TayserMahri:


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.

How can it disqualify it as an APC??It has nothing to do with how it looks and everything to do with what role it does!! the word MRAP was only coined in the mid 2000s by the US..........What do you think they called the Casspir, buffel,Mamba before the mid 2000s

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 was first and for most designed as an IFV.

jln115:

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

How does a cannon disqualify it? The scale? Well then lets leave it at machine gun.

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.

Bro, casspir is not an APC as far as am concerned. Its a MRAP. Unless there were few variants that were built to fulfill APC role. The role of the vehicle depends largely on its configuration/platform. And a gun can change its role as well since superior fire power can make it more supportive.

jln115:

How can it disqualify it as an APC??It has nothing to do with how it looks and everything to do with what role it does!! the word MRAP was only coined in the mid 2000s by the US..........What do you think they called the Casspir, buffel,Mamba before the mid 2000s

Its not about physical looks but the physics of the looks. Look at any MRAP, from Casspir to Ezugwu and notice that it would tip over in steep terrain (high CoG). APCs wont tip over as easily. That makes the MRAPs very unsuitable for troop transfer. Typically they are usually sling loaded by helicopter to the theatre, where the troops then use them for patrol. KDF does this sling loading very often in Somalia because if used to transport infantry on the tricky terror infested roads the MRAPs are too vulnerable to ambush & shoulder launched missiles. On the other hand APCs will safely transfer troops over thousands of miles; all terrain. So yea, the 'looks' can disqualify a MRAP as APC due to its limited troop transfer capacity. MRAPs are by far and large patrol vehicles.

An APC is an armoured type of Vehicle Basically to transport troops(Armoured personal carrier) With combat capability when needed..APC aren't mostly Built to fight but can serve as force multiplier....An MRAP is a machine built for Dual purpose infanct trio...It can transport troops, Fight and Deflect Mines...A vehicle dat can withstand a 12kg blast it's no ordinary APC it's an MRAP which makes Ezugwu a MRAP,ARA basically an MRAP...Dats all thank you.....

jln115:

The K-16 was first and for most designed as an IFV.

Multirole

TayserMahri:


How does a cannon disqualify it? The scale? Well then lets leave it at machine gun.



Bro, casspir is not an APC as far as am concerned. Its a MRAP. Unless there were few variants that were built to fulfill APC role. The role of the vehicle depends largely on its configuration/platform. And a gun can change its role as well since superior fire power can make it more supportive.

1. Because it has a different role now, and having a cannon also means it's going to carry less troops.

2. Ok answer this, the Casspir was built in the 80s, the word MRAP has only existed since around 2006.........So what did they call the Casspir before 2006??

TayserMahri:


Multirole

Majority of the orders made by the Russian army were for the IFV variant. But again it's about the role, not the platform......although this platform is better suited for an IFV role.

jln115:



2. Ok answer this, the Casspir was built in the 80s, the word MRAP has only existed since around 2006.........So what did they call the Casspir before 2006??

Future MRAP.

jln115:

1. Because it has a different role now, and having a cannon also means it's going to carry less troops.

2. Ok answer this, the Casspir was built in the 80s, the word MRAP has only existed since around 2006.........So what did they call the Casspir before 2006??

1. But its still an IFV. Get any APC, give it a large 20 mm gun and it becomes an IFV. Even with less troops. Or what else does it become in your opinion bro?

2. Why not use the modern specialized terms? Casspir was initially made for the SAP for patrol and counter insurgency purposes in troubled Apartheid era areas. Nothing fits this description more than MRAP. Back then it was most likely referred to as APC. But I think I have already shown the limitations of casspir and such MRAPs in the role of troop transfer.

