IFVs

> Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:
CV90 in Military Technology magazine.

> ...is an example of this, with IFV (40mm cannon + 6-8 grunts), AA,
On the other hand you can build a cheap, light tank on a IFV chassis. Much
like the TAM tank that was derived from the Marder IFV. Or, using a tank hull,
you can build a really tough IFV. Much like the Israelis do with obsolete tank
hulls.

Or you could make an anti-tank vehicle from your CV90 IFV like this:

CV 90105 ANTI-TANK VEHICLE
The CV 90105 anti-tank vehicle is fitted with a Giat TML turret armed
with a 105 mm stabilised gun and has day and night sights for both commander
and gunner. The vehicle is operated by a crew of four, the commander, gunner,
driver and loader. The TML 105 turret is equipped with a two axis stabilised
105 mm CN 105 G2 NATO standard gun. The gun laying system is power stabilised
and controlled
by a digital computer. The elevation range of the gun is -6 to +18
degrees and the traverse is n x 360 degrees. Secondary armament consists of a
7.62
mm coaxial machine gun and a roof/pintle mounted 7.62 mm machine gun. A
Galix self- defence system is also fitted.

The turret is fitted with a SAVAN 15 stabilised sight supplied by SAGEM. SAVAN
15 is a derivative of the stabilised sight developed for the Leclerc main
battle tank and includes a thermal imager. The turret provides protection
against 7.62 mm weapons at any range. The gunner's sight can also
be fitted with an infra-red charge-coupled device (IRCCD) thermal
imaging system. The commander's station can be equipped with periscopes and
panoramic stabilised sights.

Quoted from:
    http://www.army-technology.com/projects/cv90/index.html
While not a MBT, it's a good AT vehicle.

Actually the idea of using tank chassis' for IFVs was used back in WWII by
the Canadians.  They developed the Ram Mark I-II tanks for use in
Europe, but by the time they got over there & the crews got trained, the tanks
were undergunned & couldn't effectively hurt the Germans. So, they took the
turrets off, stripped out the unnecessary equipment & turned them into IFVs
(called Kangaroos), flamethrowers (called Wasps I think) & SP AA guns (called
Beavers I think). Nils

> -----Original Message-----

Howdy!

> On Thu, 19 Nov 1998, Hedglin, Nils A wrote:

> Actually the idea of using tank chassis' for IFVs was used back in

The wasp was a universal (Bren) gun carrier with a flamethrower. I though that
the Kangaroos were Australian? I don't remember.

A great way to have a "quick and dirty" APC for your SGII game; just pop off
the turret and call it a converted troop carrier.

Later!

        Ken

> At 14:37 19/11/98 -0500, you wrote:

[Engage tank nut mode]

The original Kangaroo-type APCs were the Canadian "unfrocked Priests"
(M7 SP Howitzer with the 105mm removed and the gap plated over), then came the
Ram Kangaroos as described by Nils. I recall there being a Canadian Armoured
Carrier Regt. and a UK Royal Tank Regiment (I can't remember the number)
operating them in NW Europe. Sherman Kangaroos appeared in Italy, and later
Centaur Kangaroos and even (I've read) Churchill Kangaroos in NW Europe. The
Ram flamethrower was the Badger (like a Kangaroo but with a mild steel top
over the turret ring. An ammo carrier equivalent of the 'Roo was called
Wallaby. Turretless Stuarts (T8s and home converted) were used by recce units,
as were deturreted Daimler armoured cars. The nearest thing to a sensible
explanation of the name Kangaroo is that it was carrying the infantry in its
pouch. Most of the above is from the HMSO series on UK armour in the world
wars.

Rob

> Andrew Martin wrote:

> Or you could make an anti-tank vehicle from your CV90 IFV like this:

According to the last reports I've seen it also has enough room to carry
3-4 grunts, which would make it a *very* heavily armed IFV :-/

Jane's (1994 edition) lists it as a "light tank"; the Swedish designation is
"Infantry Cannon Vehicle" or something like that (Infanterikanonvagn). The
CV90105 hasn't yet been bought by the Swedish army AFAIK, but it has replaced
the Infanterikanonvagn 91 in the manufacturer's (Hägglunds) catalogue.

Oh, BTW - why are people complaining about GW's Rhino APC looking like a
box on threads? Just take a look at the M113... <g>

Later,

In a message dated 11/20/98 2:40:19 PM EST, oerjan.ohlson@telia.com
writes:

<< Oh, BTW - why are people complaining about GW's Rhino APC looking
like a box on threads? Just take a look at the M113... <g> >>

Try looking at a picture of the 1917 British tank (the original armored
fighting vehicle) the GW model is a dead ringer. Some sci-fi gamers like
to play with toys that look like science fiction vehicles not ugly rehashes of
the very first "tank" ever to be designed and produced.

> On Fri, 20 Nov 1998 ScottSaylo@aol.com wrote:

> Try looking at a picture of the 1917 British tank (the original

Interestingly enough, the GW Landraider is actually the British Mk IV
backwards. Notice how the tracks slope down on the front of the Landraider,
and how the tracks slope up on the front of the MkIV.

> play with toys that look like science fiction vehicles not ugly

Heh, heh, most GW human vehicles look like converted tractors.

> At 01:26 PM 11/20/98 -0700, you wrote:

Actually, according to the original Rogue Trader background, they ARE
converted tractors. Ahhh...I miss those days.