@@RusselHustleIt’s not, in all honesty and from talking to ACV crewmen when they first started hitting the fleet these vics have superior flat ground/road mobility with a multitude of sensors/cameras for enhanced survivability, and has a v shaped hull that has overall better protection than an AAV alongside with being future proofed for addons that could be implemented. However the AAV beats it in rough terrain, swims better and a larger troop/cargo capacity. The ACV is also extremely cramped as a dismount and the ramp on the back of them is extremely tall owing to it having a v shaped hull, these things also have a tendency to topple over if a rogue wave hits on certain sea states which is why the AAV is still being retained. If the EFV ever came back that would’ve been the perfect “supplement then replace” sort of vehicle for both the AAV and the ACV but unfortunately the Corps is no longer invested into large scale, long term projects and is more or less looking at COTS/commercial off the shelf options for both cost saving measures and trying to expedite/rapidly field new equipment because of Force Design 2030 and to rapidly counter new found threats in the modern day as quickly as possible.
while traversing the sea between amphib ship & shore the ship should provide anti air cover. this acv should have an anti drone or air defense devise for troop protection.
Considering the marines' penchant for holding on to old equipment to the last possible moment, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Marines were using this in 2122 on Mars, just with a better atmospheric system block upgrade.
4:46 wow. Watching them getting dogged down brings back memories. “Set condition one alpha throughout the ship.” Filling out manifests for my squad. The smell of the well deck. We were still using AAVs when I was in though. A MK-40 and a 50 cal on the turret. Hopefully these have bigger benches inside though. With all your gear on, your ass was hardly touching anything. And we’d spend hours sitting all squeezed in back there. Breathing all the diesel exhaust. Not seeing anything. Sure beat walking though. Boats or helo companies had to walk from the LZ or the shore/river. The few times I got to sit in the TC hatches were pretty cool though. Especially just after splashing.
I can see this vehicle as w.orking in concert with lars..,...Lars has a command control know as C squares....the command version of this vehicle as being a vast improvement in the CoC
What sort of additional maintenance do these require post-traversal of a body of water? Do they need to be put into amphibious mode or are they always in it?
BAE is a SWEDISH/BRITISH consortium that works with other arms manufacturers at times, such as the German company KONGSBERG that makes the 30 mm unmanned turret.
are you talking about the periscope? Because it looks like the air intake might be further back and to the left of the gun. I imagine the periscope being located in line with the gun probably helps with spotting and lining up targets.
The crew exiting wearing only his overalls and no combat load, that looks very tight if you got a fireteam trying to enter the vehicle in a hail storm of bullets and mortars, that first step looks like 4 ft to the deck, I want to see a grunt in full load with his rifle hoping out that thing and back in. I am not seeing a ramp hinges on that rear, unless I missed something.
If the ACV / SuperAV 8x8 wheeled chassis is large enough to carry the three-man turret of the US Army's M10 Booker, maybe it could replace the now-retired M1128 Mobile Gun System.
@@CorePathwaythe Stryker already has an IDF version in service. The M1128 retired and confirmed that no replacement will take the 1128's place. Not even the M10 booker.
sorry, as an AVTB testing officer, this is not a replacement to the AAV and has very limited amphibious capabilities. This is a river crosser only. USMC is going down the wrong bunny trail with this and the CMC's vision for the future.
About time they are replacing those older ACV's! Those things were so ugly, and all though these new ones are ugly, too, they look better than the old ones. They also needed to modernize, anyway! The Army has well surpassed the Marines, especially with the Stryker. Since the Marines are first in, they should have some of the best equipment, especially since they're a small force!
ANdnow if the Big Army would just order the CV 90 IFV from BAE. But Noooooo! it has already whittled done the contenders to two, and likely the German version will lose out to something that has the same chassis as the BOOKER light tank (yes, it IS a light tank, despite the Army's contorted name) something larger and harder to transport to a war zone.
100% propaganda. Just don't get the "ACV" into heavy surf or it'll ROLL OVER....... As big as a two-car garage....on wheels....really, REALLY bad idea.
It’s actually a licensed version of an Italian family of armoured vehicles based on the CENTAURO II … even though it resembles the Stryker because of some design convergence, it’s still is pretty different on the inside
Terrible idea...the ACV should be faster in water so as to enable an amphibious force to have the option to do beach assaults vice slapping a 30mm cannon on it that turns it into a glass cannon! It may have firepower but what about armor? You won't risk an entire 13-Marine Rifle Squad taking on enemy tanks and IFVs would you? This is a stupid idea, just focus on the APKWS if you want the acv to be able to take on armored vehicles.