TayserMahri:


Its not about physical looks but the physics of the looks. Look at any MRAP, from Casspir to Ezugwu and notice that it would tip over in steep terrain (high CoG). APCs wont tip over as easily. That makes the MRAPs very unsuitable for troop transfer. Typically they are usually sling loaded by helicopter to the theatre, where the troops then use them for patrol. KDF does this sling loading very often in Somalia because if used to transport infantry on the tricky terror infested roads the 2[b]MRAPs are too vulnerable to ambush & shoulder launched missiles.[/b] On the other hand APCs will safely transfer troops over thousands of miles; all terrain. So yea, the 'looks' can disqualify a MRAP as APC due to its limited troop transfer capacity. MRAPs are by far and large patrol vehicles.

SMH

How you going to sling a 14 ton Couger MRAP?? again it about roll not looks.......all MRAPs are APCs, since that;s the role they fulfill, some have better all round protection than others, it's all about the doctrine and how they are used.

2 yes so are tanks and other heavy APCs. Big heavy tracked APCs like the Namer and Armata would get absolutely murdered in Souther African terrain. Hence why lighter faster wheeled APCs like the Mamba, buffel and Casspir where used during the Border war.

jln115:

Majority of the orders made by the Russian army were for the IFV variant. But again it's about the role, not the platform......although this platform is better suited for an IFV role.

The K-16 platform is best suited for both the IFV and the APC roles. The casspir platform is best suited for the MRAP role. That simple.

TayserMahri:


1. But its still an IFV. Get any APC, give it a large 20 mm gun and it becomes an IFV. Even with less troops. Or what else does it become in your opinion bro?

2. Why not use the modern specialized terms? Casspir was initially made for the SAP for patrol and counter insurgency purposes in troubled Apartheid era areas. Nothing fits this description more than MRAP. Back then it was most likely referred to as APC. But I think I have already shown the limitations of casspir and such MRAPs in the role of troop transfer.

1. I literally said exactly that !! don't know what you going on about! we are actually in agreement!!

2. Say it again?? was called an APC you say!! Why was it called one, Oh yes because it is one.

APCs can be lightly protected or heavily protected it all depends on doctrine, the SADF chose light, fast and mobile APCs(And IFVs) during the border war vs heavily protected APCs, heavy tracked APCs like the BTR50 and BMP1 IFV fared far worse

jln115:


1. I literally said exactly that !! don't know what you going on about! we are actually in agreement!!

Ok then!!! In agreement.

2. Say it again?? was called an APC you say!! Why was it called one, Oh yes because it is one.

APCs can be lightly protected or heavily protected it all depends on doctrine, the SADF chose light, fast and mobile APCs(And IFVs) during the border war vs heavily protected APCs, heavy tracked APCs like the BTR50 and BMP1 IFV fared far worse

Because SA was largely fighting guerrillas not conventional warfare. In a conventional war casspir would not play APC role.

jln115:

And how many countries have chinooks??

Your are talking about MRAPs being light tactical Patrol vehicle but need a fvcking Chinook to lift them??

P.S a Couger Mrap weighs 14 tons.........a Chinook will not sling that

This getting ridiculous. A chinook can lift 14 tons


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=socD1yLHqrI

P.S Im not Sammy

TayserMahri:


Ok then!!! In agreement.



Because SA was largely fighting guerrillas not conventional warfare. In a conventional war casspir would not play APC role.

Gorillas with Tanks, Fighter Jets, State of the art Anti Tank missiles.................Cool Story Bro! Maybe do some research on the Border War, it wasn't just asymmetric

TayserMahri:


This getting ridiculous. A chinook can lift 14 tons


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=socD1yLHqrI

P.S Im not Sammy

it can't:

"Sling-Load Capacity: 26,000 lb center hook"

And the plane it's slinging weighs about 7 tons! Probably even less since it been stripped!

https://www.military.com/equipment/ch-47d-chinook

P.S You are beginning to argue like Sammy, just do your research!

jln115:



it can't:

"Sling-Load Capacity: 26,000 lb center hook"

And the plane it's slinging weighs about 7 tons! Probably even less since it been stripped!

https://www.military.com/equipment/ch-47d-chinook

P.S You are beginning to argue like Sammy, just do your research!

