Is Scimitar gaelic for "Rolling Coffin"

[Sequoia]

Great pics guys. Are those berets the Germans are wearing? I wouldn't want to go into combat with just those on.

[Pandur]

hm, it seems you are right. they wear black berets, wich is a bit odd. but i have no idea where the shot was made, maybe its a demonstration or something along this lines for civilians.

normaly i think the germans use the soviet style "tank helmets" similar to the ones the syrians use.

like here, but its hard to see;

however, this should be the germans on a convoy through kabul, says the page watch their shiny red berets!

[Sivodsi]

At least the weasle can carry a weapon with a serious punch.

[Sequoia]

however, this should be the germans on a convoy through kabul, says the page watch their shiny red berets!

Maybe it's a "Hey, if Wehrmacht Tankers could do it in WWII the Bundeswehr can do it in Afghanistan" sort of thing.

[-Eddie-]

At least the weasle can carry a weapon with a serious punch.

But can they go for weeks on end patrolling the desert and being resupplied by air in Afghanistan?

I'll find the article when I get back from footy.

[hcrof]

At least the weasle can carry a weapon with a serious punch.

Can't the RARDEN gun on the scimiter punch holes in a BMP at ~3000m? Isn't that quite a lot of punch?

They used to have an anti tank version of the CVR(T) with swingfire on it called Striker. I can't imagine why they got rid of that. The thing could be completely concealed while fireing and the missiles could do a 90 degree turn onto a target up to 4000m away. Imagine an indestructable (except by helicopter) version of the BRDM-AT with more mobility over difficult terrain. Cheap and very effective (IMO)

[Battlefront.com]

That first pic of the AT version of the Wiesel they are wearing armored crew padded helmets, which are black. You can see it more clearly in the 2nd picture with the 20mm gun variant. In the third picture they are wearing maroon berets, which is the correct color for German airborne forces (who are the only ones using the Wiesel).

Back to the topic itself... recon vehicles come in two forms. One is a type which is generally weaker than the infantry fighting formations it is attached to, sacrificing protection for speed and agility. The second type is one which is on par with whatever the infantry fighting force is that it is performing recon for.

If you look at the recon sections of US Army HBCT you'll see an example of the "same type" where the M3 CAV Bradleys are basically the same as the M2 IFV Bradleys when it comes to firepower, protection, and mobility. US Army IBCT is also the same since their recon element is in Humvees, but they are more heavily armed. Both of these, however, have a smaller dismounted footprint than the infantry they support. The US Army SBCT's vehicles are similar in that the recon element is no weaker than the normal infantry fighting elements, however their headcount is the same as a regular Rifle Platoon.

But the British, and German Airborne, have gone with the other type. The recon element is significantly weaker in terms of protection and armament, as well as dismounted headcount. However, they are much faster and can go pretty much anywhere with little difficulty. They are, in fact, purposefully built for this role.

As for recon doctrine, there are two types. One is based around the ability to fight for intel, the other is based around more-or-less passive surveillance. Most modern forces are built around a compromise between the two where the recon forces have some ability to fight for information, however that ability is limited. HBCT can fight for some types of intel better than an SBCT, but in other situations the greater dismounts available to SBCT gives it more capabilities than the HBCT. Scimitar based forces can get themselves out of some tight spots, but in general they aren't setup with either the defenses or the dismounts to really fight for information. Probe, scatter weak rear guards, etc. are all within their capabilities... attacking a determined dug in defender is not.

Steve

[flamingknives]

The Swingfire missile was becoming increasingly obsolescent on the modern battlefield. Obsolete vs. modern heavy armour, even.

It has been replaced by Javelin, which is more effective.

[hcrof]

I agree that the missile doesn't have good penetration but now we don't have an AT weapon that can engage targets at over 2500m. Isn't that a capability gap or am I missing out on something obvious?

[MikeyD]

I don't think we quite realize how much modern-type Russian armor has made 1970's direct-attack HEAT obsolete. Hit a T90 frontally with a Swingfire and all you do is make him angry.

I'm reminded of the West German Jpz Kanone anti-tank gun. Mounted a short-barrelled Rheinmetall version of the M-48's 90mm cannon. Its solid shot AP round was obsolete from day 1, and its primary HEAT round was useless when the first T64 was deployed to East Germany. Sometime you retire a weapons system because it simply doesn't do the job anymore.

Still, it shouldn't make much of a difference in present wars. When was the last time a U.S. or British infantryman died from enemy tank fire? I heard the last U.S. infantryman to be killed by an enemy airplane attack was in 1951.

