AAV-7 (Amtrack) vs LAV25 for USMC

Liquid_Cow · Post by **Liquid_Cow** » 2007-03-19 23:12

I did a search and could not find this brought up before...

I think there is a pretty major gap in the USMC equipment.
There are no AAV-7's in the game (formerly known as LVTP-7)?

The USMC does use the LAV-25, and personally I feel its a better weapon system, but its primary light armor is the AAV-7 which is fully amphibious. The LAV-25 is not, it is a "swimmer" capable of crossing small stretches of water but never used in blue water, such as going from the carrier to the beach in Oman.

This track is equiped with reactive armor, fully blue water capable amphib, has a .50cal M2 and a 40mm Mk19 in its turret. It is scheduled for replacement in 2010, but the replacement vehicle is having some development issues.

[uBp]Irish · Post by **[uBp]Irish** » 2007-03-19 23:43

yea i always wondered where this vehicle was. I always thought that the LAV25 was supposed to replace the bradleys as the Infantry fighting vehicles.

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-03-19 23:43

I think these things are awesome, and I really want them ingame. The 40mm grenade launcher would make a welcome change from the autocannon on the current APCs, and wouldnt be that imbalanced, as AAV-7s are huge, and not particularly heavily protected.

If (when?) we finally get proper "battle taxi" (things like the M113, FV430 and such) APCs as well as the current IFVs, this should definetly be the USMC one.

TII · Post by **TII** » 2007-03-20 00:12

'[uBp wrote:Irish']yea i always wondered where this vehicle was. I always thought that the LAV25 was supposed to replace the bradleys as the Infantry fighting vehicles.

M2A#/M3A# IFV/CFVs are US Army specific vehicles that were developed to replace the M113 series APCs. USMC does not use the Bradley series, and the LAV-25 is used more as a recon assest similar to how the M3 is employed by the Army. The Stryker, M113, and AA7V are troop carriers not suited for direct engagement with other armour or anti tank troops.

Liquid_Cow · Post by **Liquid_Cow** » 2007-03-20 00:21

'[uBp wrote:Irish'] I always thought that the LAV25 was supposed to replace the bradleys

Not sure if you mean IRL or the game, but IRL the LAV provides the USMC with an IFV (which the AAV is not, its more of a heavy APC). The US Army uses a lighter version of the LAV known as the Stryker, but does not intend to replace M2/3's with them. The Stryker is not an IFV (both it and the AAV lack a large main weapon system), its a light APC.

As far as the game goes, the LAV-25 was probably chosen to give the USMC team more balance vs. the MEC and PLA IFV's. Normal APC's would not be very much fun in the game, its only purpose is to provide troops with shelter from artillery, small arms, and terrain while moving them at speed to keep up with armor.

Liquid_Cow · Post by **Liquid_Cow** » 2007-03-20 00:25

LOL Tiger, great minds think alike, eh?

WNxKenwayy · Post by **WNxKenwayy** » 2007-03-20 01:13

Lets all get in a giant metal box and fall into the ocean.

TII · Post by **TII** » 2007-03-20 01:22

Liquid_Cow wrote:LOL Tiger, great minds think alike, eh?

Maybe between the two of us they can understand.

Personally I wouldn't care to be riding in any of the tin cans. RPG/IED magnets the lot of them.

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2007-03-20 01:29

Yeah would make a great addition. Methinks would be armored a tad more than a HMMVW, kinda like a Saxon?

Liquid_Cow · Post by **Liquid_Cow** » 2007-03-20 02:00

WNxKenwayy wrote:Lets all get in a giant metal box and fall into the ocean.

LMAO

ReadMenace · Post by **ReadMenace** » 2007-03-20 03:10

I bet if someone was to produce a decent model of an Amtrak, the PR team would be more than happy to incorporate it into the game.

-REad

Harrelson · Post by **Harrelson** » 2007-03-20 06:49

these tracks are not being used in offensive operations in Iraq or elsewhere. the aluminium armour is too thin and easily compromised

[PR]AC3421 · Post by **[PR]AC3421** » 2007-03-20 08:51

We do need more vehics for USMC. But Brits are gonna come first, because they dont have any armored vehicles at all yet.

Switch · Post by **Switch** » 2007-03-20 14:40

The brits need a big red double decker bus with several mounted machine guns on the top floor.

When that thing rolls in, insurgents will clear the hell out --- beep beep straight outta london!!

DirtyHarry88 · Post by **DirtyHarry88** » 2007-03-20 15:27

Would be better than the Saxon.

Maxfragg · Post by **Maxfragg** » 2007-03-20 15:37

the AAV-7 would fit better in the inf-supporting role the devs would like to have the LAV-25, but a recon-vehicle is not needed and so the LAV-25 is used to support inf, which isn't actually its task

Aljen · Post by **Aljen** » 2007-03-20 15:49

'[PR wrote:AC3421']We do need more vehics for USMC. But Brits are gonna come first, because they dont have any armored vehicles at all yet.

There are other factions then USMC so we need equivalent vehicles for each of them.

But .. to be honest I don't think that any more vehicles or vehicle types are necessary. For me is infantry combat more interesting and vehicles are just for support.

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-03-20 17:05

Switch wrote:The brits need a big red double decker bus with several mounted machine guns on the top floor.

When that thing rolls in, insurgents will clear the hell out --- beep beep straight outta london!!

Don't know where you're from, but the red double decker buses (routemasters) aren't used anymore.

(BTW - Check my post on this thread.)

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/showth ... light=swim

Animalmother · Post by **Animalmother** » 2007-03-20 19:51

Ive suggested this many times

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2007-03-20 20:05

Aljen wrote:There are other factions then USMC so we need equivalent vehicles for each of them.

Not every vehicle is going to have an exact equivalent in each faction.

And Liquid Cow, these have been suggested before, please do a search.