[Finland] Patria AMV XP (HITFACT)

[Guest]

AMV^XP (HITFACT)

The AMV^XP (HITFACT) is a wheeled tank destroyer based on the AMV^XP armored personnel carrier (APC) chassis. It uses a nearly unmodified AMV^XP chassis with the Leonardo Defense Systems HITFACT turret mounted on it. It was built and marketed by the Finnish Patria company, the original builder of the AMV^XP.

 

 

Design

Spoiler

The AMV^XP (HITFACT) weighs 32 metric tonnes, has a length of 8.4 meters, a width of 2.8 meters and the hull has a height of 2.4 meters. It is operated by a crew of four, with the driver sitting towards the front of the hull and the gunner, commander, and loader in the turret. Two infantry soldiers can be carried in the rear of the vehicle, and a single stretcher can even be carried on the floor if necessary. The crew enters and leaves through the ramp at the rear of the vehicle.

 

The armament consists of an OTO Melara 120 mm L/45 gun which can fire all standard NATO 120 mm ammunition. A total of 32 rounds are carried for the main gun; 12 are located in the turret and the remaining 20 are stored in the hull. Secondary armament consists of a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun, and there are two mounts for machine guns on the roof. The prototype demonstrator vehicle was fitted with one 12.7 mm and one 7.62 mm machine gun on the roof. The HITFACT turret contains a gunner’s sight with thermal and a laser rangefinder, and the commander’s sight also has thermal capability. A laser warning system is fitted as well as eight smoke grenade launchers to provide a defensive capability.

 

Mobility is provided by a set of eight tires with a hydropneumatic suspension that can raise and lower the vehicle. The engine, a Scania DC13 diesel engine, provides 613 horsepower. This coupled with the transmission of seven forward and one reverse gear propels the vehicle at up to 100 kilometers per hour. The base AMV^XP is amphibious but it is unknown whether the HITFACT AMV^XP retains that amphibious capability; it’s quite possible that it does not due to the much increased weight.

 

The AMV^XP is claimed to protect against 30 mm APFSDS rounds on the frontal arc and 14.5 mm armor piercing rounds on the other parts of the vehicle.

 

History

Spoiler

The AMV^XP (HITFACT) was completed in December of 2018, taking part in driving tests by Christmas. At that point in time there had been no firing tests but they were planned to take place not long after. It was first displayed to the public at IDEX 2019, but no nation has decided to procure it so far.

 

Specifications

Spoiler

Basic

• Crew: 4

• Length: 8.4 m

• Width: 2.8 m

• Height: 2.4 m (hull only)

• Combat Weight: 32 metric tons

Mobility

• Engine: Scania DC13

• Engine Power: 603 hp

• Power to weight ratio: ~18.85

• Max. Speed: 100 kph

• Hydropneumatic Suspension: equipped

  • Options: Raise/lower

• Amphibious: ?

Main Armament

• 1 x 120 mm/L45 OTO Melara

• Total ammunition: 32 rounds

  • Turret - 12 rounds

  • Hull - 20 rounds

• Gunner Sight: 

  • Thermal

  • Laser Rangefinder

• Commander Sight: Thermal

Secondary Armament

• 1 x 7.62 mm machine gun - coaxial

• 1 x 7.62 mm machine gun - pintle

• 1 x 12.7 mm machine gun - pintle

Defensive measures

• Smoke Grenade Launchers: 8

• Laser Warning System: Equipped

Protection

• Frontal arc: 30 mm APFSDS

• All round: 14.5 mm AP

 

Images

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Videos

Spoiler

 

 

Sources

Spoiler

https://www.edrmagazine.eu/idex-2019-patria-amv-xp-shows-increased-lethality

https://www.patriagroup.com/products/armoured-wheeled-vehicles/patria-amvxp

https://www.army-technology.com/projects/patria-amvxp/

http://fighting-vehicles.com/patria-amv-xp/

http://www.military-today.com/apc/patria_amv_xp.htm

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1606.html

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuh-AagZ2lA

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Guest

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

Open for discussion.

[ponnes 473]

2 hours ago, CobraKingII said:

Basic

• Crew: 4

• Length: 8.4 m

• Width: 2.8 m

• Height: 24 m

• Combat Weight: 32 metric tons

I corrected the height of this thing.

