jln115:

MRAP is just a designation used by some manufacturers and not by others.

By definition the Casspir is a MRAP but Denel simply states that its a mine protected APC.

OK.

But let me just ask you a general question. I know you are from South-Africa, can you give an unbiased view of the Nigerian defence industry?

Your own view, and which items do you like in the industry from Nigeria.

It is just a few, no hard feelings. If you don't like any too, it is also fine.

TayserMahri:



Some armies use them interchangeably. Read about their respective histories.

In modern terms the difference is size..... Destroyers in general are bigger, simple as that.

But with the advancement of technology ships can become smaller and smaller but still carry the same amount of armament. Hence modern day Frigates are just as well armed. And thus why destroyers imo are becoming obsolete.

kabe1:

What about APCs that are armed with 20mm cannons, they also stick to the battlefield.

APCs with big guns like a heavy machine guns also stick to the battlefield.

I don't quite understand why you think an APC cannot provide support for infantry soldiers.

An APC with a cannon in excess of 20 mm is an IFV. That is according to the CFE standards. I mean APCs can barely support troops directly when faced with heavier artillery. They are not tanks. They cannot withstand direct fire.

jln115:
you said APCs are next thing to the tanks bro!!

Was I wrong? An APC is also an IFV.

kabe1:

I agree with this in a way, although they are no longer designated as just MRAPs. They have a new name, like that Nigerian Ezugwu vehicle is not really an MRAP.

The vehicle Australia recently bought also can protect against mines, but it is not an MRAP.

Ezugwu is a MRAP. No two ways about it.

kabe1:

OK.

But let me just ask you a general question. I know you are from South-Africa, can you give an unbiased view of the Nigerian defence industry?

Your own view, and which items do you like in the industry from Nigeria.

It is just a few, no hard feelings. If you don't like any too, it is also fine.

will give a more detailed answer tonight but for now will leave it here:

The Nigerian defence industry has made tremendous progress in only a couple of years. And honestly I feel with enough backing from the government can become a major industry and strong competition for South Africa's defence industry.

jln115:

In modern terms the difference is size..... Destroyers in general are bigger, simple as that.

But with the advancement of technology ships can become smaller and smaller but still carry the same amount of armament. Hence modern day Frigates are just as well armed. And thus why destroyers imo are becoming obsolete.

Same argument we are having between APCs and MRAPs.

TayserMahri:


Was I wrong? An APC is also an IFV.

no its not though an APC is an APC and an IFV is an IFV.

You said it yourself IFVs provide direct fire support and apc dont

Clear distinction existed between frigates and destroyers before and during WW2 .

With time the distinction eroded because classification of naval ship types was being done by respective countries.

Some countries classify 3000 ton ships as frigates while some countries classifies them as Corvettes

Some countries classify 6000 ton ships as frigates while some countries classifies them as destroyers.

Etc

jln115:
will give a more detailed answer tonight but for now will leave it here:

The Nigerian defence industry has made tremendous progress in only a couple of years. And honestly I feel with enough backing from the government can become a major industry and strong competition for South Africa's defence industry.

I will be waiting for your response.

Thanks for the initial. I think it's a win-win if Nigeria and South-Africa do well.

APC is generally used for mobility , behind leading armour columns.

IFV is generally used for mobility and fire support along armour columns.

TayserMahri:


Precisely. Same argument we are having between APCs and MRAPs.

let's just agree to disagree on the frigate vs Destroyer debate.

But MRAPs are always APCs.... That's not negotiable.

nemesis8u:
APC is generally used for mobility

IFV is generally used for mobility and fire support

yeah bro we not debating that

TayserMahri:


Ezugwu is a MRAP. No two ways about it.

But it does not have MRAP design. I think it's a APC that can deflect mines. Look at it.

jln115:
no its not though an APC is an APC and an IFV is an IFV.

You said it yourself IFVs provide direct fire support and apc dont

Not at all, an APC with a gun in excess of 20 mm is effectively an IFV based on the fact that it can provide direct fire support due to its superior autocannons. All IFVs provide direct fire support. So basically I should have said an APC CAN be an IFV.

TayserMahri:


An APC with a cannon in excess of 20 mm is an IFV. That is according to the CFE standards. I mean APCs can barely support troops directly when faced with heavier artillery. They are not tanks. They cannot withstand direct fire.

OK, thank you for this. I understand better now.

jln115:
let's just agree to disagree on the frigate vs Destroyer debate.

But MRAPs are always APCs.... That's not negotiable.

The frigate destroyer debate is exactly the APC MRAP one. If we cant agree on the frigate-destroyer then we wont agree on the MRAP-APC. The high CoG (center of gravity) of MRAPs automatically disqualifies it as an APC. MRAPs typically cannot even climb steep hills compared to APCs.

kabe1:

But it does not have MRAP design. I think it's a APC that can deflect mines. Look at it.

