LAV25 Pros and Cons

[Rockwolf66]

Ok, since the last time I was in a LAV25 was back in 1999 and I don't think that we have a thread on them.

What are the pros and cons of the LAV25 in both real life and for Tw2K

Pros:
It's relatively fast.
It's easier to maintain than a tracked vehicle.

Cons:
Cramped interior.
Light armor

[Raellus]

PRO: Versatile main gun- can engage soft-skinned and light armored targets, and structures. The coax alone makes the vehicle a mobile pillbox. If they're working, the optics are pretty handy to have too.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Light armor good versus splinters and most of what militia etc. would be throwing at you. Uses standard automotive parts. As mentioned, electronics. NBC sealing, I think. Can haul some cargo on and in.

Cons would be fuel consumption (but then what doesn't face that), light armor (if you're big enough then you might be worth an ATGM or ATR), large profile.

[LT. Ox]

I have not been in one but..

Light armor good versus splinters and most of what militia etc. would be throwing at you. Uses standard automotive parts. As mentioned, electronics. NBC sealing, I think. Can haul some cargo on and in.

Cons would be fuel consumption (but then what doesn't face that), light armor (if you're big enough then you might be worth an ATGM or ATR), large profile.

As above Pro; add on swim. super good idea in a number of cases.
the tight space neg is one shared by all other USA types. ( my Op)
Neg that could be big, no tow system as on the Bradley.
Over all and in most game situations. I would take the 25 over the tracks in a poor supply environment.

[copeab]

Cons would be fuel consumption (but then what doesn't face that), light armor (if you're big enough then you might be worth an ATGM or ATR), large profile.

In fact, the LAV 25 is about the same size as the M-4 Sherman ...

[ArmySGT.]

Pros:
It's relatively fast.
It's easier to maintain than a tracked vehicle.

Parts commonality with 5ton and 7ton diesels.

The 6V-53T is a common 5.2 liter diesel found in 1ton pickups and some heavy equipment. If in the U.S. parts would be fairly common as would mechanics with experience working on them. This also means that much better filters are available courtesy of the commercial market.

Hit a mine.... lose one wheel, one suspension unit, keep moving.

18tons dry weight means nearly all bridges and roads will support the V.

Amphibious seals and motive systems are a bonus in ETO with significant rivers and canals.

All munitions are NATO common.

Dismounts exit the rear under cover.... can exit while V is in motion.

Cons:
Cramped interior.
Light armor

Six dismounts isn't a full squad.

Dangerous roll over hazard on curves.

Two man turret..... Gunner/Commander

720 rounds of main gun ammunition goes fast.

Main gun cannot penetrate modern MBTs.

No ATGM. Crew must dismount a separate launcher.

HUGE side profile is an inviting ATGM target.

Hot muffler high on the body is very visible to thermal imagers.

Wrecker support to change a flat tire.

Packs, duffles, etc must be stowed externally..... a fire hazard.

[LT. Ox]

well done

good post thanks

[Olefin]

definitely would prefer the Bradley for the TOW system - the LAV is a nice vehicle but run into anything bigger than a BMP and you are in big trouble fast - with the Bradley, at least as long as you have TOW's, you can take on a tank and have a good chance at surviving

the LAV-AT gives you the ability to take on tanks but then you only have a pintle mounted 7.62 for everyone else

For me its not the vehicle I want to be in for Europe or Iran where you are still looking at a good possibility of meeting tanks if I have to settle for a 25 mm cannon on the vehicle

[StainlessSteelCynic]

If you're in ANY sort of light armour, you should never even think of trying to take on a tank. Instead, you get the hell out of Dodge.
Even if you're in medium armour e.g. a Bradley or Warrior, you should not be thinking about taking on a tank.
The problem with the TOW on the Bradley is that it made some people (politicians, armchair commandos and some army upper ranks) think that it could take on a tank all by itself. As part of a layered defence/offence, yeah it's really good to have but for a single vehicle (as in the case of a PC group), discretion is the better part of valour.

[Raellus]

I agree with Cynic. If the tank's got one in the chamber and spots the Bradley first, the Brad's toast. The TOW takes at least a few seconds to deploy and the missile's flight time is longer than that of a tank shell. The Bradley would need to have the drop on the tank to stand a chance of winning that duel.

The best way for light armor to deal with tanks is to avoid them.

[Draq]

And most t2k squads probably won't have a whole bunch of TOWs anyway.

[ArmySGT.]

If you're in ANY sort of light armour, you should never even think of trying to take on a tank. Instead, you get the hell out of Dodge.
Even if you're in medium armour e.g. a Bradley of Warrior, you should not be thinking about taking on a tank.

I agree with Cynic. If the tank's got one in the chamber and spots the Bradley first, the Brad's toast.

I think everyone that has seen the results of the two Brads at the Battle of 73 Easting think that is normal.

The TOW on Brads is for AT defense while on the defense and the Brad is hull down with a long wide open kill zone.

Anyhoooooooooo........ LAV-25.

Pros........... It is a damn crows nest.... You can see for miles from up there.

Cons.... it is a damn billboard...... You can be seen for miles.

Pros.... 25mm can defeat all Pact IFVS.

Cons... Light armor can be hulled by all Pact IFV main guns.

Pros...... x8 wheels, strong suspension, good fuel consumption compared to tracks....

Cons..... get mistaken for a BTR-70 alot........ friendly fire much

[Apache6]

More advantages

The operational mobility and fuel consumption of the LAV-25 is excellent compared to anything else in the US. The Stryker was adopted largely based on the successes of the LAV-25 series vehicles. But it's heavier and more thristy.

The LAV-25 gun and sights are equal to the Bradley. They have VERY good thermal sights now. In the first generation T2K they would have only had very good thermal sights. The 25mm and 7.62mm coax can reliably engage mansized targets at 1500m while moving at speed. This is part of the qualification tables.

Fuel consumption is far less then Bradley. And you don't have that TOW system that makes your vehicle commanders think they can take on a MBT. LAV-25s are recon vehicles after all.

Operational employment, not the vehicle, but the Marines in LAV-25s are far more likely to dismount and really scout then the Soldiers assigned to Bradley units, either cav or "mech infantry." The rear "top hatches" for the LAV-25 allow the Marines in the back good situational awareness and the ability to use their weapons. Including Javelins, from the protection of the vehicle.

I'll +1 what someone said about the wheeled chasis being better against mines and IEDs. A tracked vehicle hits a AT mine or large IED, you are more likley to become immobile and more likely to have a armor penetration. The LAV-25 does not have a "proper V-hull" but it's 'boatshaped' and one tire hits a mine it's designed to blow off, and to be relatively easily replaced.

[Olefin]

Oh I am not saying that the TOW lets you take on tanks with impunity - but that TOW means that at the least you have a chance against an MBT - where the 25mm alone means you are dead meat

as for supply of TOW's - per the rules you start with a full ammo load out - and that means you have them for sure, at the least at the start

had a Bradley in my last campaign - and that TOW saved our butts when the time came when we needed it

[CDAT]

Oh I am not saying that the TOW lets you take on tanks with impunity - but that TOW means that at the least you have a chance against an MBT - where the 25mm alone means you are dead meat

as for supply of TOW's - per the rules you start with a full ammo load out - and that means you have them for sure, at the least at the start

had a Bradley in my last campaign - and that TOW saved our butts when the time came when we needed it

Problem I see with the TOW is unless you ambush them at close range (or attack in number) you are in real trouble. At max range you are looking at a flight time over 40 seconds for the TOW, but the tank gun will cover the same distance in less than a second. If the controlling unit is lost the TOW misses.