griffons having a 7.62 RWS and them accepting some risk.

The focus on firepower to include 120mm mortars is interesting overall.

In terms of the Recce Pl, Intelligence Pl, etc. it will be interesting to see how those develop. Same is true for the overall Scorpion family of networked vehicles.

I would be curious to see what the delta is between the on ground reality and the shiny brochure.

I think they have a good solution with reserve companies directly part of their parent regiments as a manpower solution quite frankly.

The lack of dedicated SF MGs would be a problem, but if every section already has an 7.62 mg is it really required? It’s also changes how you fight a bit, so you need a platoon base of fire if section provides its own?


I’m not sure how I feel about the scorpion family. On one hand I’m impressed the speed of adoption, on the other they are essentially MRAPs and can’t really be provide fire support so that’s a problem. Even a VAB was at least small enough to be a small target while doing that.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I was in 29 Palms to specifically look at training areas and borrowing (renting) equipment. All their equipment is theirs. Reg force is not allowed to touch it, period. They have their own maintenance facilities and spares. I don't recall how much stuff they had available, but it was lots.

 

[FJAG]

I think they have a good solution with reserve companies directly part of their parent regiments as a manpower solution quite frankly.

That's where my head's at. Phase 1 reorg to make a mix with existing equipment and Phase 2 - buy the equipment needed to arm the "total" force.

Voila!

 

[Fabius]

Scorpion isn’t really the vehicles from my understanding. Scorpion is an overall program to network , upgrade and integrate all the vehicles and weapons systems in the French Army.
The Griffon, Jaguar and Serval are a subset of the Scorpion program.

I think the speed of adoption and application of lessons being observed is very interesting too.

My understanding is that Griffon and Serval will be used more by the French Regiments which could be compared to the US IBCT in role vs the VCBIs that are being used by the Inf Regt that are expected to work in conjunction with the MBTs etc. as armoured infantry.

I think that there will also be almost 3 times as many Griffons as VBCIs.

 

[FJAG]

My understanding is that Griffon and Serval will be used more by the French Regiments which could be compared to the US IBCT in role vs the VCBIs that are being used by the Inf Regt that are expected to work in conjunction with the MBTs etc. as armoured infantry.

That's my general understanding as well. Appx 1,800 6-wheel VBMR multi-role APC Griffons for mech infantry and appx 2,000 4-wheel VBMR-L Servals for light and airborne infantry (interestingly they both carry 8 dismounts). Appx 630 8-wheeled VCBIs IFVs (9 dismounts) stay principally with the armoured brigades.

While the VCBI is a appx 7 tonnes heavier its armoured protection seems the same for VBMR at level 4.

 

[markppcli]

Scorpion isn’t really the vehicles from my understanding. Scorpion is an overall program to network , upgrade and integrate all the vehicles and weapons systems in the French Army.
The Griffon, Jaguar and Serval are a subset of the Scorpion program.

I think the speed of adoption and application of lessons being observed is very interesting too.

My understanding is that Griffon and Serval will be used more by the French Regiments which could be compared to the US IBCT in role vs the VCBIs that are being used by the Inf Regt that are expected to work in conjunction with the MBTs etc. as armoured infantry.

I think that there will also be almost 3 times as many Griffons as VBCIs.

Yes Griffon and Serval are replacing the VABs while VCBI replaced the AMX 10P.

The French, like most European countries, never really had what we’d call light infantry, even their mountain troops have VABs (now Servals) to get them around.

I have a hard time buying the protection being equal @FJAG, I assume that doesn’t take into account the giant driver windows of the Griffon and Serval.

 

[Fabius]

The VBMR and VBCI in their baseline configuration are STANAG level 4. For direct fire that’s defeating a 14.5mm HMG at 200m.

There is glass that can do that. However going up to STANAG level 5 introduces the ability to defeat 25mm APDS at 500m across the vehicles frontal arc. That’s likely doable for the VBCI same as the LAVs. VMBR glass though is likely not achievable realistically.

 

[FJAG]

I have a hard time buying the protection being equal @FJAG, I assume that doesn’t take into account the giant driver windows of the Griffon and Serval.

I can't speak to it with any personal knowledge. All that I've got is what several websites say.

It seems me that going from six to eight wheels in and of itself would add some weight to the VCBI. Add to that the 25mm turret while the basic VBMR only carries a 12.5mm RWS and the heavier engine that the VCBI has and you've already have taken up a good bit of the extra weight without adding any extra armour thickness.

 

[markppcli]

I can't speak to it with any personal knowledge. All that I've got is what several websites say.

It seems me that going from six to eight wheels in and of itself would add some weight to the VCBI. Add to that the 25mm turret while the basic VBMR only carries a 12.5mm RWS and the heavier engine that the VCBI has and you've already have taken up a good bit of the extra weight without adding any extra armour thickness.

Yeah I suppose the turret must be at least a few tonnes

 

[KevinB]

The VBMR and VBCI in their baseline configuration are STANAG level 4. For direct fire that’s defeating a 14.5mm HMG at 200m.

I’d believe the VBCI, but have a tough time finding that would be applicable to the VBMR across the glass windshield.

There is glass that can do that.

I tend to doubt that the front glass on the VMBR can, as generally it’s small glass for visions ports, not a windshield like setup on the VMBR.
Not a dig on the vehicle, just a general observation, because many MRAP type vehicles make those claims, but the ‘fine print’ has Level 3 glass for DF impact but L4-6 for 155MM explosives.

However going up to STANAG level 5 introduces the ability to defeat 25mm APDS at 500m across the vehicles frontal arc. That’s likely doable for the VBCI same as the LAVs. VMBR glass though is likely not achievable realistically.

