antarctica?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Stryker Vehicles deploy to Iraq.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Space05us
who was the genious that invented that. and why would the government deploy them if even you can give a reason not to?
With the wheeled vehicle faction, they are a group of armor and cav branch pukes. Their basic view is that because heavy divisions take a hell of a long time to deploy, they only get to play in protracted conflicts, and if you could get a unit deployed quicker by ligthening it's AFVs and making them air deployable, you could get in a lot more action than those light fighter infantry and airborne pukes, and thus be in a preferred position to get combat experience into officer's personnel files to help them through senior level promotions, thus enhancing the overall position of the wheeled vehicle faction.
On the opposite side, you have the treadhead "dinosaur" faction who thinks that having real by God firepower and survivability, not to mention off road maneuverability, is more important than trying to get into little pissant conflicts that are heretofore the province of SOCOM and the lightfighter / airborne pukes, who are all swagger and no firepower.
Compounding this internal strife among the Chairborne (who agree only in ****ing over the Airborne establishment and ignoring the lightfighters) is all those nice consulting jobs you can get on retirement for difference defence contractors, if you've been their boys on the inside and helped them get those all important contracts. Throw in pork from Congress members of the two Armed Servives committees (who generally have defense contractors in their home districts) and the abso****inglutely last thing that gets considered is any real, objective consideration of the Army's combat needs looking forward a decade or two. Oh, except for ****ing over those Airborne *******s with their berets and jump boots and bloused trouser legs. Everyone except us Airborne *******s believe in ****ing us over in the procurement action within the Army.
And here I bet you thought the Pentagon was about national defense.
The cute thing, last I heard, was that before Congress will authorize the money for the fourth, fifth and sixth Stryker brigades, they'll have to do another TOAB test against an "existing amphibious capable" AFV in the Army inventory, which is a vague euphemism for the M113A3 which is an upversioned variant of the original POS APC from the 'Nam era. This is to demonstrate that before spending this ungodly amount of money, that the Stryker was fairly and realisticallytested against tracked competition.
One of the treadhead ideas is to scrap the silly ass C-130 deployable requirement, use Bradleys as medium IFVs and base a gun variant off the Bradley, and develop a new heavy combat replacement for the Bradleys in the heavy divisions. This is probably the most sensible proposal, which means it has precisely no chance in hell of coming to pass.Last edited by MichaeltheGreat; November 5, 2003, 04:44.When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
hmmm, we've gone to wheeled troop carriers - they make a lot of sense in desert terrain and where large distances have to be covered.
Now what country does that sound like apart from Australia?
We deploy into a little broader range of terrain.When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."
Comment
-
Canadian DND concluded that mines could be fatal to the crew. Canadians deploy more often where mines are a major concern. The GoC decided to buy them anyway.
These things are a bad news day waiting to happen.(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
Comment
-
You need a mix of vehicles - the anti wheel lobby arguments are rather undermined by the widespread use of wheeled vehicles by special forces.
The wear and tear on tracked vehicles in dusty, sandy terrain is very high. AFAIK, tracked vehicles still need transporters for long haul travel. Wheeled vehicles can fill a lot of roles. Tracked vehicles are better for others.
Ths is the Australian built wheeled AFV which the Army has just ordered several hundred of to replace the M113:
Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
You need a mix of vehicles - the anti wheel lobby arguments are rather undermined by the widespread use of wheeled vehicles by special forces.
The wear and tear on tracked vehicles in dusty, sandy terrain is very high. AFAIK, tracked vehicles still need transporters for long haul travel. Wheeled vehicles can fill a lot of roles. Tracked vehicles are better for others.When all else fails, blame brown people. | Hire a teen, while they still know it all. | Trump-Palin 2016. "You're fired." "I quit."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Space05us
Bushmaster wonder what kind of ops they'll use those on
Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Ths is the Australian built wheeled AFV which the Army has just ordered several hundred of to replace the M113:
Comment
-
Yes and its claimed to be land mine proof.Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
-
You can't see it in that photo but the hull of the vehicle is V shaped to deflect blast. It also has a high ground clearance.Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?
Comment
Comment