+1 btw.

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Miki_Hoshii said:

Open for discussion.

Thank you! 

4 minutes ago, ponnes said:

I corrected the height of this thing.

+1 btw.

That's a joke right? 

But thank you very much! (and I corrected the height, I believe it's 2.4 m for the hull only, not including turret)

Edited February 5, 2021 by Guest

[Nicholas_Concu 2,634]

+1, possibile Italian tree premium.

[Milocat 4,857]

+1 from me, very cool vehicle.  Perhaps it could go in the Swedish/Scandinavian tree?

[eleks12 1,079]

+1 For the Swedish/Nordic Tree!

[spacesoldier117 876]

Either in a Finnish/Scandinavian Tree or in the Italian Tech Tree as a premium or event vehicle seeing how it mounts the same turret of the Centauro.

It has no correlation with the Swedish TT if Gaijin doesn't intend to transform it in the Scandinavian Tree.

[Tantor57 10,319]

+1

[Wolf_89 2,525]

Would be nice to see more Finnish vehicles in the Swedish tree. And maybe it should be renamed into Scandinavian tree?

So we can have Danish & Norwegian vehicles to  

They do have some interesting ground vehicles. And useful air/naval to.

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, Wolf_89 said:

Would be nice to see more Finnish vehicles in the Swedish tree. And maybe it should be renamed into Scandinavian tree?

So we can have Danish & Norwegian vehicles to

They do have some interesting ground vehicles. And useful air/naval to.

Nordic tree would be more fitting, as Scandinavia classically referred only to Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Other than that, absolutely agree with you!

4 hours ago, spacesoldier117 said:

Either in a Finnish/Scandinavian Tree or in the Italian Tech Tree as a premium or event vehicle seeing how it mounts the same turret of the Centauro.

It has no correlation with the Swedish TT if Gaijin doesn't intend to transform it in the Scandinavian Tree.

Same turret as the Centauro 120 mm, which may I remind you never entered service with Italy. Also, Nordic tree would be more fitting than Scandinavian, as Scandinavia classically referred only to Norway, Denmark, and Sweden.

Edited February 7, 2021 by Guest

[spacesoldier117 876]

On 07/02/2021 at 16:02, CobraKingII said:

Nordic tree would be more fitting, as Scandinavia classically referred only to Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Other than that, absolutely agree with you!

Same turret as the Centauro 120 mm, which may I remind you never entered service with Italy. Also, Nordic tree would be more fitting than Scandinavian, as Scandinavia classically referred only to Norway, Denmark, and Sweden.

I don't doubt it would be more fitting in a Finnish/Nordic tree, I'm saying it wouldn't make any sense to see it in the Swedish TT if Gaijin doesn't make it the Nordic tree.

I remind you that Gaijin, when implementing vehicles of nations that are not in the game, gives priority to the origin of the tecnology used in the said vehicle.

This vehicle use the same turret of the Centauro MGS, produced and designed in Italy and tested by the Italian Army.

It's true that the italian army never adopted it but that's because they decided to go with the Centauro 2. Still the turret is italian.

Edited February 11, 2021 by spacesoldier117

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, spacesoldier117 said:

I don't doubt it would be more fitting in a Finnish/Nordic tree, I'm daying it wouldn't make any sense to see it in the Swedish TT if Gaijin doesn't make it the Nordic tree.

I remind you that Gaijin, when implementing vehicles of nations that are not in the game, gives priority to the origin of the tecnology used in the said vehicle.

This vehicle use the same turret of the Centauro MGS, produced and designed in Italy and tested by the Italian Army.

It's true that the italian army never adopted it but that's because they decided to go with the Centauro 2. Still the turret is italian.

I wasn't arguing that it shouldn't be in the Italian tree if you read what I said. All I said was that the turret actually wasn't in-service with Italy on the Centauro because it was only for testing/export, I didn't say anything about which tree it should go in. Please read a bit more carefully, you are putting words in my mouth.

Edited February 7, 2021 by Guest

[Wolf_89 2,525]

2 hours ago, CobraKingII said:

Nordic tree would be more fitting, as Scandinavia classically referred only to Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Other than that, absolutely agree with you!

