[Non-included nation] BELGIUM

User avatar
ST21
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2016 18:15
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] BELGIUM

Postby ST21 » Wed 1 Mar 2017 17:27

Xeno426 wrote:Don't know why you have mixed AIM-9 versions on the same aircraft. Did Belgium even get the AIM-9M?


Yes, entered service in 1991 IIRC.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re:

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 1 Mar 2017 18:31

Xeno426 wrote:
FrangibleCover wrote:For the rate of fire. It struck me that no F-16 is currently really fully in the short-range dogfighter role that the F-16 was conceptually designed for. The Peace Bridge and the Dutch Block 1 both have the full AIM-9 loadout but don't have the split-fire that makes the Lazur and L-17K so good, even with worse missiles.

Don't need to set them with different AIM-9 versions, though. Just split them up like I did with the F-16C Peace Rhine in my air forces thread.

Yeah, or that. I'm a little concerned that that makes them flat upgrades from the Dutch and South Korean equivalents but then I don't intend to give Belgium MRAAMs so it seems fair enough to me.

ST21 wrote:Nice list, FC. I added a few corrections/recommandations. :D
Add M113A1-B-CP and/or AIFV-B-CP.

Yup, the models are already in game so why not. They're not exactly meta but whatever, it's only a copy/paste job.

Add A109HO (with FZ LAU-68 rocket pods) observation and recon chopper. Entered service in 1992 so isnt out of timeframe.

Maybe add A109HA gunship with FN HMP .50 gun pods or FN RMP rocket/0.50 gun pods:
Image
A109 with HMP

1992 is just OOTF I'm afraid. I'd actually quite like to merge these two since a .50 gunship is pretty useless but twin .50s can be handy for self-defence on a recon heli. Also, the FN combined rocket pods are cool and I'm determined to use as much domestic Belgian stuff as I possibly can. Now, is that a battlefield radar, an advanced sight or a tumour on the top of that A109?

M42 Duster - Could be a vehicle. Never operated by Belgium.

Righto, it's not needed with the Gepard about.

Add MGM-52 Lance.

Ehhhh, leave it for the Dutch I think, every Blufor Tactical Missile we add is just going to compound the drama. Aside from anything else the BeNeLux coalition looks like it'll be the best fit so if you want a more flexible Belgian national deck you can just go BeNeLux and pick up the various Dutch units that can also represent a Belgian unit; like the Lance, Grenadiers or a whole raft of F-16s with different loadouts.

1. The SIBMAS, a wheeled IFV that could be armed with a Belgian-made Cockerill Mk.III 90mm gun:
Image

Oooooh, that's very nice. I'll have it as an IFV if Eukie lets me :lol: .

2. The ACEC Cobra, an interesting APC with electric transmission instead of mechanical. Had promising performances but sadly never got any orders due to the end of the Cold War. One of the most interesting variants of the Cobra was the AFV version fitted with a Cockerill 90mm gun:
Image
Interestingly, a MLRS version of the Cobra fitted with a FZ LAU-97 rocket system was also tested in 1985 but i cant find any pics of it.

A very cool vehicle but there's a problem to my mind. What would it provide the deck that the Spartan and Scorpion '90 with the Belgian FCS don't, with better armour? Indigenous stuff and all but they seem like they're wastes of a prototype. The MRL is interesting if you can track down a picture though, Belgium is actually coming out with a remarkably varied support tab.

Change to Alouette II instead. Adding SS-11 to Alouette II was studied back in the day but not implemented. Alouette III with SS-11 would be too much of a stretch IMO since they are naval helos in Belgian service.

Fair enough, I thought I'd use the Navy's Alouette IIIs for that since they weren't doing anything else and we had the model. I think I'll switch the Alouette II in for this and then give the IIIs the CV Helo role. Then we put the Sea King in the Logistics tab, transport men with the H-34s and the Navy is doing the logistics while the Army does the battlefield support. Neat, eh?

Change to AIM-9J/N? From mid-70s, AIM-9J/N was the primary AAM of BAF F-104s.
Change to AIM-9J/N. Never heard of BAF F-16s using AIM-9F.

Sure, no worries. I think I got carried away with the AIM-9Fs.

Belgian AF used BLU-1/B napalm bombs on F-84F, F-104G and Mirage 5BA. Doubt they were ever used on F-16s though. Mirage 5BAs also used French-made napalm bombs but cant remember the name.

