GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

I've been maintaining this article from the start and it will make a very good featured article one day. My questions are:

• is it to early to nominate it for Good article status.
• do the references need to be archived (like at webcite.org).
• Is it to early to split off the BAE/Northrop vehicle to its own article.

Marcus Qwertyus 21:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AirplanePro

Short comment: could you make the lead a little longer? I tagged the article. AirplanePro^Radio_Checklist 05:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Sweeney

• In answer to the GA yes the problem is that this is just a concept at the moment and the finial design has not been agreed. The same reply to splitting the article.

Some other points.

• The clarification tags need doing and theres one ^{[citation needed]} tag.

• The lead states its a fourth generation combat vehicle. What are the other three generations I have never heard of that term being used for IFV's.

• Gen 1:XM734, a modified version of the M113.
• Gen 2:XM765 Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle another modified version of the M113.
• Gen 3:MICV-70, M2 Bradley
• Gen 4:XM1206 Infantry Carrier Vehicle. Marcus Qwertyus 22:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are these official designations or OR ? and what about the M75 (APC) and the M59 (APC) which both pre date the M113--Jim Sweeney (talk) 22:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Link US Army at first use.

• It replaced the canceled XM1206 Infantry Carrier Vehicle. As the vehicle has yet to be ordered is this right ?

• The lede also states "Derivatives of the vehicle based on a common chassis—such as tanks" but tanks are not mentioned in the Role section.

• A lot of the article reads like a sales pitch:

The IFV will be modular and networked and offer improved survivability

The IFV would be operable with the current Battle Command control and communications suite but would gradually use a more revolutionary networked integration system.

providing adaptive access points and connectivity

• The IFV would provide exportable electrical power, and battery charging capability for soldier systems - What systems ?

• Whats a non-civilian environment ?

At the moment I think it asks more questions than it answers, maybe after they pick which model/manafacturer they go with, there may be more to work with. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 23:23, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note Marcus maybe you can make it clear which programme will replace the Mounted Combat Vehicle though I well understand this is not part of the GCV IFV programme. Also NLOS-C replacement. Buckshot06 (talk) 04:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]