Dunno why i always forget that Finland ain't really part of Scandinavia for some dumb reason.

But Wikipedia says this:

Composition	Denmark  Norway  Sweden[3] Sometimes also:  Åland Islands  Faroe Islands  Finland  Iceland[a]

 

So that might be why i keep forgetting they ain't part of Scandinavia  

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Wolf_89 said:

Dunno why i always forget that Finland ain't really part of Scandinavia for some dumb reason.

But Wikipedia says this:

Composition	Denmark Norway Sweden [3] Sometimes also: Åland Islands Faroe Islands Finland Iceland [a]

 

So that might be why i keep forgetting they ain't part of Scandinavia

Yeah, Scandinavia excludes Finland but I guess because it's such a common mistake that it's now become kind of an unofficial part of Scandinavia 

[Wolf_89 2,525]

Just now, CobraKingII said:

Yeah, Scandinavia excludes Finland but I guess because it's such a common mistake that it's now become kind of an unofficial part of Scandinavia 

They should just become part of it. Then most of us wont do that mistake  

[eleks12 1,079]

8 hours ago, Wolf_89 said:

Dunno why i always forget that Finland ain't really part of Scandinavia for some dumb reason.

But Wikipedia says this:

Composition	Denmark  Norway  Sweden[3] Sometimes also:  Åland Islands  Faroe Islands  Finland  Iceland[a]

 

So that might be why i keep forgetting they ain't part of Scandinavia  

 

This reminds me of the interresting discussion that was about Nordic culture in the NM-116 suggestion. But yea it can get really confusing with all the nuance of... Are that people group Scandinavian or Nordic?!?

 

 

8 hours ago, CobraKingII said:

Yeah, Scandinavia excludes Finland but I guess because it's such a common mistake that it's now become kind of an unofficial part of Scandinavia 

 

Offtopic Nordic culture

Spoiler

Even Greenland is considered by many Nordic. Even though the people is more indigenous with ethnic groups in the northern US, Canada and Russia. But because of both History, Culture and that alot of Greenlanders have Danish and even Norwegian families. Greenland is more aligned to the Nordic countries than their North American counterparts

Greenlandic Inuit - Wikipedia

 

Edited February 8, 2021 by eleks12

[ComradeHanz 136]

yeah make a nordic tech tree becouse Gaijin have already said that they going to have Finnish Vehicles in the swedish tree so why not make it a nordic tree and add norway and danmark to it!

[Yontzee 1,676]

A Nordic tree would be nice but could definitely fall under the Swedish tree as previous vehicles have. +1

[Haman_bighand 5]

What about turkey , i think all middle east countries and around in one tree would be good

major powers are :

 

turkey

egypt

iran

saudi arabia

israel 

syria

algeria

iraq (before 2000 and post 2000)

 

 

each of them have some unique over hauled machines of all sort and all combined would be cool from f-86 to m1abrams and f-4 , migs and russian tanks (like the premium syrian t-72) which is awesome

 

[ComradeHanz 136]

17 hours ago, Haman_bighand said:

What about turkey , i think all middle east countries and around in one tree would be good

major powers are :

 

turkey

egypt

iran

saudi arabia

israel 

syria

algeria

iraq (before 2000 and post 2000)

 

 

each of them have some unique over hauled machines of all sort and all combined would be cool from f-86 to m1abrams and f-4 , migs and russian tanks (like the premium syrian t-72) which is awesome

 

tho israel have isch kinda already been put in the american tree

[Q_Garbage_Q@psn 2,092]

On 01/03/2021 at 12:59, ComradeHanz said:

tho israel have isch kinda already been put in the american tree

And putting Israel together with other Middle Eastern nations is definitely a mistake from a historical and military perspective

[ComradeHanz 136]

20 minutes ago, Q_Garbage_Q@psn said:

And putting Israel together with other Middle Eastern nations is definitely a mistake from a historical and military perspective

yeah

[MasterOfUltramar 1,711]

Frontal armour. Source: Me

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, JamesJLahey said:

Frontal armour. Source: Me

Unfortunately I can not add this to the suggestion due to it not having a proper source