I think I'll switch the RAPPORT to 4x BLU-1/b (if not more, what was max load?), I'm really envisaging a napalm plane that you'll want to use and will get to use again. According to Belgianwings the F-84s were gone by 1972 so I don't think they're worth including. Do you know if the later Mirages could carry AIM-9Ls?

F-16A Block 15OCU were already AMRAAM capable when delivered back in the late 80s. Maybe add AMRAAMs? However, Belgium didnt procure the missiles until the mid/late 90s so maybe a bit out of timeframe...
Why no F-16 MLU with AMRAAMs? A bit out of timeframe but Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands already have it so...

Well, the late procurement is a factor but I'd have ignored it if Belgium weren't guaranteed to end up in a coalition that has decent fighters one way or another. Therefore I envisage the OCU as a dedicated Superheavy-sniper with decent ECM and no MRAAMs to drive up the cost compared to the Dutch and Danish offerings. 2 or 4 missiles, do you think?

Change to LAU-3A rocket pods. SNEB was never in Belgian service.

With the old FFARs? Okay.

That all makes the Air Tab look like this:
  • SABCA F-104G - 0% ECM. M61A1, 4x AIM-9J. - I could split this into 2 and 2 just for the memes but I shaln't.
  • SABCA F-16A-1 - 20% ECM. M61A1, 3x AIM-9L, 3x AIM-9L. - I've just realised that this could be rearmed with older Sidewinder sand would just make it into Cat-C so the F-104 could be reroled. I don't know if I prefer it here as a better helicopter killer though.
  • SABCA F-16A-5 - 20% ECM. M61A1, 2x Mk.84, 2x AIM-9J.
  • SABCA F-16A-10 - 20% ECM. M61A1, some cluster bombs, 2x AIM-9L. - We need some kind of clusters that aren't CBU-87s to stop it from being a direct copy of the Dutch one.
  • SABCA F-16A-15 - 20% ECM. M61A1, 3x AIM-9M, 3x AIM-9M.
  • SABCA F-16A-15OCU - 30% ECM Prototype. M61A1, 2x AGM-65G, 4x AIM-9M.
  • Mirage 5BA - 0% ECM. Twin DEFA 552s, 12x Mk.82, 2x AIM-9F.
  • Mirage 5BA RAPPORT II - 30% ECM. Twin DEFA 552s, 5x BLU-1/bs, 2x AIM-9F. The RAPPORT II programme added AN/ALQ-178(V)2 RWR and DECM as well as countermeasure dispensers. The number of bombs is a guess.
  • Mirage 5BA MirSIP - Prototype, first flight in '93 but in service by 1995. Includes a whole slew of upgrades that are irrelevant in Wargame and canards. I don't know what to arm it with and I'd prefer to fill the F-16s out properly first before we get a prototype in.
  • Alpha Jet B1 - 0% ECM. BK-27, 38x FFARs.
[Non-included Nation] Belgium - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Hungary - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Pakistan

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11927
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] BELGIUM

Postby Xeno426 » Wed 1 Mar 2017 19:03

1992 isn't OOTF. Rafale? Eurofighter? There's a huge list of post-1991 units around in the game.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] BELGIUM

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 1 Mar 2017 19:23

Xeno426 wrote:1992 isn't OOTF. Rafale? Eurofighter? There's a huge list of post-1991 units around in the game.

Yeah, okay, non-standard usage of OOTF. It's within prototype timeframe but outside of normal timeframe. It's a fine prototype though, totally justifiable and provides extra capability to the deck and the likely coalitions. I appreciate that I've not gone way into the 1990s with this list but that's partially out of personal prejudice and partially because I honestly don't need to. This Belgium has a couple of things that some other nations would give their eye-teeth for and they're either operational or prototypes that could easily be in widespread service by 1991, never mind 1996.

ST21 wrote:No high-end tanks indeed but maybe give them a boost in veterancy to compensate. Belgian tankers had a great reputation within NATO during the CW. They tended to perform very well at the famed Canadian Army Trophy tank competition.

Sorry, missed a couple of bits. Veterancy changes don't happen on a case by case basis like this, I'm afraid. However, their good performance in competitions could indicate that the AVLS was quite a nice system and the subsequent FCS upgrades were also good. The 1A5(BE) should be a very fun unit, a Leopard 1 with roughly the gun from a Mag'ach 7 :D .

Maybe change to Iltis MILAN?

