Its the lav revup again:

[killagee 0]

I think the ARTEC MRAV "Boxer" is going to be a winner. Wonder how the Trials are going? Anybodt know anything more about it?

[the_unknown_one 0]

I don't understand. What is it about the LAV (whats an LAV anyway?) that the ofp engine can't handle?

[suchey 0]

well, the big proble (as I understand it) is that wheeled vehicles cant function on the same level as treaded ones...in other words, wheeled vehicles dont have the following capabilities:

-cant turn out

-cant fire missles from it

-cant use "periscope" feature

- and probably more that I missed

Since the LAV is a wheeled vehicle, much of its functionality as a "light armored" vehicle would be missing. There are a variety of MOD teams that have tried to 'fake' this with no good results (to my knowledge). Although Im SURE there is some way around this, no one has been able to find it yet...the man that comes up with the solution will most certainly be an OFP addons hero!

[hellfish6 7]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (killagee @ April 13 2003,02:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think the ARTEC MRAV "Boxer"  is going to be a winner. Wonder how the Trials are going? Anybodt know anything more about it?<span id='postcolor'>

Is going to be a winner for what? The US Army selected a variation of the LAV-III (called the Stryker) to be the new MAV about a year or two ago. the 3rd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division is almost fully equipped already. The 3rd Bde/25th ID is just starting to get theirs. And the 2nd ACR just placed the order for theirs. I think the only vehicle that has not reached production yet is the Armored Gun System variant.

Personally, I was really hoping that they'd pick the M-8 Buford Armored Gun System. It's a beautiful little tank. I've wargamed some semi-official battles with it before (I helped the contractor and consultants who analyzed the wheeled vs. tracked debate back in '99 when they first started thinking about fielding these). At armor level 3, the M-8 was totally invulnerable to all known RPGs, and could kill a T-72 before the T-72 even knew it was there.

M-8 pic

[the_unknown_one 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Suchey @ April 13 2003,20:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You can't fire missiles from it <span id='postcolor'>

So how come the Hummers made by quakergamer at opgwc fire TOW's?

And what is the periscope function?

What is the use of "turning out"?

What is the meaning of life?

the_unknown_one

[Wick_105 0]

LAV-III = canadian built

canadian built = long lasting

why long lasting?

because we dont have the money to get new crap every few years.

[suchey 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (the_unknown_one @ April 13 2003,04:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So how come the Hummers made by quakergamer at opgwc fire TOW's?

And what is the periscope function?

What is the use of "turning out"?

What is the meaning of life?<span id='postcolor'>

They dont. I believe they fire a bullet which does extended dammage. Notice that there is no missle actually launched...this is the reason that the Macc and Marfy HUMVEE has not been released yet.

Periscope function is the ability to see more clearly by using the 'v' function while in a tank...since many folks play without 3rd person activated, this is kind of a big deal....and since the LAV doesnt have windows, how else would you see out of it aside from the tiny slats in the front?

Turning out is when you open the hatch and drive with your head hanging out of the vehicle. If 3rd person is not active, this is the best method for viewing while driving, but also a good way to get your head taken off.

The meaning of life is to drink plenty of coffee and smoke many cigarrettes...its a government conspiracy that perpetuates that these are bad for you.

[killagee 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hellfish6 @ April 14 2003,07:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (killagee @ April 13 2003,02:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think the ARTEC MRAV "Boxer" is going to be a winner. Wonder how the Trials are going? Anybodt know anything more about it?<span id='postcolor'>

Is going to be a winner for what? The US Army selected a variation of the LAV-III (called the Stryker) to be the new MAV about a year or two ago. the 3rd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division is almost fully equipped already. The 3rd Bde/25th ID is just starting to get theirs. And the 2nd ACR just placed the order for theirs. I think the only vehicle that has not reached production yet is the Armored Gun System variant.<span id='postcolor'>

From http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/index.html

The UK, Germany and the Netherlands will each receive four prototypes and a first batch of 200 vehicles, with deliveries to begin in 2006. The first prototype, in German APC configuration, was rolled out to representatives of OCCAR and the participating nations in December 2002 and is undergoing industry trials in Germany. UK prototypes will be delivered in 2003. The total requirement is expected to be more than 2,000 vehicles - Germany 1,000, UK 775 and the Netherlands 384. The UK Boxer is required to replace FV430, Saxon and Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) utility vehicles. Germany intents to replace M113 and Fuchs Tpz 1vehicles.