Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle
-
The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) is the newest USMC amphibious vehicle, intended for deployment in 2015. It was renamed from the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle in late 2003.
The designed is an amphibious armored personnel carrier; launched at sea, from an amphibious assault ship beyond the horizon, able to transport a full Marine rifle squad to shore. It will maneuver cross country with an agility and mobility equal to or greater than the M1 Abrams.
The EFV is designed to replace the aging AAV, and is the Marine Corps' number one priority ground weapon system acquisition. It has three times the speed in water and about twice the armor of the AAV, and superior firepower as well.
Design:
The General Dynamics Land Systems EFV is an amphibious armored tracked vehicle with an aluminum hull. The engine is a custom MTU Friedrichshafen diesel (MT883) with two modes of operation; a high power mode for planing over the sea, and a low power mode for land travel.
The hull has a hydraulically actuated bow flap to aid planing. Shrouded Honeywell waterjet propulsors are integrated into each side of the hull and hydraulically actuated chines cover the tracks while in seafaring mode.
The aluminum hull has caused some controversy due to protection and flammability concerns. It is vulnerable to most armor piercing weapons and ignited aluminum produces toxic fumes. However, aluminum hulls have been used for decades in military ground vehicles and boats. The rear loading ramp is not able to open while the vehicle is afloat. This is also typical of other swimming military ground vehicles. For example, the M113 is another armored military ground vehicle the US currently is using that swims. It also has an aluminum hull, and its rear ramp cannot open while the vehicle is afloat.
It has a crew of three and can transport 17 Marines and their equipment.
There is a Command Platform version with secure command and control electronics (and seven work stations), but lacking the 30 mm cannon.
It is fitted with composite armor, mine-blast protection, and a nuclear, biological and chemical defense system (NBC). The standard version also has a Bushmaster II 30 mm Cannon.
Features:
7.62 mm Machine Gun (1xcoaxial)
Smoke / Gas Dispensers (32x)
Rear Troop Hatch
Top Troop Hatches (2x)
Reinforced Crew Compartment
Still under testing in the prototype stage though... Looks pretty ugly to me.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=abWIjfFa26s
Featured in Mail Call
-
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/aaav.htm
I know its a bit outdated... but i guess the specs given here should fall within the EFVs ballpark
-
Looks kinda like the British Mark I tank.
-
looks very weird.
-
Especially with those furry skirts...Originally posted by beavan:looks very weird.
Just a prototype, hope the outcome will be nicer... 
-
Looks like a beached whale.
-
bmp-ish to me... hope when it hits IEDs the whole front doesnt get innilated and the driver dies cos the front is like over sloped
-
it looks weird
[/code] -
It's supposed to be deployed when it's hydroplaning over the water...Originally posted by M551Sheridian:bmp-ish to me... hope when it hits IEDs the whole front doesnt get innilated and the driver dies cos the front is like over sloped -
It was reported the USMC is not satisfied with the reliability of the prototypes and was not going to initiate production as planned. Instead it has asked for 7 new prototypes, to address the current deficiencies which have caused an average of one failure for every four and a half hours of operation.
-
On another froum, I presented the view that most existing amphibious tanks are tanks trying to be boats - i.e. swim.
They should build more armoured boats that can double as a tank.
This seems to be one such vehicle. -
well it all came abt, at least in my opinion with the higgins boatsOriginally posted by chino65:On another froum, I presented the view that most existing amphibious tanks are tanks trying to be boats - i.e. swim.
They should build more armoured boats that can double as a tank.
This seems to be one such vehicle.
then in vietnam, the LVT-4
80s- modern day AAVP7
The main idea in the past was just to get the jarheads ashore and they can slog it out from there, but then in vietnam the need for more mobility and more protection for the marines meant that it became more like what you said, armoured boats, posing as tanks.
But imo the AAVP7 in my opinion was designed to be an APC with a compulsory swim ability. as seen in the abv pic, AAVP7 venturing thru Fallujah, far from the waters.
The new mission for the AAVs is to be a Tank first, a boat later(but no less important ) after all the Marines still need to get off the beach and inland in relative safety from small arms, something im quite sure our "ducks" cant do -
The Philippines still uses a version of these AAVP7. They are about the size of a SBS bus.
I don't think any one thing can ever be good at doing 2 jobs equally well - swim to shore, then operate on land.
In the end, they don't do well at either. They are slow and unstable in the water and on land they are one big fat thinly armoured target. They can't be too well-armoured as they weren't designed to float.
Many tanks drowned in Normandy before they got to the beach.
A boat on the other hand, is designed to float first, so you can put more armour on a boat and it will still be faster and more capable on water than a lightly armoured amphibious tank.
So this is a fast sea-going vehicle, heavily-armoured like a Merkava, and once on land this boat will have some land capabilities - Just enough for it to rule the beach. But not so much that it compromises its boat concept hull.
Some of these vehicles will be weapon platforms while others will carry troops.
After the beach is secured their job is done. You don't need them to go on fighting inland as you can land all the tanks and MBTs you have after you've secured the beach.
The hovercraft comes very close to what I am describing - agile and fast at sea. But how good is it on land? Does the thing goes deflated if the air cusion is shot out? -
dont u know? US strategy sucks they use a jeep meant for transporting troops from base 1 to base 2 as a armoured tank then say lousy.
the AAV thingy which is supposed to go from ship > shore then hold the beach awhile b4 going back. why the hell is it in iraq where there is no freaking water and then get blown up and say its lousy.... stupid ppl...
same happened to the m2 bradley designed to be amphibious which has to be light then easy to penetrate( which is of course as its amphibious) then upgrade and then say heavy lousy then spend $10billion(kidding la) to develop a possibly even lousier stryker -
The Stryker when paired with tracked vehicles, may turn out to be one of the best decisions made.
Not to mention the rave reviews from the field, aka hell aka Iraq. So much so the British are thinking of electric powered wheel IFVs.
Try using a Bradley, M113 to chase a pickup/ light truck, the answer is obvious. -
wow so big... -
about the bradley part why chase the pickup wif a stryker when u can shoot it wif a bradley? bradley is far more superior compared to the strykers in the squad the bradley has a basic armament of the 20/30mm ( forgot le) auto cannon and TOWs . compared to the stryker unless its special usually it only has .50cals
-
its actually a 25mm chain gun... also don't forget the co-axial 7.62 MGOriginally posted by M551Sheridian:about the bradley part why chase the pickup wif a stryker when u can shoot it wif a bradley? bradley is far more superior compared to the strykers in the squad the bradley has a basic armament of the 20/30mm ( forgot le) auto cannon and TOWs . compared to the stryker unless its special usually it only has .50cals -
I still prefer the BMDs. The latest BMD-4 incorporates the turret from the BMP-3 and that has way more firepower and better for infantry support.
-
The USMC's Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle: SDD Phase (updated)
01-Aug-2007...The personnel version of the new EFVs will have a high-tech weapons station with an ATK 30mm MK 44 Bushmaster cannon to replace the AAV's .50 caliber machine gun, and carry a crew of 3 plus a reinforced rifle squad of 17 combat-loaded Marines. A command variant will carry an array of communications and computer systems and staff personnel...
-
From this picture it looks better...Originally posted by lionnoisy: -
doubt it will fare well lol... they will still use it like a tank n then complain b4 spending billions to makesomething the same