The Land Rovers were taken from page 8 of this: http://www.fireandfury.com/orbats/modcwbelgian.pdf which has a bunch of its own mistakes but helped me find a few other bits. It's all the same to me really so I'll change it, I assume either is realistic? Do you think we need the M75, by the way? It fills out Cat-C better but then that's four very similar 5 point tracked transports in the deck.
[Non-included Nation] Belgium - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Hungary - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Pakistan

User avatar
ST21
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2016 18:15
Contact:

Re: Re:

Postby ST21 » Wed 1 Mar 2017 21:20

FrangibleCover wrote:1992 is just OOTF I'm afraid. I'd actually quite like to merge these two since a .50 gunship is pretty useless but twin .50s can be handy for self-defence on a recon heli. Also, the FN combined rocket pods are cool and I'm determined to use as much domestic Belgian stuff as I possibly can. Now, is that a battlefield radar, an advanced sight or a tumour on the top of that A109?


1992 is barely OOTF. Its way less OOTF than AH-64D, Ka-52, Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, Caesar and many more. At this point it doesnt really matter anymore.

The thing on top is the HeliTOW 2 sight unit to guide TOW missiles. ;)

Ehhhh, leave it for the Dutch I think, every Blufor Tactical Missile we add is just going to compound the drama. Aside from anything else the BeNeLux coalition looks like it'll be the best fit so if you want a more flexible Belgian national deck you can just go BeNeLux and pick up the various Dutch units that can also represent a Belgian unit; like the Lance, Grenadiers or a whole raft of F-16s with different loadouts.


Fair enough. Its true that the Lance and other tactical missiles are kind of controversial units in Wargame so maybe we dont need yet another country with one.

A very cool vehicle but there's a problem to my mind. What would it provide the deck that the Spartan and Scorpion '90 with the Belgian FCS don't, with better armour? Indigenous stuff and all but they seem like they're wastes of a prototype. The MRL is interesting if you can track down a picture though, Belgium is actually coming out with a remarkably varied support tab.


I would add the Cobra just for the sake of variety. Its a pretty unique unit. Beside both Spartan and Scorpion 90 are already in the game so i would rather see the Cobra instead of Scorpion 90 in a Belgian deck.

Cant find a pic of the Cobra MLRS. Seems that thing was as rare as a unicorn. Found a pic of the FZ LAU-97 rocket system mounted on a truck though:

Image

Still might be worth adding to the game since its a Belgian-designed system.

Fair enough, I thought I'd use the Navy's Alouette IIIs for that since they weren't doing anything else and we had the model. I think I'll switch the Alouette II in for this and then give the IIIs the CV Helo role. Then we put the Sea King in the Logistics tab, transport men with the H-34s and the Navy is doing the logistics while the Army does the battlefield support. Neat, eh?


Yep, i like that. :)

I think I'll switch the RAPPORT to 4x BLU-1/b (if not more, what was max load?), I'm really envisaging a napalm plane that you'll want to use and will get to use again. According to Belgianwings the F-84s were gone by 1972 so I don't think they're worth including. Do you know if the later Mirages could carry AIM-9Ls?


I think four was the max load. I dont think Mirages ever carried AIM-9Ls, only AIM-9J/Ns.

Well, the late procurement is a factor but I'd have ignored it if Belgium weren't guaranteed to end up in a coalition that has decent fighters one way or another. Therefore I envisage the OCU as a dedicated Superheavy-sniper with decent ECM and no MRAAMs to drive up the cost compared to the Dutch and Danish offerings. 2 or 4 missiles, do you think?


Still think Belgium need a fighter with BVR missiles. Otherwise it would be the only nation in the game without one... a bit unfair. And Air Force is supposed to be one of Belgium's strong points to somewhat balance the relative weakness of its Armour tab.

That all makes the Air Tab look like this:
  • SABCA F-104G - 0% ECM. M61A1, 4x AIM-9J. - I could split this into 2 and 2 just for the memes but I shaln't.
  • SABCA F-16A-1 - 20% ECM. M61A1, 3x AIM-9L, 3x AIM-9L. - I've just realised that this could be rearmed with older Sidewinder sand would just make it into Cat-C so the F-104 could be reroled. I don't know if I prefer it here as a better helicopter killer though.
  • SABCA F-16A-5 - 20% ECM. M61A1, 2x Mk.84, 2x AIM-9J.
  • SABCA F-16A-10 - 20% ECM. M61A1, some cluster bombs, 2x AIM-9L. - We need some kind of clusters that aren't CBU-87s to stop it from being a direct copy of the Dutch one. Well, change to BL755. Belgian F-16s used it.
  • SABCA F-16A-15 - 20% ECM. M61A1, 3x AIM-9M, 3x AIM-9M.
  • SABCA F-16A-15OCU - 30% ECM Prototype. M61A1, 2x AGM-65G, 4x AIM-9M.
  • Mirage 5BA - 0% ECM. Twin DEFA 552s, 12x Mk.82, 2x AIM-9F. Mirages could not carry that many Mk82s (at least not in Belgian service). However, F-16s could. What about a F-16B bomber with 12x Mk82 and two AIM-9s? :twisted:

