TOP 5 Most Advanced Heavy IFVs - TOP 5 Best Heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicles

[@ArmyEncyclopedia]

► More Military videos on: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ame1aquNhqx1g68&ab_channel=QUASAREntertainment

[@peterjordansonthe2nd731]

43 'tones'

[@tomaszlatos1363]

Which of the depicted was involved in a real fight? Even during exercises on the training ground, the Puma fails. Lynx is a prototype. The Russians, despite the war in Ukraine, did not send this miracle of technology to the fight. Namer was at least used in combat and despite the damage, the crews survived and that's the point. The rest are cardboard boxes.

[@destrike3561]

In fact, they made an infantry fighting vehicle out of a tank, removing the turret and the ammunition, which made a place for the landing. And only 10 years later, in 2018, she received an uninhabited carriage tower. And I wonder what kind of combat experience is there?The fact that she drove 100 km to the Gaza Strip, swept away their militants who do not own heavy weapons? That's combat experience, powerful (sarcasm).

[@liljon0111]

@@destrike3561 Well, the militants in the gaza strip do own tandemshaped RPG's which would be very effective against normal IFV's (Bradley, Marder, BMP etc.) so it does speak partially of the vehicle, though I also want to say that no, the rest are not necessarily cardboard boxes, any vehicle once was in a development stage and did not see combat. So looking at vehicles purely from that perspective in my opinion is wrong, though i want to add that yes the gazastrip is not really a perfect example of "combat" proven as actual combat against a near pear advesary would be very different. (the knowledge from these experiences could help further developing the vehicle)

[@periculosumadversario]

This has had me wondering as well, for years. Seeing their claimed super-T72B &T-90Ms perishing in droves in 2022 Ukraine, and f.ex their feared double prop KA-52 Alligator attack heli (ca 120-150 shot down), that the Armata has not been fielded yet (1800 would be ready by 2018); is it maybe a paper tiger? Might well be, judging the new russia's propaganda apparatus. They do not even have BVR missiles for their fighter jets!

[@к.а.в.к.а.з.05]

А с каким государством он воевал .и Еше это танк только без башни поэтому сегодня уничтожаются в Палестине

[@jacksonteller1337]

Nearly all prototype vehicles. Only the Namur is still in production. The Puma is halted as 18 caught on fire during an exercise last year. Unfortunately one was a total loss. Once they sort out the computer and cabling it should be a decent vehicle. But they are replacing the Marder with the heavy Boxer for now. They are going to be using the heavy battalions with Puma, the medium battalions with the heavy Boxer IFV and the light battalions with the GTK Boxer and for now Wiesel/TPz Fuchs. The Wiesel will be replaced with a Boxer variant and the Fuchs with an amphibious APC most likely the Patria.

[@robandcheryls]

Well written and delivered. 🇨🇦 Veteran

[@peterjordansonthe2nd731]

Yeah, super great. Only about 50 errors

[@GreatRaphael]

Considering that almost all modern IFVs (Borsuk, Puma, Boxer, Redback, CV90…) are or will be equipped with Israeli SPIKE ATGM and Trophy or Iron Fist APS, we can say that the Namer is the reference here.

[@BoHein-fx3nu]

now cv 90 go akeron ATGM but still spike is good both are 5th gen

[@periculosumadversario]

The CV90 is, among military personnel and decisionmakers, the best, most advanced and cost effective IFV available today. It's modular design, a ready available ghost-model with active camouflage, and 16 different configurations, and combat proven, hands down the best IFV on the market today.

[@iterationfackshet1990]

It’s not a heavy IFV though. Heavy IFV’s are relatively new and are meant as an in-between for IFV’s and tanks. They have enough protection to tank on other IFV’s including other heavy IFV’s and some weaponry to take out tanks like ATGMs but their main role is still to support the infantry. Really this developed because IFV’s were naturally getting heavier as time progressed and their designs simply couldn’t handle the stress, so the were split into two designs. So you would likely have more CV90’s in your army, but enough heavy IFV’s so that the CV90’s aren’t outclassed as despite them having the same gun essentially the CV90 has less armor. Essentially they’re meant to serve as compliments to but not replace the lighter IFVs, such as what Poland is looking for now with their Borusk IFV being a lighter IFV and getting a heavier one to compliment it.

[@periculosumadversario]

@@iterationfackshet1990 I believe 37 tons for the new MarkVI is quite heavy, but I never said it was meant to replace a tank. Compared to a T-90 (47t) it s quite heavy.