US Marine command basically said contested landings are an outdated concept, in their restructure that isn't what they are rebuilding for. So the amphibious part of these is just the logistics of getting them onto uncontested shorelines far away from port infrastructure (I presume before the enemy can move forces to contest it). If they needed more rapid landings I presume they'd use LCAC's or a more modern equiv (which I don't think they want to spend the money buying), maybe they will leave that capability to the Navy for logistics.
speed in water from an amphibious vehicle requires something like a hovercraft, which the military already has. Much larger type of vehicle that would drop less amphibious vehicles off. In something like this...speed in water is wishful thinking, too high a requirement. If they need to land on extremely swampy terrain, then these things will come in handy. I imagine it would be useful if we wanted to conduct a massive war in southeast Asia, which has quite a bit of jungle and scattered bits of land that regularly floods.
"US Marine command" should not be relied on for objective analysis and sound decisions. CMC Berger.....yea, that guy....is responsible for the FD2030 debacle which gutted the US Marine Corps, perhaps destroying the US Marine Corps. The ACV isn't a good design; refresh your head with the reports from California surf testing where it did NOT perform well and is now limited to pretty darn low sea-state. ACV.....big as a two car garage.....a bad idea. And, by the way, contested landings are most certainly NOT outdated, considering the asymmetric capabilities available today, to the "bad guys". Today's US Marine Corps leadership makes one wonder who is in charge and what are their true motives? Too many "yes men/women" in today's Corps......too many willing to "go along" to get ahead. @@deadlydays3401
Why? designed to do ferrying between island? Amphibious assault isn't going to happen in today's warfare. Doesn't matter what kind of Cope Cage you put on it, not happening. Thought they came to that realization with the EFV.
afaik marines said contested landings are basically impossible and their restructure isn't considering contested landings a primary focus. So the amphibious part of this is mostly logistics getting forces to an undefended shoreline far away from port infrastructure. afaik, you'd need a ton of fast hovercraft to be fast enough to make any contested landing....and you could just carry these on those anyway. Hovercraft are shit on land, so using them as anything other than transports is pretty pointless. So building these is fine I think, if they ever decide to bring back forces for conducting shoreline assaults they are likely going to just be building large hovercraft to tote these up to the beachfront. LCAC's, though maybe marines plan on leaving the LCAC landers to the navy and asking them for help landing if needed?
Agreed . With the ability to use both aviation, LCACs , and AMTRAKs mobility (hopefully) should make contested landing a thing of the past. This will be a amphibious IFV (again, I hope) first and a ship to shore transport second
ПЕРЕДЕРГИВАЕТЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ 90х в РОССИИ с ПРАПЕЛЕРОМ а ТАК свое на 2024год ПОКАЗАТЬ НЕЧЕВО все с РОССИИ ПЕРЕДЕРГИВАЕТЕ --- ОТСТОЙ )))).... СЕМИЧКИ для РОССИИ !!!
When will people realize the AAV and now the ACV are/were never meant to 'storm the beach'? Marines travel on Naval vessels and the AAV and now ACV are one of the delivery methods to get them from ship to shore as well as inland objectives. That's why Marines are the "tip of the spear". We're always deployed on a ship somewhere, combat prepped and ready to go at a moments notice.
"Tip of the Spear" is an acceptable way of saying "Cannon Fodder". "Deployed on a ship somewhere" means a reinforced battalion of infantry, along with a few tanks and artillery, doing "donuts in the ocean" waiting to land on an uncontested beach or airfield, securing the site for follow-on Army main forces, with the "big guns". They may also be joined with an Army Airborne battalion, and these two elements will defeat numerous potential enemies armed with bamboo spears and bananas! LOL!
It’s based on the Italian IVECO DV SuperAV (same mechanics of centauro II and vbm freccia). AVCs are produced by BAE Systems on licence IVECO DV
SUPER
shit i don't know, maybe this cheaper than EFV
USA needs another 1 million troops if it thinks it will go to war with China...
@@RusselHustleIt’s not, in all honesty and from talking to ACV crewmen when they first started hitting the fleet these vics have superior flat ground/road mobility with a multitude of sensors/cameras for enhanced survivability, and has a v shaped hull that has overall better protection than an AAV alongside with being future proofed for addons that could be implemented. However the AAV beats it in rough terrain, swims better and a larger troop/cargo capacity. The ACV is also extremely cramped as a dismount and the ramp on the back of them is extremely tall owing to it having a v shaped hull, these things also have a tendency to topple over if a rogue wave hits on certain sea states which is why the AAV is still being retained. If the EFV ever came back that would’ve been the perfect “supplement then replace” sort of vehicle for both the AAV and the ACV but unfortunately the Corps is no longer invested into large scale, long term projects and is more or less looking at COTS/commercial off the shelf options for both cost saving measures and trying to expedite/rapidly field new equipment because of Force Design 2030 and to rapidly counter new found threats in the modern day as quickly as possible.