Just look at its center of gravity and compare it to the Boomerang K-16 APC below. The Ezugwu MRAP cannot carry troops to all terrain which makes it NOT APC in my opinion, among other factors. APCs take troops just about anywhere. Ezugwu can deflect mines obviously and that makes it a MRAP not an APC. Note the difference in:

MRAP: Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
APC: Armored Personnel Carrier

TayserMahri:


Just look at its center of gravity and compare it to the Boomerang K-16 APC below. The Ezugwu MRAP cannot carry troops to all terrain which makes it NOT APC in my opinion, among other factors. APCs take troops just about anywhere. Ezugwu can deflect mines obviously and that makes it a MRAP not an APC. Note the difference in:

MRAP: Mine Resistant Ambush Protected
APC: Armored Personnel Carrier

The K-16 Boomerang is a beast of a vehicle, wow!!

I get your point.

kabe1:

The K-16 Boomerang is a beast of a vehicle, wow!!

I get your point.

Yea, its also amphbious. Check those waterjets at the rear I think everyone would/should consider this a personnel carrier because it can carry troops anywhere. MRAPs like Ezugwu are very limited to the local areas (what we would call patrols), preferably non-mountainous flat ones - and am not in any way trying to degrade Ezuguwu. Its a great invention from the Nigerian Defense forces and should help minimize casualties. Though I am not sure about the latter. You asked me about my view on why the Nigerian army is struggling with insurgency and I avoided that to avoid turning the thread on its head

Chinook Drifting ?? Pretty dope


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtZpcUj_wqQ

TayserMahri:


Yea, its also amphbious. Check those waterjets at the rear I think everyone would/should consider this a personnel carrier because it can carry troops anywhere. MRAPs like Ezugwu are very limited to the local areas (what we would call patrols), preferably non-mountainous flat ones - and am not in any way trying to degrade Ezuguwu. Its a great invention from the Nigerian Defense forces and should help minimize casualties. Though I am not sure about the latter. You asked me about my view on why the Nigerian army is struggling with insurgency and I avoided that to avoid turning the thread on its head

Bro, there nothing wrong with giving an unbiased assessment without prejudice.

Kenya, Egypt are also struggling with Insurgencies.

I was only asking for your opinion, if you feel it would be best to avoid the question, that's fine.

The Russians have been developing military equipment for hundreds of years, the K-16 is in a class of it's own.

Hailstorm45:
Algeria
Another kilo submarine exercise, this time firing at a ground target
https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=113&v=kDiJLgYG8aM

Wow!!!

This is incredible.

Algerian1:
Algerian navy exercise this days ,Kalibr cruse missile launched from kilo 636 M submarines to a ground target at 290 km


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41F3Gvh50E0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDiJLgYG8aM

Kalibr, this is the Russian cruise missile right?

kabe1:

Bro, there nothing wrong with giving an unbiased assessment without prejudice.

Kenya, Egypt are also struggling with Insurgencies.

I was only asking for your opinion, if you feel it would be best to avoid the question, that's fine.

The Russians have been developing military equipment for hundreds of years, the K-16 is in a class of it's own.

Is it hundreds of years really? I think they started it in the Soviet era.

TayserMahri:


Is it hundreds of years really? I think they started it in the Soviet era.

How about the time of the Tsars?

kabe1:

How about the time of the Tsars?

What notable weapons did they make back then?

TayserMahri:


What notable weapons did they make back then?

Muskets.

I just came across this. Looks like a mine-roller attached to a lorry.

Looks like the SANDF is intensifying military internal security deployments. Isn't this a bit of an overkill or is the situation really that bad?

https://twitter.com/TrafficSA/status/1178904729872670720

kabe1:

But it does not have MRAP design. I think it's a APC that can deflect mines. Look at it.

Then by definition its a MRAP!

TayserMahri:


1.Not at all, an APC with a gun in excess of 20 mm is effectively an IFV based on the fact that it can provide direct fire support due to its superior autocannons. All IFVs provide direct fire support. 2.So basically I should have said an APC CAN be an IFV.

1. literally my exact responds to kabe1, but since you put a cannon on it it's not an APC anymore!!

2.Exactly!! It's all about the role not necessarily the platform, but certain designs will be better suited to one role above thee other.......putting a cannon on a Casspir wont make it a better IFV than a Ratel, since it was specifically designed to be an APC from the start were as the Ratel was designed as an IFV from the start.

Some countries however use only one platform for some of their APC,IFV and even Tank designs. The Namer is based on the Merkava IV and comes in both an APC, IFV and obviously the Merkava tank variants. The Armata from Russia is another great example of one platform fulfilling different roles

Pic: APC
Pic 2 IFV
Pic 3 Tank