[@nagmashot]

it is not the best or cost effective... it is just cheap and not russian, the only reason it get customers... the latest version of the CV90 got trashed to debris during procurment trails vs Puma.... you get what you pay.. a average, average performing CV90 for cheap...or a top class state of the Art IFV but expansive Puma....

[@periculosumadversario]

​@@nagmashotSaid the the unenlighted, non-engineer person...

[@nagmashot]

@@periculosumadversario look a warthunder nerd

[@friscostreetstories5403]

The "Armata" bahahaaa what a joke. Me personally I would like a German Puma.

[@RR-jz2up]

russia develops "most protected IFV" and at the same time can't afford fully equip it's soldiers. I wonder if operating squad will have to pay out of their pocket to get armata?

[@isadanjan4762]

Namer better than Puma-don’t cry.

[@jonny2954]

@@isadanjan4762 Puma and Namer were evaluated by US Army experts and Puma was considered to have higher capabilities. Especially mobility and weight/protection ratio.

[@neutraluser4019]

Any IFV has a canon that can penetrate the armor of the MBT ? Or is just not possible technically?

[@nagmashot]

frontal no chance side and rear hull possible ...but thats not the task of a IFV... their task is to get troops to the contact line and give them accurate fire support... if they realy have to figth a MBT they need ATGM

[@hitman_zulu]

pretty sure the few with 40-50mm APDFS could side pen some, let alone things with the 100m maybe. Depends on the tank really, but i doubt any would front pen and MBT

[@igorrodrigues4161]

Qual veículo possui melhor blindagem: Namer, Puma ou Lynx?

[@Bob-l4q6f]

The Namer has the best protection of any infantry fighting vehicle, and this was proven during both the 2008 and 2014 wars in the Gaza Strip. Numerous RPG and Kornet anti-tank missiles were fired at the Namer during the 2008 and 2014 wars in the Gaza Strip, but no Namer vehicles were destroyed or even seriously damaged at all.

[@igorrodrigues4161]

@@Bob-l4q6f Ok, muito obrigado pela explicação.

[@yusufmartapura6702]

Saya sangat mengagumi desain dari German..sangat keren tapi mahal mahal

[@hankcester]

Isreali namer best protected

[@gaborfejes]

Lynx best so far

[@Foxtrottangoabc]

What no ajax

[@playercembalo8248]

Why no redback AS21? What a lousy analysis.

[@MartinNicol-bk7ny]

Gees two

[@deamon-tx1xl]

Nooooo!!!! No1 : Lynx KF41 !

[@nagmashot]

lost vs Puma in procurment trails

[@andreidobrican7445]

Tons not tones 😅😅😅😅😅

[@LCG-1030]

an ill-advised ranking

[@jaysidayon8217]

CV90 MK4💪😊💯❤️🇵🇭

[@ganikurpali5855]

Dron bairaktar t,b,2

[@josephandersen6649]

This is a joke totally inaccurate

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

namer is not the most protected ifv people ened to stop saying it. its only heavy because its based off the merkava which is a overweight and obsolete tank that was designed without the use of composite in mind. look at where the engine is placed on the merkava and the namer. its at the very front and without any space for extra composite there and without any ERA. the neymar is only well protected against HEAT not other tanks just like the merkava. unlike the t15 and the VN20 which both have extremely thick composite armor + heavy ERA. the puma has era but no composite so its also easily destroyed by any tanks.

[@nagmashot]

look a chicken with no clue.... the only IFV with 120-125mm frontal protection is the Puma

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

@@nagmashot lol you’re a dumbass if you believe for a second the puma has the armor to stop a tank round. Luna is only protected against HEAT retard

[@jonny2954]

Since we know it only weights 50 tons the T-15 is considered to have a lower level of armor protection than the 43 ton Puma. It is only 7 tons heavier than the Puma yet has an about 40% larger protected volume (larger volume = more external surface area to armor). T-15 exceeds 14 m³, Puma has just 10 m³. To have a compable weight/volume ratio the T-15 would need to be uparmored to exceed 60 tons. And that is only considering crew compartment volume. The powerpack on the Puma is far more compact aswell allowing for even more volume savings in the engine compartment, pushing it towards 65 to 70 tons for equivalent protection on the T-15. Advantage of the Puma is just ultra-compact design compared to giant vehicles like T-15, Namer and VN20.

[@jaysidayon8217]

#1cv90 Mk4 ifv.

[@к.а.в.к.а.з.05]

Ниодна боевая машина пехоты не устоит против птрк