User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 4:04:01 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m not saying this is a bad move. Just that we have always prepared for a fight that has never materialized. Thats probably a good thing too. My point is we’re not being honest about the conflicts we’re going to be engaging in. Those conflicts will be geographically confined to small areas, probably urban and politically constrained to very small formations to avoid another grinding Vietraqistan-like forever war. As evidence Id point to: The army was all ready getting itself spun up for “the next war” when Syria kicked off and it not surprisingly didn’t look anything like what the army thought ie WWIII. We were quite literally killing mercenaries sent from the same country we were deconflicting humanitarian aid convoys from into an area where the locals were trying to kill both of us and that doesn’t even scratch the surface of the other state and non-state actors. It was and continues to be a giant ball of string with no known end state. SOF is doing a metric fuck load of operations down in South America, partner training, counter drug, counter terrorist stuff the usual, if any of that grows into something it’ll look more like the narcowar in Mexico or the Marawi fight a few years back. We may also have to go back into Iraq and restablize since they’re one hard sneeze away from total chaos at any given moment. Africa is a complete and utter disaster from stem to stern and if we ever end up fighting China it’ll be there. That won’t be a lot of tanks either it’ll be more like Vietnam but with cellphones and manpads. Any of those is way more likely. I think we’re talking past each other with you clearly demonstrating the most dangerous course of action and me advocating the most likely. Syria is a great example. I was there a few times. We went in thinking it was a limited COIN style conflict and found ourselves doing that right alongside a conventional MDO fight. Contested air, armored warfare, dense urban terrain, EW attack, offensive IW, UAS innovation, even fucking space domain involvement. If there was ever anything that proved we need to stop putting all our eggs in the COIN basket, it was Syria. This is war now. If you think Africa or South America would be somehow any different you aren't paying attention. We need heavy, light, and a whole lot of enabling capability gaps in between we forgot about. Preparing for LSCO doesn't mean we discounted low intensity. They aren't mutually exclusive. Last I checked we just regionally aligned SFABs against Africa and South America, and have had more troops in both than ever before. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 4:06:21 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Found this on wikipedia. Looks like the new vehicle is a lot chunkier than the m113. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/US_Army_AMPV_compared_to_the_M113.png Yay, more antennas. Probably still easier to troubleshoot than a BFIST. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 4:22:11 AM EDT
[#3]
FPNI
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 4:26:24 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So we should ignore the primary threat that has the potential to wipe us clean off the face of the earth because you are certain it would never happen in the next 10+ years? China would attack just because the 3 gorges dam burst and they needed an external threat to blame so they dont get overrun by their own people. That isnt the threat you ignore and hope to catch up with if you need to through dollars and a can do attitude. They could close 60% of the world's shipping lanes via the South China Sea if they wanted to on a whim. Iran may not be a peer adversary on the open front, but they have a lot of big missiles they could get off before we could do anything about it, as they showed us. The Aramco oil attacks in Saudi they sponsored caused a 5% reduction in global oil supply in an afternoon, via a proxy, not even their regular army. You seem awfully confident they dont intend on doing any of this, but military planners dont have that luxury. You seem to be preoccupied with propping up and developing the COIN fight. At what point militarily do you think we've got that licked? COIN fails because of politics and moving goalposts, not because we didnt develop an adequate military infrastructure to do it. We are the most COIN capable military to ever have ever existed right now. Meanwhile we let ADA/SHORAD fall to pieces, lost expeditionary capability in the Pacific, and are already taking major losses in the CYBER/EW and IW domains. Strategic planning isnt about now or next year. It's about 2028 and 2035. POM cycles are 5 years, making that the minimum you can project large scale innovation and capability growth. If China decides to attack it won’t be the army’s problem. Either dealing with nuclear missiles or shipping lanes. Now if we somehow make it to mainland China that becomes a shitfight and it’ll be about who’s logistics and manpower lasts longer. Spoiler alert, we lose that one no matter what tank support vehicle we have. Either through attrition or political will that fight is over before it starts, so why start it? There’s no strategic goal there that’s obtainable. There just isn't. They know it and so do we. That’s why they’re focusing on their navy. Saudi is kinda interesting. They have all US equipment, are an “ally” (yeah right) and still weren’t able to protect their stuff. We don’t particularly need them. We could have taken over Iraqi oil production and been independent of Saudi but we