    Image
  • Mirage 5BA RAPPORT II - 30% ECM. Twin DEFA 552s, 5x BLU-1/bs, 2x AIM-9F. The RAPPORT II programme added AN/ALQ-178(V)2 RWR and DECM as well as countermeasure dispensers. The number of bombs is a guess.
  • Mirage 5BA MirSIP - Prototype, first flight in '93 but in service by 1995. Includes a whole slew of upgrades that are irrelevant in Wargame and canards. I don't know what to arm it with and I'd prefer to fill the F-16s out properly first before we get a prototype in. Unfortunately, MirSIP was only an avionics and structural upgrade. There was no change regarding weapons. It was supposed to still use the same, old unguided weapons (tough with better accuracy with the help of a new laser rangefinder).
  • Alpha Jet B1 - 0% ECM. BK-27, 38x FFARs.


The Land Rovers were taken from page 8 of this: http://www.fireandfury.com/orbats/modcwbelgian.pdf which has a bunch of its own mistakes but helped me find a few other bits. It's all the same to me really so I'll change it, I assume either is realistic? Do you think we need the M75, by the way? It fills out Cat-C better but then that's four very similar 5 point tracked transports in the deck.


Both are realistic but Iltis is just more recent.^^

M75 is not needed IMO. It was more a curiosity than anything else.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: Re:

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 1 Mar 2017 22:50

ST21 wrote:
FrangibleCover wrote:1992 is just OOTF I'm afraid. I'd actually quite like to merge these two since a .50 gunship is pretty useless but twin .50s can be handy for self-defence on a recon heli. Also, the FN combined rocket pods are cool and I'm determined to use as much domestic Belgian stuff as I possibly can. Now, is that a battlefield radar, an advanced sight or a tumour on the top of that A109?

1992 is barely OOTF. Its way less OOTF than AH-64D, Ka-52, Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, Caesar and many more. At this point it doesnt really matter anymore.

The thing on top is the HeliTOW 2 sight unit to guide TOW missiles. ;)

Yeah, sorry, I thought you were claiming it wasn't prototype. I've seen people claim 1992 isn't prototype before. The A109 is already in in two variants and I don't see anything wrong with a third, especially when it's been in active service for years before Belgium ordered them.

A very cool vehicle but there's a problem to my mind. What would it provide the deck that the Spartan and Scorpion '90 with the Belgian FCS don't, with better armour? Indigenous stuff and all but they seem like they're wastes of a prototype. The MRL is interesting if you can track down a picture though, Belgium is actually coming out with a remarkably varied support tab.

I would add the Cobra just for the sake of variety. Its a pretty unique unit. Beside both Spartan and Scorpion 90 are already in the game so i would rather see the Cobra instead of Scorpion 90 in a Belgian deck.

Put like that, fair enough. The armour on the Cobra is thinner though.

Cant find a pic of the Cobra MRLS. Seems that thing was as rare as a unicorn. Found a pic of the FZ LAU-97 rocket system mounted on a truck though:
Image
Still maybe worth adding to the game since its a Belgian-designed system.

Yup, that's as good if not better. Do you know what sort of trucks Belgium operated so we can mount it to something realistic? Unimog seems a little big for the job, which is probably something that nobody else has ever said in a discussion about Wargame. I'm thinking probably make it pure HE since the cluster loading only penetrates 105mm, which doesn't sound like that much in the scheme of things. Unfortunately there's no highly-meta smoke option unless the launcher can also fire smoke warheads from standard Hydras on the uprated rocket motor. It looks like it's probably airmobile though, Paracommando deck go!

Well, the late procurement is a factor but I'd have ignored it if Belgium weren't guaranteed to end up in a coalition that has decent fighters one way or another. Therefore I envisage the OCU as a dedicated Superheavy-sniper with decent ECM and no MRAAMs to drive up the cost compared to the Dutch and Danish offerings. 2 or 4 missiles, do you think?

