meh,one of the reasons why people go for 105s is because it can be man handled.if vehicle based baik go all out for larger guns

ada lagi hang,ingat dah kena sembelih

naw man.for an IFV to be amphibious it needs to sacrifice a lot of things.Armour,carrying capacity,the exhaust,electronics,firepower

making it less of a vehicle at a higher price.

the base hull is amphibious but it is a modular design.the add-on armour packages will make it too heavy to float

so why not just remove the propellers on the versions that will be used to escort tanks?can get heavier armour and more powahh

Malaysian IFVs work in mixed battle groups

the Adnan/KIFV is amphib. and so is versions of the av8.they can secure the bridgehead and the more armoured AV8 would proceed with the attack

a single vehicle cannot be used for all roles,for example the Bradley.a recce vehicle too big and slow,a transporter that couldn't carry a full section and a hunter that didn't have enough room to store ammo

and?IFVs are armoured buses,no such thing as 'better'

Meh.if people want real info come here.

Xtau apa2 pasal military tapi buat pandai macam dah panglima

Its for old school recce.the american way of recon.probe,draw fire and run.

that's the point of the AV8,it has the potential to be more so in the next 5-10 years if army planners want a ground vehicle they can use the AV8 as a base design.no need for retooling and an already familiar design

i dont even know satellites can take images like that .how times have changed