NATO v.s Warsaw Pact APC's/IFV's

Its your job to post pictures of vehicles from both sides and discuss which ones are better and why.

Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Definitions:

Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV): an armoured combat vehicle which is designed and equipped primarily to transport a combat infantry squad, which is armed with an integral or organic cannon of at least 20 millimeters calibre and sometimes an antitank missile launcher."

IFV Example:


Click to enlarge

Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC): An armoured Combat Vehicle which is designed and equiped to transport a combat infantry squad and which as a rule is armed with an integral or organic weapon of less than 20 millimetres calibre.

APC Example:


Click to enlarge


http://www.osce.org/library/14087?download=true

@vostok @500 @AUSTERLITZ @Jessica_L @A.P. Richelieu

Soviets had the best IFV close to end of cold war ( BMP-3)
before that NATO had better IFVs

USSR:

BMP-1 (1966) - 13.2 t. Light very reliable and maneuverable machine. Armor is weak. Its front armor protects vs 20-mm rounds but does not protect vs 20-mm APDS rounds. Side and back armor protect vs 7.62 mm but dont protect vs. 12.7 mm. From close ranges it can be penetrated even from AP 7.62 mm. Armed with 73-mm smoothbore gun which was not successful, because of poor accuracy and range. Because of bad fuel tanks location and large caliber ammo it tends to flame and explode. 8 passengers.

BMP-2 (1980) - 14 t. Same as BMP-1 but with 30-mm gun instead of 73-mm. 7 passengers.

BMP-3 (1987) - 18.7 t. I dont like it. Armor is increased compare to BMP-1/2 but not enough for late 80-es. It can withstand 30-m AP rounds from front and 12.7 mm from sides, but Bradly's 25-mm APFSDS can penetrate it's front easily. Engine is moved from front to rear. It makes much harder for passengers to leave and load (it needs to open hatches manually and jump/ climb from considerable height). Also moving engine to rear removes the additional protection of front provided by the engine. 30-mm gun is not enough vs western IFV, 100-mm has low accuracy and its rounds tend to explode if vehicle is penetrated. It has 7 passengers total, but 2 of them are in front of the vehicle and can enter exit only from hatches on top.

Germany:

Lang HS.30 (1958) - 14.6 t. Arguably world first IFV. But very poor design. Because of the rear engine crew could enter exist only from top hatches, it had only 5 passengers and reliability issues. Front protection vs 20-mm AP, side vs 7.62 mm. Armed with 20-mm gun in turret.

Marder-1 (1970) - 28.5 t. Much heavier and better protected than its BMP-1 counterpart. Front protection against 30-mm AP and 25-mm APDS, 14.5 mm side protection. Cant swim. Remotely controlled 20-mm gun, 7 passengers.

Marder-1A3 (1989) - 33.5 t. Increased protection. Front vs 30-mm APDS, roof protection vs cluster bombs.

USA:

M2 Bradley (1981) - 22.8 t. Much better protection than BMP-1/2. Front can protect from 30-mm AP, sides from 14.5 mm. 6-7 passengers.

M2A2 Bradley (1988) - 30 t. Increased protection. Protects vs 30-mm APDS, option for ERA.

UK:

Warrior (1988) - 25.4 t. Front protects from 30-mm AP, sides from 14.5 mm. 30-mm cannon. 7 passengers.

BMP-3 is the crappiest IFV when it comes to ergonomics.

Soviet BMP were created within the Soviet military doctrine for a quick counter-attack on a broad front in Western Europe. They had to be necessarily buoyant , fast , cheap and have high firepower . Therefore we had to sacrifice comfort and armor . Militaries also often complained that the USSR did not create heavy infantry fighting vehicles, by type of Israeli Achzarit from captured Soviet tanks.
In modern conditions, Russia has new military doctrine . And within this doctrine now creates " Kurganets -25 ." Next year we will see it at the Victory Parade (some sources says this year).

vostok said:

Soviet BMP were created within the Soviet military doctrine for a quick counter-attack on a broad front in Western Europe. They had to be necessarily buoyant , fast , cheap and have high firepower . Therefore we had to sacrifice comfort and armor . Militaries also often complained that the USSR did not create heavy infantry fighting vehicles, by type of Israeli Achzarit from captured Soviet tanks.
In modern conditions, Russia has new military doctrine . And within this doctrine now creates " Kurganets -25 ." Next year we will see it at the Victory Parade (some sources says this year).

Click to expand...

Interesting, so its pretty soon. Like to see what they bring if its this year.

Many don't know what's the different between IFV and APC.
the Treaty of Conventional Armed Forces in Europe definition is outdated and flawed, many APC have armament over 20mm gun and many IFV do not have, or have minimal troop transport capability.

In short and brief definition. IFV is designed for Infantry support while APC is designed to transport infantry from A to B.

Now, onto the detailed version

IFV - Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

CV-90 IFV (Sweden)

This type of vehicle is design to support infantry in a fight. Basically provide combat support for infantry from other infantry and up to Armuor, designed to operate stand-alone type operation (Without MBT support) It is used to fill the gap between an Infantry squad to anything that moves faster than the infantry.

Traditionally an IFV would have less than survivability rate than normal MBT, but have more or less he same fire power to a Main Battle Tank. Light enough to operate between Infantry section (Which is basically a requirement to operate as infantry support) Fast and Quiet Enough to act as a scout and forward element (Assault) with or without infantry support.

Key requirement for IFV

-Heavy Fire Power (In CV-90 case, 40mm Bofor + AT4/Carl Gustav Launcher)
-Light Complex ( In CV-90 case, 35 ton (CV-90III)
-Troop Compartment (In CV-90 case, 8 troop, fully equipped)
-Fast (In CV-90 case, 75km/h)

APC - Armoured Personnel Carrier

Pansarbandvagn 302 (Sweden)

Armoured Personnel Carrier, also known as APC is designed to support Armoured Unit (ie MBT), it may seems strange to understand, but the birth of APC is due to the fact that armoured attack usually result in a gap between the spearheaded Armoured column and their supporting infantry. The remedy is simply put an infantry squad in a car/armoured carrier and travel with the attacking MBT. When the MBT stopped, the APC unload and the infantry squad will then fanned out and protect the MBT from close range attack.

Traditionally, APC does not require heavy caliber weaponry, as they accompany MBT spearhead, APC traditionally have the same speed with the current serving MBT in case of Pansarbandvagn 302, they have the same speed as Stridsvagn 122, the Swedish MBT (67km/h) and basic weapon for infantry support.

Key Requirement for APC

-Large troop compartment (8 troop in Pbv302)
-Speed as the same with MBT (67 KM in Pbv302)
-Same operational requirement for MBT (CBRN, all weather operation and Airlift-able)

Hey why only comparing Warsaw pacts against NATO, we had Asian countries producing excellent beast like Singapore Bionix IFV, Indonesian IFV Anoa, Chinese numerous type of IFV.

Type 07 IFV from PRC


Type 97 IFV



ZLC 2000



Anoa IFV



Bionix 2 IFV




Japanese Type 89 IFV



K21 IFV