26000 lbs is 13 tons or 11.7 tonnes. You said a chinook cannot lift a 10 ton Cougar, yet its payload is 13 tons!! A chinook can lift a couger without sweat.

TayserMahri:


26000 lbs is 13 tons or 11.7 tonnes. You said a chinook cannot lift a 10 ton Cougar, yet its payload is 13 tons!! A chinook can lift a couger without sweat.

SMH

this is what I said:

jln115:


P.S a Couger Mrap weighs 14 tons.........a Chinook will not sling that

And that's empty weight, loaded its upwards of 17 tonnes.

jln115:
SMH

this is what I said:



And that's empty weight, loaded its upwards of 17 tonnes.

What have we yet not agreed on? For a start the Cougar is my quintessential MRAP seen in my initial response to Kabe1, its looks and role. Its no surprise its a MRAP from all definitions.

TayserMahri:


What have we yet not agreed on? For a start the Cougar is my quintessential MRAP seen in my initial response to Kabe1, its looks and role. Its no surprise its a MRAP from all definitions.

This is what you said:

"As far as I know a MRAP is a light tactical vehicle used for such things as patrols in troubled areas."

"Typically they are usually sling loaded by helicopter"

Your Original argument was that MRAPs are light tactical vehicles vs APCs which are heavy better protected vehicles and thus they are different. All Im proving is that you get heavy MRAPs and Light MRAPs just like you get Heavy APCs and light APCs, and like you get Wheeled and tracked APCs.............. but the fact of the matter is they all fulfill the same role hence MRAPs are always be APCs, even though APCs might not be MRAPs.

TayserMahri:


What have we yet not agreed on? For a start the Cougar is my quintessential MRAP seen in my initial response to Kabe1, its looks and role. Its no surprise its a MRAP from all definitions.

and also The fact that the Chinook cant lift the Cougar as you claimed!

jln115:

This is what you said:

"As far as I know a MRAP is a light tactical vehicle used for such things as patrols in troubled areas."

"Typically they are usually sling loaded by helicopter"

Your Original argument was that MRAPs are light tactical vehicles vs APCs which are heavy better protected vehicles and thus they are different. All Im proving is that you get heavy MRAPs and Light MRAPs just like you get Heavy APCs and light APCs, and like you get Wheeled and tracked APCs.............. but the fact of the matter is they all fulfill the same role hence MRAPs are always be APCs, even though APCs might not be MRAPs.

This one photo settles it. Ezugwu is a MRAP and the Nigerians who manufacture it know it thankfully!! After all the cherrypicking circus!

jln115:
and also The fact that the Chinook cant lift the Cougar as you claimed!

Cherry picking bro.

TayserMahri:


This getting ridiculous. A chinook can lift 14 tons


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=socD1yLHqrI

P.S Im not Sammy

You are not serious..what is this suppose to mean

jln115:



it can't:

"Sling-Load Capacity: 26,000 lb center hook"

And the plane it's slinging weighs about 7 tons! Probably even less since it been stripped!

https://www.military.com/equipment/ch-47d-chinook

P.S You are beginning to argue like Sammy, just do your research!

Don't drag me into this thread.we are not yet done over there Mr therapist

TayserMahri:


This one photo settles it. Ezugwu is a MRAP and the Nigerians who manufacture it know it thankfully!! After all the cherrypicking circus!

why you quoting me? I never said it wasn't a MRAP?

samorobo:


Don't drag me into this thread.we are not yet done over there Mr therapist

I don't remember quoting your moniker, so only God know why you are on this thread.

Seems like you stalked me here.

TayserMahri:


Cherry picking bro.

well actually it's not since the basis of your argument was that helicopters can sling MRAPs and not APCs...... Which is not always the case as proven

jln115:
why you quoting me? I never said it wasn't a MRAP?

Why did you quote me when I said Ezugwu is a MRAP not an APC?