Boxer 30mm

The ARTEC Boxer with 30mm LANCE Turret

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest

5 Responses

  1. Video showing off your new weapon system, without using your new weapon system? Either someone in marketing needs a slap or integration isn’t as far along as they’d like you to think. Colour me suspicious.

  2. @ wiseape, that G5 has been highlighted before we were discussing whether this would work for the surplus warriors (no-one knew how many there would be at the time). The thought being it could be an ambulance/command/ICV and therefore it could remove the 432 from the system and bring a common chassis to the medium armour group in swoop, so sensible it could never happen!!

  3. Christ, 42 tonnes MLC, and can it get any bigger?

    There’s a cunning bit of ESRI software that allows you to “remove” routes that are limited by bridge classification or some other constraint (eg low bridge). I’ve only seen it demo’d for use in the UK, but I’d imagine the database is also populated with fairly decent data sets for other countries. Would be interesting to see how many bits of Western Europe you could not get to, and God knows about places in Africa or less developed parts of the world. Of course, you can bring up class 50 over-bridging, but the logistic footprint gets worse.

  4. Interchangeable “mission modules” have to be stored somewhere and moved around when not being used. My experience has been that “interchangeability” isn’t used on something as small as a vehicle. (A commo shelter might be moved from one truck to another, but only if the original prime mover is being replaced or going for 4th level maintenance. A ship might have a use for interchangeable “mission modules” because they can be based on standard containers, left at a home port, or be shipped by other vessels. Some cargo aircraft equipped with roller handling equipment might be configured with different “mission modules,” but in use they probably aren’t interchanged very often.

Comments are closed.