Again in my experience most MRAP type vehicles glass is defeated by 14.5mm or .50 (12.7mm) AP quite easily at 200-300m

Which exceptionally sucks when you are in said vehicle that gets hit…

 

[markppcli]

I’d believe the VBCI, but have a tough time finding that would be applicable to the VBMR across the glass windshield.


I tend to doubt that the front glass on the VMBR can, as generally it’s small glass for visions ports, not a windshield like setup on the VMBR.
Not a dig on the vehicle, just a general observation, because many MRAP type vehicles make those claims, but the ‘fine print’ has Level 3 glass for DF impact but L4-6 for 155MM explosives.



Again in my experience most MRAP type vehicles glass is defeated by 14.5mm or .50 (12.7mm) AP quite easily at 200-300m

Which exceptionally sucks when you are in said vehicle that gets hit…

And that’s where I sit. The windshield is massive, and I’m pretty convinced that’s got to be the weakest part of the armour. The weird part to me in the French seem to like to use it like a fighting vehicle vs a battle taxi but I think that’s just a general truth with any APC. Picture for reference to the windshield and note the troops stacked up behind it.

 

[FJAG]

And that’s where I sit. The windshield is massive, and I’m pretty convinced that’s got to be the weakest part of the armour. The weird part to me in the French seem to like to use it like a fighting vehicle vs a battle taxi but I think that’s just a general truth with any APC. Picture for reference to the windshield and note the troops stacked up behind it.

View attachment 86333

That mission creep is pretty much the way of it with these vehicles.

If you go back to the M113, it was a pretty light battlefield taxi but you'll see more than one video from the 1970s with them charging into attacks next to Centurions, M60s and Leo 1s on exercises.

AVGPs? Training tanks and APCs. Definitely not a Marder. Maybe for us but others used equipment not much better than this in combat.

Strykers were designed to bring troops into an area under cover and close to the fight but leave them dismounted. But the LAV III gets a 25mm turret which simply begs to take part as a fire support element. LAV 6s re a substantial upgrade but still short of a Bradley or Warrior or Lynx.

It always gets me back to the one good thing Rumsfeld said "You go to war with the army you have ...". I did a search earlier and came up with an old article about the VBMR that I found interesting and said the following:

One of the main objectives of the SCORPION program and the VBMR Griffon project is to increase the level of crew protection in the characteristic conditions of a modern armed conflict. In addition, it is planned to increase combat capability by including the unit and its transport in the general system of communications and command and control of troops. Armored cars are often referred to as the most advanced from the point of view of electronics French products.

There were also cost requirements for the VBMR project - the price of a serial armored car should not exceed 1 million euros. This task group GME decided by maximizing the use of ready-made units. Thus, the armored vehicle is built on a remanufactured three-axle chassis of a serial Renault brand truck. Most of the other equipment is also serial samples.

As I said before, I have no idea as to the level of protection the windshield offers, but increased protection was a design requirement. A fully armoured front with vision slits or periscopes wouldn't have compromised the weight or cost. Somewhere within the design process someone said we'll do a large sheet of armoured glass and worked out the tradeoffs with a purpose. IMHO that speaks to the operational use concept it was built for but, at the same time it doesn't negate the fact that this thing will be used for more than as a battlefield taxi.

When I take a look at the French army's structure the one thing one sees that its not as clear cut as the American ABCT, SBCT, IBCT structures. There's a substantial mixing of types going on within the various brigades. It's hard to distill a clearcut operational use model. The edges seem a bit more blurred and somewhere, within that, armoured glass is accepted.

 

[daftandbarmy]

And that’s where I sit. The windshield is massive, and I’m pretty convinced that’s got to be the weakest part of the armour. The weird part to me in the French seem to like to use it like a fighting vehicle vs a battle taxi but I think that’s just a general truth with any APC. Picture for reference to the windshield and note the troops stacked up behind it.

View attachment 86333

The equipment needs of a colonial military force differ somewhat from those of a high intensity war fighting force...

 

[Kirkhill]

The equipment needs of a colonial military force differ somewhat from those of a high intensity war fighting force...


View attachment 86334

Likewise for a homeland defence force working from a tightly woven web of asphalt roads.

 

[KevinB]

Likewise for a homeland defence force working from a tightly woven web of asphalt roads.

Those roads which are then plowed under by explosions and vehicles that vastly exceed the planned weight of the road.

 

[FJAG]

Those roads which are then plowed under by explosions and vehicles that vastly exceed the planned weight of the road.

I keep being heavily influenced by a book that I read on WW2 post D-Day logistics and the massive casualty rate amongst tires from bomb and artillery splinters and rubble littering the roads and especially bombed villages at intersections.

Road networks (especially junctions and bridges) will not be the smooth sailing people expect. They will be one of the first deep strike targets. One needs to greatly build up our maintenance and vertical engineering capabilities if you intend to keep thinks moving. "Remember Caen."

 

[KevinB]

I keep being heavily influenced by a book that I read on WW2 post D-Day logistics and the massive casualty rate amongst tires from bomb and artillery splinters and rubble littering the roads and especially bombed villages at intersections.

Road networks (especially junctions and bridges) will not be the smooth sailing people expect. They will be one of the first deep strike targets. One needs to greatly build up our maintenance and vertical engineering capabilities if you intend to keep thinks moving. "Remember Caen."

Heck I can tell you from going through Fallujah that many roads where no go areas for LAV-25, Hummers and other wheeled vehicles, even two and three months after the final battle.