Still think Belgium need a fighter with BVR missiles. Otherwise it would be the only nation in the game without one... a bit unfair. And Air Force is supposed to be one of Belgium's strong points to somewhat balance the relative weakness of its Armour tab.

Huh, you're right. I guess my head is stuck in AirLand Battle. :lol: Well, guess we're doing the MLU dance again. I'll give this one 2x AMRAAM and 2x AIM-9M like the Barak II to make it better optimised for the current air environment and noticeably different from the others. Could anyone shed some light on where the extra 10% ECM on the F-16AMs comes from? The EWMS?

We need some kind of clusters that aren't CBU-87s to stop it from being a direct copy of the Dutch one.
Well, change to BL755. Belgian F-16s used it.

That's a downgrade but sure, why not. I'll swap the Block 5 and Block 10 and put the loadout on the Block 5 so it's Cat-B and I'll downgrade the missiles to make it the cheap option.

Mirage 5BA - 0% ECM. Twin DEFA 552s, 12x Mk.82, 2x AIM-9F. Mirages could not carry that many Mk82s (at least not in Belgian service). However, F-16s could. What about a F-16B bomber with 12x Mk82 and two AIM-9s? :twisted:
Image

I could have sworn someone already had that loadout but I was confused with the Danish cluster bomber. I'd just rerole the block 10 to be honest, I'm not very happy with having two multi-sidewinder aircraft. That then leaves the Mirage 5BA empty. This air tab stuff is an embuggerance, eh?

The Land Rovers were taken from page 8 of this: http://www.fireandfury.com/orbats/modcwbelgian.pdf which has a bunch of its own mistakes but helped me find a few other bits. It's all the same to me really so I'll change it, I assume either is realistic? Do you think we need the M75, by the way? It fills out Cat-C better but then that's four very similar 5 point tracked transports in the deck.

Both are realistic but Iltis is just more recent.^^

M75 is not needed IMO. It was more a curiosity than anything else.

Alright, that's fair. I'll keep the Iltis to annoy the people who say it was a pointless unit for Germany :D
[Non-included Nation] Belgium - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Hungary - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Pakistan

User avatar
ST21
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2016 18:15
Contact:

Re: Re:

Postby ST21 » Thu 2 Mar 2017 02:17

FrangibleCover wrote:Yup, that's as good if not better. Do you know what sort of trucks Belgium operated so we can mount it to something realistic? Unimog seems a little big for the job, which is probably something that nobody else has ever said in a discussion about Wargame. I'm thinking probably make it pure HE since the cluster loading only penetrates 105mm, which doesn't sound like that much in the scheme of things. Unfortunately there's no highly-meta smoke option unless the launcher can also fire smoke warheads from standard Hydras on the uprated rocket motor. It looks like it's probably airmobile though, Paracommando deck go!


Actually i think the Unimog would be perfect for the LAU-97. Its a relatively light system that can be mounted on any vehicle capable of carrying a 1.200kg payload. Unimog max payload is 1.500kgs (or more for later versions). Fits like a glove^^. It would look kinda similar to the South African Valkiri-22 Mk1 MLRS also fitted on Unimogs.

I could have sworn someone already had that loadout but I was confused with the Danish cluster bomber. I'd just rerole the block 10 to be honest, I'm not very happy with having two multi-sidewinder aircraft. That then leaves the Mirage 5BA empty. This air tab stuff is an embuggerance, eh?


I suggest this for the Mirage 5BA: 4x Matra 400kg bombs (analogue to Mk83s) and maybe two AIM-9Fs. Its a realistic loadout for early Mirage 5BAs.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] BELGIUM

Postby FrangibleCover » Thu 2 Mar 2017 02:55

ST21 wrote:i think the Unimog would be perfect for the LAU-97.

Done, I'll update the spreadsheet fully tomorrow when I've got some time.

I suggest this for the Mirage 5BA: 4x Matra 400kg bombs (analogue to Mk83s) and maybe two AIM-9Fs. Its a realistic loadout for early Mirage 5BAs.