So its basically a water proofed and ligter version of the army striker?
In role, maybe. But it's based on a entirely different platform and I think is larger in general.
It's a BAE System Production. It is not based on Stryker, but on IVECO 8 x 8 that is bigger then Stryker.
while traversing the sea between amphib ship & shore the ship should provide anti air cover. this acv should have an anti drone or air defense devise for troop protection.
The engineering excellence in these vehicles is absolutely breathtaking!
Its looking more and more like that APC in "Aliens."
Just another "bug" hunt!
Considering the marines' penchant for holding on to old equipment to the last possible moment, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Marines were using this in 2122 on Mars, just with a better atmospheric system block upgrade.
It just has to be able to not sink lol anything other than that is a plus. It doesn’t have to be fast it just has to work
YAT-YAS!!!
4:46 wow. Watching them getting dogged down brings back memories. “Set condition one alpha throughout the ship.” Filling out manifests for my squad. The smell of the well deck. We were still using AAVs when I was in though. A MK-40 and a 50 cal on the turret. Hopefully these have bigger benches inside though. With all your gear on, your ass was hardly touching anything. And we’d spend hours sitting all squeezed in back there. Breathing all the diesel exhaust. Not seeing anything. Sure beat walking though. Boats or helo companies had to walk from the LZ or the shore/river. The few times I got to sit in the TC hatches were pretty cool though. Especially just after splashing.
Every west coast 0311 recognizes that beach.
Love this machine! Much love from your humble NATO ally - Bulgaria
Will the 30 mm variation be part of future LAR battalions? Replacing the. LAV 25 I assume?
No, the ARV is the planned replacement for the LAV-25. Separate vehicle.
If I had to guess, it will probably have the same 30mm unmanned turret. I will miss those goofy frogs with the Detroit 6V53T whenever they go away
I can see this vehicle as w.orking in concert with lars..,...Lars has a command control know as C squares....the command version of this vehicle as being a vast improvement in the CoC
how will the tires do on coral?
Designed and developed in Italy 🇮🇹
Send the old ones to my place:)
What sort of additional maintenance do these require post-traversal of a body of water? Do they need to be put into amphibious mode or are they always in it?
Looks like the German BOXER 😅 good upgrade for the Marines !
BAE Systems is a british defense contractor?
The boght FMC
It’s Italian
BAE is a SWEDISH/BRITISH consortium that works with other arms manufacturers at times, such as the German company KONGSBERG that makes the 30 mm unmanned turret.
@@ericb.4358 British that owns the main Swedish Armoured Vehicle manufacturer.
@@trevorhart545 I always thought BAR Systems was a JOINT Brit/Swedish ownership, around 50/50. Nez pas?
Is there a reason the RCWS is mounted directly behind the engine snorkel?
ALRIGHT
are you talking about the periscope? Because it looks like the air intake might be further back and to the left of the gun. I imagine the periscope being located in line with the gun probably helps with spotting and lining up targets.
Good to go!
The crew exiting wearing only his overalls and no combat load, that looks very tight if you got a fireteam trying to enter the vehicle in a hail
storm of bullets and mortars, that first step looks like 4 ft to the deck, I want to see a grunt in full load with his rifle hoping out that thing and back in. I am not seeing a ramp hinges on that rear, unless I missed something.
I was hoping it gets fitted with a jawline missile with 30mm cannon.
If the ACV / SuperAV 8x8 wheeled chassis is large enough to carry the three-man turret of the US Army's M10 Booker, maybe it could replace the now-retired M1128 Mobile Gun System.
MGS needed a 120mm mortar-gun, not a high velocity 105. Direct fire? Check. Indirect? Check.
@@CorePathwaythe Stryker already has an IDF version in service. The M1128 retired and confirmed that no replacement will take the 1128's place. Not even the M10 booker.
WHY IS THERE NO BAYONET LUG ON THE 30MM?
THAT IS FUCKING UNACCEPTABLE FOR A MARINE CORPS VEHICLE
Don’t sweat it, there’s still a crayon dispenser in the crew compartment.
Are these replacing Amtracs or LAVs?
It’s replacing the AAV
sorry, as an AVTB testing officer, this is not a replacement to the AAV and has very limited amphibious capabilities. This is a river crosser only. USMC is going down the wrong bunny trail with this and the CMC's vision for the future.
God damn. Why is the music so loud and dramatic? It's distracting. And the speaker sounds like an AI.
Do they sink as quick as the outgoing Brick?🙏🙏👍👍🇬🇧🇬🇧⛵️⛵️
Completely different horse than the old LVT-7. The best crews turn out to be those who never operate an LVT
The height and V shape,, I recommend this ACV capable to be MRAP 😎😀
Más potencia y mas velocidad en el mar
Q: What's the MAXIMUM SEA STATE these vehicle can handle? Likely more than 3.
Just what it's tested in mirror smooth no one shooting at you
ONE MUST MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
WOW
They should have stayed with a tracked vehicle ….🤷🏻♂️
Более легкую цель для РПГ или ПТРК еще поискать нужно. Удивительно что такие двухэтажные автобусы строят в принципе для военных.
Without laser on top to take out the drones, then this is not gonna be working well
Wait a minute I thought you were all saying amphib assault vehicles were useless in the modern day?
To this day they still haven't developed anything that worked better then the EFV, including this turd.
When it face a Centauro II it will disappear.
Since when is Stryker new?
This is an ACV. The Stryker is not amphibious.
Technically this is British as its designed and built by BAE Systems a British Company
Copiato dal super av italiano non c'è niente d,'inglese
They should probably give them SHORAD module.
About time they are replacing those older ACV's! Those things were so ugly, and all though these new ones are ugly, too, they look better than the old ones. They also needed to modernize, anyway! The Army has well surpassed the Marines, especially with the Stryker. Since the Marines are first in, they should have some of the best equipment, especially since they're a small force!
ANdnow if the Big Army would just order the CV 90 IFV from BAE. But Noooooo! it has already whittled done the contenders to two, and likely the German version will lose out to something that has the same chassis as the BOOKER light tank (yes, it IS a light tank, despite the Army's contorted name) something larger and harder to transport to a war zone.
Dear Marine Corps, Please reserve about a battalion's worth of those vehicles for the US Cavalry...just incase they have to cross a few dozen rivers.
Can they survive DONGFENG?
Nos demoramos pra fazer 01 Guarani e os americanos fazem um monstro marinho como um estralar de dedos 😂😅 🫣🤦🤡🤭😮🪖🫡🐊🐊🌽🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🐍🦥🪖🦖🦖🦖🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸😎🤝🫂
rear door won't work
More toys...?
What for ?
Are they going to use any ? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Why? It’s archaic thinking.
yes that is enough to sink another amphibious lander, chinese got over kill canons! That's a handsome off roader!
I have a name for it the "Gator "
Can the ACV enter the maritime mission bay of the Freedom class version of the LCS?
ALRIGHT
Doubtful
@@chbgator2226anyway for me to find out?
100% propaganda. Just don't get the "ACV" into heavy surf or it'll ROLL OVER....... As big as a two-car garage....on wheels....really, REALLY bad idea.
I hope they don't sink to the bottom of the ocean like their last attempt at floating tanks in World War 2 ?
They do 6 dead already
Don't make it over technical.
Imagine a thousand of these coming ashore your countries beach.
um thats not NEW, its a stryker with a 30mm........
It’s actually a licensed version of an Italian family of armoured vehicles based on the CENTAURO II … even though it resembles the Stryker because of some design convergence, it’s still is pretty different on the inside
Stryker cannot drive in water
Terrible idea...the ACV should be faster in water so as to enable an amphibious force to have the option to do beach assaults vice slapping a 30mm cannon on it that turns it into a glass cannon! It may have firepower but what about armor? You won't risk an entire 13-Marine Rifle Squad taking on enemy tanks and IFVs would you? This is a stupid idea, just focus on the APKWS if you want the acv to be able to take on armored vehicles.
US Marine command basically said contested landings are an outdated concept, in their restructure that isn't what they are rebuilding for. So the amphibious part of these is just the logistics of getting them onto uncontested shorelines far away from port infrastructure (I presume before the enemy can move forces to contest it). If they needed more rapid landings I presume they'd use LCAC's or a more modern equiv (which I don't think they want to spend the money buying), maybe they will leave that capability to the Navy for logistics.
speed in water from an amphibious vehicle requires something like a hovercraft, which the military already has. Much larger type of vehicle that would drop less amphibious vehicles off. In something like this...speed in water is wishful thinking, too high a requirement. If they need to land on extremely swampy terrain, then these things will come in handy. I imagine it would be useful if we wanted to conduct a massive war in southeast Asia, which has quite a bit of jungle and scattered bits of land that regularly floods.
"US Marine command" should not be relied on for objective analysis and sound decisions. CMC Berger.....yea, that guy....is responsible for the FD2030 debacle which gutted the US Marine Corps, perhaps destroying the US Marine Corps. The ACV isn't a good design; refresh your head with the reports from California surf testing where it did NOT perform well and is now limited to pretty darn low sea-state.
ACV.....big as a two car garage.....a bad idea. And, by the way, contested landings are most certainly NOT outdated, considering the asymmetric capabilities available today, to the "bad guys".
Today's US Marine Corps leadership makes one wonder who is in charge and what are their true motives?
Too many "yes men/women" in today's Corps......too many willing to "go along" to get ahead. @@deadlydays3401
LCACs are huge targets. A Marine Corps should be able to conduct uncontested and contested landings as part of its amphibious capability.
Send some of the old ones to Ukraine
No shit!
@@user-kr4rz5hn4n they usually test all that stuff before making deals
This ACV capable to be MRAP too 👍because quite enough of height and good Vshape
The old ones will be used for reserve and training units
@@user-kr4rz5hn4nThe AAVP7 is a piece of shit. It needs to go.
Why? designed to do ferrying between island? Amphibious assault isn't going to happen in today's warfare. Doesn't matter what kind of Cope Cage you put on it, not happening. Thought they came to that realization with the EFV.
Then why not just use landing craft to ferry in REAL IFVs
👍👍👍👍👍
Not new. Get it right.
The top doesn't Look like it could take a strike from a Cheap 🇨🇳 rpg Drone 😉
This is a mistake these things are to slow in water the more time in water less chance of survival
afaik marines said contested landings are basically impossible and their restructure isn't considering contested landings a primary focus. So the amphibious part of this is mostly logistics getting forces to an undefended shoreline far away from port infrastructure. afaik, you'd need a ton of fast hovercraft to be fast enough to make any contested landing....and you could just carry these on those anyway. Hovercraft are shit on land, so using them as anything other than transports is pretty pointless. So building these is fine I think, if they ever decide to bring back forces for conducting shoreline assaults they are likely going to just be building large hovercraft to tote these up to the beachfront. LCAC's, though maybe marines plan on leaving the LCAC landers to the navy and asking them for help landing if needed?
This isn’t 1942, no one is making contested landings.
too....its "too" slow....
Agreed . With the ability to use both aviation, LCACs , and AMTRAKs mobility (hopefully) should make contested landing a thing of the past. This will be a amphibious IFV (again, I hope) first and a ship to shore transport second
No one does amphibious assaults anymore. We will never accept the casualties a contested landing demands. Marines need to stop kidding themselves.
Great REPUBLICAN PARTY FOR VICTORY.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP MUST WIN
Another channel uses an AI reader with corporate press releases as a script.👎🏼
ПЕРЕДЕРГИВАЕТЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ 90х в РОССИИ с ПРАПЕЛЕРОМ а ТАК свое на 2024год ПОКАЗАТЬ НЕЧЕВО все с РОССИИ ПЕРЕДЕРГИВАЕТЕ --- ОТСТОЙ )))).... СЕМИЧКИ для РОССИИ !!!
Compro 20.000 unidades para a marinha do Brasil rio de janeiro e o projeto e a tecnologia para a avibras
YES
34 trillion in debt.
then have your mom work more.
Compro 100.000 unidades para a marinha do Brasil rio de janeiro
Old news
You will lose to PLA tanks
PLA tanks will lose to missiles.
PLA tanks will break down.
stringdong,
wong answer!
PLA tanks will lose by having water instead of fuel
When is the marine corps going to get past storming the beaches.
they will let you know
When will people realize the AAV and now the ACV are/were never meant to 'storm the beach'? Marines travel on Naval vessels and the AAV and now ACV are one of the delivery methods to get them from ship to shore as well as inland objectives. That's why Marines are the "tip of the spear". We're always deployed on a ship somewhere, combat prepped and ready to go at a moments notice.
"Tip of the Spear" is an acceptable way of saying "Cannon Fodder". "Deployed on a ship somewhere" means a reinforced battalion of infantry, along with a few tanks and artillery, doing "donuts in the ocean" waiting to land on an uncontested beach or airfield, securing the site for follow-on Army main forces, with the "big guns". They may also be joined with an Army Airborne battalion, and these two elements will defeat numerous potential enemies armed with bamboo spears and bananas! LOL!
Look.....the IVECO ACV, ...this is interesting...
next over priced, over complicated, high maintenance even higher maintenance price, peice of crap to steal taxpayer dollers with