Jump to content

Norway purchases FN MINIMI 7,62®Mk3


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Laser Shark said:

Most Norwegian CV9030s (i.e. the IFVs, not the recce or command vehicles) can carry 8 dismounts though.

So two dismount fire teams per vehicle, with the actual crew acting as a third, heavy team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there in lies the problem. Structuring your infantry as whole around the IFV and exacerbating it by splitting into 2 identical fire teams. Which will inevitably abused by separate taskings. 

The infantry cannot always depend on the IFV to be present and contributing to the fight, most usually because of terrain, particularly close or mountainous terrain. I wonder where that could be.........

Thus they must be structured to be able to fight light first, IFV essentially being jam.

The dismounts should NOT be configured as 2 fire teams but as 1 squad. And function as such. It should still have a base of fire and a manouevre element. This is where the Maximi comes in, and logically a DM with something like a HK417 (not the boat anchor than is G28). 

Taht's why I don't like homogenous IFV platoons. To me it is legacy from the early age of atomic battlefield. The vehicle dictates to the infantry function, not vice versa. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, shep854 said:

So two dismount fire teams per vehicle, with the actual crew acting as a third, heavy team.

That’s correct, although, it’s also worth mentioning that a few seats will be reserved for the platoon’s medic, the platoon assistant and the foot platoon leader (not to be confused with the platoon commander, his superior). I’m reasonably confident, however, that they’re all seated in the same vehicle as the fire support squad since the latter appears to be a smaller squad that will dismount with either 2 Javelin crews, 2 MMG crews or 1 of each according to the Army’s own FB page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Simon Tan said:

...The infantry cannot always depend on the IFV to be present and contributing to the fight, most usually because of terrain, particularly close or mountainous terrain...

Problem is not IFV, problem is in the combination of putting every infantry into IFV (seeing IFV as a solution to every problem) and trying to use same squad/plt/co org for vastly different classes of infantry.. Wheeled cargo cult IFVs are also horrible offenders, being even more road bound. Mountains should have dedicated units, as training for effective use of infantry in the mountains is so radically different from anything else unless you really want to stay roadbound, in which case you are ineffective.

.IMO there should be multiple versions of infantry, each with own org:

- Mechanized, with tracked ifvs, operating closely with tanks. Not intended for "safari" missions and "colonial" warfare.

- Motorized, with wheeled APCs, with main focus on dismounted fighting, potentially leaving transports far behind. Tanks are Brigade asset. Resist urge to "upgrade" to IFVs. If you have to do "safaris" - send those. IFV version of the APC only makes some sense as a Co level support, grouped in the weapons platoon.

- "Light", with only dismounted role, w/o real fighting transport (MRAPs are OK if they need to hitch a ride from A to B, not to follow them into battle). This is your infantry for urban and any other rough terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With fully external modules that do not limit dismount capability there is no point in pure (tracked) APCs for units that are operating with tanks, since even 20-30mm automatic cannons alone increases Plt and Co level firepower by the considerable level. Also, for 10 dismounts you need something Namer sized, in which case at C25 it will have absolutely craptacular armor.

APCs + Co level FSV platoon is IMO best solution for "motorized" infantry.

Edited by bojan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am absolutely not against tracked IFVs being tank sized and with similar weight if they come with at least somewhat comparable armor. I am against tank sized with 30/14.5mm protection at best (looking at wheeled gigantism especially).

Edited by bojan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Class 25 baseline. As in no applique armor modules. Operationally Class 30ish. I dont think a 2+10 needs to be Namer sized at all. 

I'm not so keen on autocannons on everything as they push the tracks to LOS. The tracks and armor is to bring the dismounts to behind the Line of Contact., not onto the target. The latter storming or coup de main role is high risk and should be used sparingly, not as a matter of course. 

I am keen on autocannons in support of the infantry on dedicated FSVs. These are not MBTs. MBTs are not efficient fire support vehicles. In our age, they are tank destroyers doing a side gig. Anything the MBT can do, you can do with thermobaric missile or rocket. A 50-57mm class medium autocannon a la Derivatsiya will be more than sufficient to winkle out bunkers and other hardened positions as well as to deliver airburst. 

Running MLC 30 is a lot less burdensome on logistics than MLC 70 if only because of fuel, bridging and recovery.

Close cooperation with MBTs is done with BMPT and heavy APC but these should be part of tank unit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Canada, infantry has become LAV centric. Some people see the issue but can't make headway to divorce the infantry from the LAV's and keep them capable of changing modes of transport, because of capbadges. The LAV 6 is a 30 ton+ vehicle without tracks and not the best armour protection, but good mine protection. Providing soldiers with mine proof seating limits how many can be carried vs the good old days of bench seating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
On 8/31/2021 at 8:23 PM, Simon Tan said:

You'll need new ones in a decade. Maximi batters itself to death. The receiver is too short.

ETA:- How big is the squad now? And how is a platoon comprised?

Yeah,should have bought the Ultimax 100 Mk 5. LOL. ST would go down on their knees and kiss their ass to make that sale. Plus throw in a bunch of Geylang ho's to sweeten the deal. LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...