[GSX]

Might be that in your average CMSF size map they are too close to the fighting. Guess most recon stuff is done by stealth and perhaps at longer distances. Or screening the main adavance/line and bugging out when the bad boys show.

I think George hits the nail on the head here. I dont think your average SF scenario does Recon justice. Recon units are there for just that and it would be a rare unit that would engage SF style in my opinion/experience. I think the distances involved in the average SF encounter are not good for any lighter vehicles to be heavily invoved.

One little SF 'trick' I have learned though is to sit your vehicles in one place for a period of 30-40 secs, often the enemy suddenly hoves into view and you can beat a hasty retreat. This works with Hummers and Im assuming it may do with every unit? Not ideal, but thats all Recon is really.

[Battlefront.com]

We put in some options for scenario designers to simulate pure recon missions if they so chose. The scenario designer can cater the Victory Settings to direct the recon side to identify targets instead of killing them or taking the bits of earth that they occupy. However, it's understandable that most gamers want to blow stuff up and take things over, so it doesn't surprise me that there are few scenarios out there that cater totally to a recon type mission.

Steve

[Sequoia]

That first pic of the AT version of the Wiesel they are wearing armored crew padded helmets, which are black. You can see it more clearly in the 2nd picture with the 20mm gun variant. In the third picture they are wearing maroon berets, which is the correct color for German airborne forces (who are the only ones using the Wiesel).

Steve

Glad to see research is well underway for the NATO module or maybe even completed, or maybe Steve knew this all along, him being a uniform grog.

[Pete Wenman]

Interesting thread on how recce fits (or does not fit) into the CMSF world. My large rural maps were made with recce tasks in mind.

Now we've got the 4 hour time limit for scenarios recce will come into it's own. How does an hours recce grab you, prior to a 3 hour assault, on a 2k map.

[-Eddie-]

Well it was Iraq, not Afghanistan. But here we are:

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002959.html

[Battlefront.com]

Sequoia,

Glad to see research is well underway for the NATO module or maybe even completed, or maybe Steve knew this all along, him being a uniform grog.

The latter I actually have one of those helmets. Wore it to a costume party recently. Hot bastards and it's impossible to hear anything with the earphones clamped down. Plus, the mic gets in the way of beer drinking, not to mention what happens when trying to eat snack mix

I'm actually acquitted, a little bit, with a German Captain who used to command a platoon of Wiesels. Unfortunately, he's off to Afghanistan and so I can't hit him up for more info. He wasn't much help anyway since technically they are special forces and aren't supposed to tell me squat about how they are organized. Dang OPSEC

Steve

[Trident-za]

Now we've got the 4 hour time limit for scenarios recce will come into it's own. How does an hours recce grab you, prior to a 3 hour assault, on a 2k map.

Sounds awesome.

Been a very interesting thread this! I've struggled to effectively use recon type units for a long time, this thread has helped me come up with alternative ideas to try.

[c3k]

The weasel (?) second picture: Um, what's with the white "USAF" painted on the "German" vehicle? Yeah, just a little detail....

Ken

[-Eddie-]

Yeah. Or the white ISAF? Just a little literacy;)

[c3k]

Hence the . And I guess that's the difference between "U" and "I"...

Ken

[-Eddie-]

What a terrible pun. I am in no mood! Monkey want Brits.

[JonS]

Now we've got the 4 hour time limit for scenarios recce will come into it's own. How does an hours recce grab you, prior to a 3 hour assault, on a 2k map.

I have a scen that is basically ready to go which is based on exactly that premise. I expect to be uploading it to The Repository in the next few days.

[wisbechlad]

Yep, the Scimitar ISTR weighs four tonnes. A large car (Bentley) weighs two tonnes. This is the spiritual successor of something like the Humber Scout Car or Daimler AC, not a Chaffee

[Dietrich]

Glad to see research is well underway for the NATO module or maybe even completed, or maybe Steve knew this all along, him being a uniform grog.

The latter

So long as the NATO module includes the basic Bundeswehr stuff (Leo 2, MG3, G36, etc.), I'll be happy.

Interesting thread on how recce fits (or does not fit) into the CMSF world. My large rural maps were made with recce tasks in mind.

Now we've got the 4 hour time limit for scenarios recce will come into it's own. How does an hours recce grab you, prior to a 3 hour assault, on a 2k map.

An hour's recce prior to a three-hour assault sounds good to me.

[stikkypixie]

Hence the . And I guess that's the difference between "U" and "I"...

Ken

Don't tell me you wrote that previous post to set this one up