Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

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)

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

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 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)
 * 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)


 * 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)


 * 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)