The thing is that while that would certainly be a useful load in real life in Wargame the player will probably take the aircraft with the heaviest bombload available and the Block 1 with 2x Mk.84s is available in Cat-C decks. Thanks to the total lack of countermeasures on the aircraft it's actually a worse rocket truck than the Alpha Jet, the Mirage RAPPORT is taking the napalm and the Block 5 with the cluster bombs just makes it into Cat-C as well. It is therefore either totally redundant or an ALB style direct -30% ECM downgrade from the RAPPORT, which nobody seemed to like as a system and makes it redundant with the NF-5 anyway. As a result we're kind of down to gimmicks and pre 1980 prototype weapons. Anyone fancy the smoke rocket aircraft back?
[Non-included Nation] Belgium - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Hungary - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Pakistan

User avatar
hansbroger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun 28 Jul 2013 03:45
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] BELGIUM

Postby hansbroger » Fri 3 Mar 2017 19:24

Trying to remember the name but I think the company that made the chassis for the Vickers Mk.11 was belgian, there was an entire VABesque line of APCs from those guys.

Leo 1A6 would be a solid and flavourful addition to Belgium of at least the same quality as C2 Mexas.

There's SIBMAS which was developed by Bussings and then sold to SA and BN Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques, it was a private venture which ran from 1971-76 and while not selling any "vehicles" a subsidiary of the company sold the design work to South Africa which bought the pre-production prototype and IP, using the plans and the "Springfield-Büssing Buffel" to develop the Ratel.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... sibmas.htm

In game it would be a much more protected clone of the US V-150 90mm though as a ICV/IFV which would be rather interesting, I remember some Piranha related stuff so i'll go dig on that.

The BDX is a Timoney derived design so it would be good to see if they trialed the Timoney CM-31
Image

Early in 1985, CMI Defense purchased an M113A1-B from Belgian Mechanical Fabrication (BMF), which was subsequently fitted with the CSE90 turret and demonstrated as a fire support vehicle
Image
Projectnordic in game! will likely see you on pact/red dragons/french!
Image

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] BELGIUM

Postby FrangibleCover » Fri 3 Mar 2017 20:20

Thanks, that's some really great stuff. I've edited the list again with much of the stuff that's been talked about.

hansbroger wrote:Trying to remember the name but I think the company that made the chassis for the Vickers Mk.11 was belgian, there was an entire VABesque line of APCs from those guys.

There seems to be a few contenders but I believe the theory that says it's a stretched Vickers Valkyr, which is itself a BDX with some improvements. I think that the Mk.11 would steal too many people's thunder, both ANZAC and South Africa, but the Valkyr itself would be okay if there weren't indigenous Belgian options for everything but the VDAA type turret. The 'Valkyr VDAA' could be nice though.

Leo 1A6 would be a solid and flavourful addition to Belgium of at least the same quality as C2 Mexas.

Yeah, as a MEXAS-alike it enables Belgium to take part in the medium tank game on her own terms. I'm still more looking forward to the 1A5 with the same gun and FCS but 5FAV, that's going to be a superbly cheap support tank.

There's SIBMAS which was developed by Bussings and then sold to SA and BN Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques, it was a private venture which ran from 1971-76 and while not selling any "vehicles" a subsidiary of the company sold the design work to South Africa which bought the pre-production prototype and IP, using the plans and the "Springfield-Büssing Buffel" to develop the Ratel.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... sibmas.htm

I've got it down but I'm not sure if it's too South African, if that makes sense? Regardless, the UK coalition is now looking like a tempting option. No wonder NORTHAG planned it the way they did with Belgian forces stiffened by British armour.

In game it would be a much more protected clone of the US V-150 90mm though as a ICV/IFV which would be rather interesting, I remember some Piranha related stuff so i'll go dig on that.

The final purchase of Belgian Piranhas was in 2006 but they did have the Pandur I, which is on the list for now.

The BDX is a Timoney derived design so it would be good to see if they trialed the Timoney CM-31
Image

Considering that the prototypes were only finished in 1992 and they actually entered production in 1997 it doesn't matter that much. That's very handy for my Irish joke deck though, thanks! We're all the way up to 40 units with 9 prototypes and 3 things that were out of service before 1980, it's coming along well.

Early in 1985, CMI Defense purchased an M113A1-B from Belgian Mechanical Fabrication (BMF), which was subsequently fitted with the CSE90 turret and demonstrated as a fire support vehicle
Image

I'll have that, it's a nice turreted FSV. You know, for a nation that operated KaJaPas and M47s with crap old 90mm guns and also basically cornered the international market on 90mm guns you'd think someone at Cockerill or MECAR would have put deux and twee together...
[Non-included Nation] Belgium - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Hungary - Spreadsheet
[Non-included Nation] Pakistan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests