British armoured tactics BAOR 1970s

[Hertsblue]

Our crowd knew what the frontal armour thickness of a Chieftain was back in the 70s. How do I know? Simple, one of my hates jumped up on to an open Chieftain at a Bovington with a tape measure and measured it. Nobody saw, nobody noticed. Just as well we weren't Russians, eh?

[Rob]

Our crowd knew what the frontal armour thickness of a Chieftain was back in the 70s. How do I know? Simple, one of my hates jumped up on to an open Chieftain at a Bovington with a tape measure and measured it. Nobody saw, nobody noticed. Just as well we weren't Russians, eh?

I did similar at Ashchurch Camp when I was contracting for GD(UK)Ltd in South Wales, (loved it there, stayed in Manmoel and played wargmes at Taffs Well).

It gets more difficult these days to get protection values, we are restricted to estimates usually because of the specialised armours and sensor protection.

It amuses me the way protection is now quoted in in completely unrealistic thicknesses of NATO equivalent RHA armour plate e.g. Chally 2; 960mm RHA equivalent. Reminds me of pre-breechloader howitzer shell weights when the weight of the shell was measured in its theoretical stone forebears equivalent.  

Chears, Rob

[Rob]

It's more that a modern IFV can fight WITH the infantry, and isn't just a minimally armoured bus; if needed infantry can fight FROM the vehicle but in general will dismount.

I think with the Warrior it is the former part of the statement that is true. The Brits do not provide any firing ports, and the vehicle is not particually suited for fighting with its unstabilised main gun on the move. I think its a doctrine thing.

Cheers, Rob