why no tow/atgm mraps?

[Tonci87 163]

I'm confused... an RPG-7 isn't even an ATGM. It's a dumbfire rocket, which would make no sense to mount to a vehicle.

I agree that there are good ATGM platforms out there today that aren't US made. Unfortunately, I think all we'll see in arma is a variant of each MRAP with a titan launcher mounted to the roof. If we even get that. Since apparently all armies use the same few weapons in the future.

I'd much prefer to see light vehicles with wire guided ATGM's like the TOW. Not fire and forget type rockets, but something you have to guide into the target. That would at least leave the vehicle somewhat exposed while engaging targets.

Dumbfire rockets make no sense on vehicels? Geez someone should have told the Soviets and the US not to put those recoilless rifles on vehicels.... :p

[JestersDead 2]

Dumbfire rockets make no sense on vehicels? Geez someone should have told the Soviets and the US not to put those recoilless rifles on vehicels.... :p

Yeah, I worded that poorly. I meant the RPG-7 would be pointless to mount, not all dumbfire weapons. It's a light shoulder fired rocket. ATGMs and recoilless rifles make sense because the launchers are usually bulky and much heavier than a shoulder fired weapon.

[bwc153 10]

Why no mine resistant ambush protected vehicles... with ATGMs? You're asking why there are no vehicles designed for COIN (this follows from the nature of the engagements specified in their name) that are designed against tanks (the purpose of ATGMs). It's not often it gets to be said, but I think you've just answered your own question.

MRAPs in ARMA 3 have replaced Humvees. It doesn't really even seem like the MRAPs in ARMA are designed specifically for COIN. Also conventional armies use mines and ambush tactics too, nothing in the nature of the MRAPs name points to it being a COIN vehicle.

[UltimateBawb 1]

Why no mine resistant ambush protected vehicles... with ATGMs? You're asking why there are no vehicles designed for COIN (this follows from the nature of the engagements specified in their name) that are designed against tanks (the purpose of ATGMs). It's not often it gets to be said, but I think you've just answered your own question.

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/mfc/photo/joint-light-tactical-vehicle-jltv/mfc-jltv-newest-02-h.jpg

[Koodoo 10]

I hate it..

[msy 22]

There is also no AA MRAP too

[squirrel0311 16]

I wouldn’t be opposed to ATGM mounted MRAPS, Striders included. (See bottom Link for something similar.)

The AA version doesn’t feel as useful to me but I do like that picture and if you’re going to make one, why not make the other?

The question I have is….

Do we use the same MRAPs that we already have? Or do we pick new MRAPs to mount these weapons on and give it a slightly more varied look?

Maxx Pro MRAP/ TOW variant - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Navistar_MaxxPro.JPG - http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/c/images/2012/06/13/251497/original.jpg - and a video...

RG 31 MRAP with TOW - http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg67/djiti/610xbtc.jpg

Awhile back, ExplosiveAids made a thread in the ARMA 2 section about an MRAP RG 31 Tow missile Variant. It seems he was working on a mod with a friend for Arma 2. Here’s the link - http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?123017-MRAP-RG31-Mk5/page18

I like this one. http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p121/explosiveaids/RG33L_wip_204.jpg

One thing I wish was added before adding AT/AA MRAPs is the Top Attack feature for the Titan missile launcher. ….I suppose you can just manually guide it down but meh.

Here are a few other MRAPs that I really like the look of. In not sure I’d want them to be used for AT/AA Missile platforms….I’m not even sure what faction they would go to, maybe Additional forces DLC.

RG34 - http://defense-update.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/rg34_trt960.jpg (Maybe British DLC?)

Titus - http://www.military-today.com/apc/nexter_titus.htm (Couldn’t find just a picture.)

Kamaz Typhoon APC - http://i57.tinypic.com/16klxc.jpg - 4x4 version. (Russian forces DLC?)

Kamaz BTR replacement - http://i57.tinypic.com/r94kex.jpg

Kamaz Vystrel Air Defense version. - http://i57.tinypic.com/2q9e6f4.jpg These are old but it’s something to think about…

[lugiahua 26]

1. The argument that ATGM would make MBTs to extinct was around since 1970s, when AT-3 came out, yet it still didn't happen.

There are a few reasons:

- ATGMs are defensive weapons, they are not suitable for for offensive purposes. Tanks are still the best options for mobile warfare. This was proven in Yom Kippur War. While Egyptian ATGMs positions were invulnerable against Israeli frontal attacks, they could not move forward into Israeli territory, nor protect their flanks and rear from attacks.

Just like AA missiles can reduce the odds against aerial attack or deny an area to enemy aircraft, but can't not replace the function of an Air Force. You can't use AA missiles for recon, air drop or close air support.

- While ATGM became more advanced, so did armor and active defense. Furthermore, most countries can not afford a massive numbers of advanced ATGM and skilled operators.

2. There certainly should ATGM armed light vehicle in the game, just like in real world.

3. vehicle carries ATGM doesn't equal to no other protections, TOW armed humvee and Stryker both also armed with M240 machine guns.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Lugiahua

[jgbtl292 0]

look at the toyota war in africa - tanks versus toyota with TOW - toyota wins ;)

[squirrel0311 16]

Additionally, the Light Strike Vehicles I outlined in my post on page 2 of the Light Vehicle Thread could easily be fitted with Anti-Tank weapons as well. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?174990-So-are-we-going-to-get-Humvee-equivalents-And-how-about-some-armored-Trucks/page2

NATO:

British - Supacat Jackal 2 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...D_45148137.jpg (This would give a good JOINT FORCES feel to the NATO side.)

U.S. - GD Flyer 2 - http://i57.tinypic.com/dcsx1k.jpg - http://i58.tinypic.com/2ps57yg.png - (Armored door version.) http://i60.tinypic.com/2jeqlag.jpg (I think this would be better as a U.S. Vehicle DLC…then again it would be nice to have both. )

CSAT:

French - ACMAT - Bastion Patsas - http://www.master-fighter.com/mf4850...ouille_SAS.htm (France has dealt with Iran in the past…)

Singapore - MK11 LSV - http://i58.tinypic.com/24617c7.jpg - http://livinginsingaporetoday.com/wp...hicles-105.jpg (I think this would make a good CSAT vehicle but it might look good with the AAF too.)

India - Mahindra AXE LSV - http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attach...oops740782.jpg

AAF:

French - ACMAT - VLRA Commando - http://defesaglobal.files.wordpress....commando-b.jpg (This could also fit the CSAT inventory)

Polish - LPU-1 - http://greendef.blogspot.com/2013/10...wy-lpu_19.html

[beaar 78]

Would fit there, me thinks

[squirrel0311 16]

I like the IFRIT Anti-Air Truck variant I think that could work... the other stuff I don't really see a need for though.

...Then again.... That IFRIT with the radar dish got me thinking about how neat it would be to have deployable radar sites. (This would be the only way I could justify tanks having radar.)

Basically you'd have a Tempest truck with a large radar dish on top. You would drive the truck to a suitible location near or in the AO and then deploy it....It would slowly set up like a moble radar station and then it would provide all friendly vehicles in the area with the ability to see enemy aircraft on radar.

When the mobile radar station is packed up or destroyed. Those vehicles would lose the radar link and be rendered blind to air threats not in their line of sight.