didn’t. We could be energy independent now but we’re not. If Iran decides to play with oil again they’ll learn the same lesson again that a few tankers get taken, some pipes and refineries randomly explode and they stop. A better solution is oil and energy independence. I’d rather fix Venezuela and buy their oil than deal with Iran. That seems much easier. But in the Middle East that’s an engineering fight about who can rebuild faster because we’ll never really stop them from killing each other or themselves. And the army of today can already kill the Iranian army of tomorrow. Yes coin sucks because politicians can’t decide what they want. Also the army as a whole knows fuck all about coin. We think we do. We do not. As far as EW/ADA etc that is a mess I agree. It needs to be fixed too because those enemy systems are out there and will proliferate to fights we will actually be in. As far as the marine corp and pacific power projection that has been falling apart since the 70s. That’s not anything new. That’s a legit concern as I said earlier I see those conflicts being way more likely. Putting down insurrections, FID etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 4:39:26 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Syria is a great example. I was there a few times. We went in thinking it was a limited COIN style conflict and found ourselves doing that right alongside a conventional MDO fight. Contested air, armored warfare, dense urban terrain, EW attack, offensive IW, UAS innovation, even fucking space domain involvement. If there was ever anything that proved we need to stop putting all our eggs in the COIN basket, it was Syria. This is war now. If you think Africa or South America would be somehow any different you aren't paying attention. We need heavy, light, and a whole lot of enabling capability gaps in between we forgot about. Preparing for LSCO doesn't mean we discounted low intensity. They aren't mutually exclusive. Last I checked we just regionally aligned SFABs against Africa and South America, and have had more troops in both than ever before. That is precisely what I’m talking about. We are already in the places we’re going to be fighting. Our country has always been somewhere killing someone. We like to hide it but the truth is we already have a bunch of little conflicts simmering all over just waiting to turn into the next dumpster fire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 4:41:14 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yay, more antennas. Probably still easier to troubleshoot than a BFIST. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Found this on wikipedia. Looks like the new vehicle is a lot chunkier than the m113. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/US_Army_AMPV_compared_to_the_M113.png Yay, more antennas. Probably still easier to troubleshoot than a BFIST. Don’t worry it won’t be soldiers that have to do that. It’ll be some contractor from Northrop Grumman that does it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 5:23:03 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don’t worry it won’t be soldiers that have to do that. It’ll be some contractor from Northrop Grumman that does it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Found this on wikipedia. Looks like the new vehicle is a lot chunkier than the m113. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/US_Army_AMPV_compared_to_the_M113.png Yay, more antennas. Probably still easier to troubleshoot than a BFIST. Don’t worry it won’t be soldiers that have to do that. It’ll be some contractor from Northrop Grumman that does it. Oh, thanks for explaining that to me. It would have been a shame to rely on my two decades in an armored brigade doing C&E to form an opinion on my future work load. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 5:26:15 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. It was not. It was supposed to be a faster, better armored M113. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No. The Bradley was always an IFV with turret and ATGM launcher No. It was not. It was supposed to be a faster, better armored M113. I thought it was designed to counter the BMP? Until the gravy train got started and it turned into a "light tank". |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 5:35:10 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is precisely what I’m talking about. We are already in the places we’re going to be fighting. Our country has always been somewhere killing someone. We like to hide it but the truth is we already have a bunch of little conflicts simmering all over just waiting to turn into the next dumpster fire. Maybe so, but I really don't see your point tying that to fixing an established capability gap in the ABCT. Your argument is similar to getting upset at a new THAAD missile because it wouldnt work very well patrolling Baghdad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 5:41:57 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is more hardware covering software issues. Shit man, that's how we won WWII!  And we've been applying the same model over and over again ever since. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 6:29:16 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe so, but I really don't see your point tying that to fixing an established capability gap in the ABCT. Your argument is similar to getting upset at a new THAAD missile because it wouldnt work very well patrolling Baghdad. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That is precisely what I’m talking about. We are already in the places we’re going to be fighting. Our country has always been somewhere killing someone. We like to hide it but the truth is we already have a bunch of little conflicts simmering all over just waiting to turn into the next dumpster fire. Maybe so, but I really don't see your point tying that to fixing an established capability gap in the ABCT. Your argument is similar to getting upset at a new THAAD missile because it wouldnt work very well patrolling Baghdad. Not upset. I said this is a good thing. I’m just pointing out it’s not the biggest priority for what we’re likely to face. I’m sure it’s not going to hurt anything having. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 6:33:03 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oh, thanks for explaining that to me. It would have been a shame to rely on my two decades in an armored brigade doing C&E to form an opinion on my future work load. 20 years dealing with antennas. No wonder you missed the very obvious joke.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 6:41:18 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 20 years dealing with antennas. No wonder you missed the very obvious joke. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Oh, thanks for explaining that to me. It would have been a shame to rely on my two decades in an armored brigade doing C&E to form an opinion on my future work load. 20 years dealing with antennas. No wonder you missed the very obvious joke.  Attached FileTouche, then. We spent last year going behind the contractors sticking JBC-P in the Herc fleet. Talked about installation kits for the upcoming A7 Paladin fielding with the PBO over breakfast. Life is pain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 6:51:38 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/B926BC70-2451-4EC1-A889-3A3C070B9F9D-404.gif Touche, then. We spent last year going behind the contractors sticking JBC-P in the Herc fleet. Talked about installation kits for the upcoming A7 Paladin fielding with the PBO over breakfast. Life is pain. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Oh, thanks for explaining that to me. It would have been a shame to rely on my two decades in an armored brigade doing C&E to form an opinion on my future work load. 20 years dealing with antennas. No wonder you missed the very obvious joke. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/B926BC70-2451-4EC1-A889-3A3C070B9F9D-404.gif Touche, then. We spent last year going behind the contractors sticking JBC-P in the Herc fleet. Talked about installation kits for the upcoming A7 Paladin fielding with the PBO over breakfast. Life is pain. I wouldn’t have any patience with that. I can’t get my siprs reimaged because the one person ONE PERSON who can do it is a contractor and on vacation. I hate the dependence we have on third parties. Any class I’ve taken the last year or so on any new system has been from civilians. Forget enemy tanks, if we have a poorly written contract soldiers will die. We have contracting commands for fucks sake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 6:55:35 AM EDT
[#15]
The word "multipurpose" makes me cringe a bit when used to describe military equipment.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 7:16:54 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wouldn’t have any patience with that. I can’t get my siprs reimaged because the one person ONE PERSON who can do it is a contractor and on vacation. I hate the dependence we have on third parties. Any class I’ve taken the last year or so on any new system has been from civilians. Forget enemy tanks, if we have a poorly written contract soldiers will die. We have contracting commands for fucks sake. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Oh, thanks for explaining that to me. It would have been a shame to rely on my two decades in an armored brigade doing C&E to form an opinion on my future work load. 20 years dealing with antennas. No wonder you missed the very obvious joke. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/B926BC70-2451-4EC1-A889-3A3C070B9F9D-404.gif Touche, then. We spent last year going behind the contractors sticking JBC-P in the Herc fleet. Talked about installation kits for the upcoming A7 Paladin fielding with the PBO over breakfast. Life is pain. I wouldn’t have any patience with that. I can’t get my siprs reimaged because the one person ONE PERSON who can do it is a contractor and on vacation. I hate the dependence we have on third parties. Any class I’ve taken the last year or so on any new system has been from civilians. Forget enemy tanks, if we have a poorly written contract soldiers will die. We have contracting commands for fucks sake. At least the JBC-P transciever reprovision capability is moving to the green side. We were lucky that we worked on Bragg and they had a contractor there; I heard horror stories from other units, driving all day or mailing them to Hood and waiting. I'm starting to blame the depots as much as the defense companies anymore. Making every a task depot level repair. The latest was turning in whole computer systems for a dead CMOS battery. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 7:40:18 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We brought tons of them to Iraq in 3ID in 2007. I believe you, I just don't remember ever noticing one in service, not even stateside. Clearly, I was just in the wrong unit since I've now learned that some units in some places are still using them for whatever. I guess you really can learn something new every day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 7:56:06 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I thought the Stryker and Shinseki proved that track is obsolete. Wheels are the way to the future. s/  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 7:57:10 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I believe you, I just don't remember ever noticing one in service, not even stateside. Clearly, I was just in the wrong unit since I've now learned that some units in some places are still using them for whatever. I guess you really can learn something new every day. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: We brought tons of them to Iraq in 3ID in 2007. I believe you, I just don't remember ever noticing one in service, not even stateside. Clearly, I was just in the wrong unit since I've now learned that some units in some places are still using them for whatever. I guess you really can learn something new every day. I don't know where you, as an 11B, would encounter one outside of an ABCT. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 8:01:27 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know where you, as an 11B, would encounter one outside of an ABCT. Interesting. I was never in one of those. I had to think about it for almost a whole minute before I pieced together what that even is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 8:06:16 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I believe you, I just don't remember ever noticing one in service, not even stateside. Clearly, I was just in the wrong unit since I've now learned that some units in some places are still using them for whatever. I guess you really can learn something new every day. To be fair, they didnt move under their own power very much. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 8:13:46 AM EDT
[#22]
@Manic_Moran
do you still have the pics of you rolling into Iraq in an M113? I remember you live blogging this back in the tank-net days |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 8:58:58 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The word "multipurpose" makes me cringe a bit when used to describe military equipment. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be moved when an armoured unit advances, and that stuff needs to keep up with the tanks up front. Look at this like an armoured, tracked truck, which you can be used as an ambulance, command post, battle taxi, or whatever. It's multipurpose because it would be retarded to use different vehicles for all of that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 9:00:58 AM EDT
[#24]
I bet most of my tinnitus is from riding in the back of one of those for hundreds of hours.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 9:24:07 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/108155/mil-armored-multi-purpose-vehicle-1800_j-1577371.JPGProduction of the first new armored vehicle that will replace the Army Vietnam Era M113 armored personnel carrier is now complete, manufacturer BAE Systems announced today. The first Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, or AMPV, rolled off BAE's production line as part of a 2018 low-rate initial contract to deliver up to 450 of the vehicles to the Army, according to a BAE news release. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/09/02/army-set-receive-first-armored-vehicles-replace-vietnam-era-m113.html?ESRC=eb_200903.nl APC's brings back memories. LOL Late 1960's at Fort Polk one of my uncles was a Colonel stationed there and we would visit every now and then since we lived a couple of hours away. Me and my oldest sister were playing in and on a M113 ? and I "accidentally" closed a hatch on her hand and crushed it. No broken bones but she sure did yell. I sure enjoyed hanging out with my uncle on base, I felt like I had the run of the place. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 10:17:23 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: China and Russia don't need to completely dominate us, they found the niches we ignored and became masters of those specific areas. Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm guessing one of those is cyber attacks. What are others? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 10:19:20 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Heavy armor hasn't been on those streets in over a decade. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm thinking that big doesn't work too good for the 3rd world shithole streets that our troops get deployed to. Heavy armor hasn't been on those streets in over a decade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 10:31:39 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But if this is in preparation for a big war vs China+Iran+North Korea I have to imagine that we will need to be rolling through the streets of their cities, which arent' all nice broad thoroughfares Pyongyang  Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached FileTehran  Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 10:43:03 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm guessing one of those is cyber attacks. What are others? Our counter mine assets are few in number  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 11:10:00 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To be fair, they didnt move under their own power very much. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I believe you, I just don't remember ever noticing one in service, not even stateside. Clearly, I was just in the wrong unit since I've now learned that some units in some places are still using them for whatever. I guess you really can learn something new every day. To be fair, they didnt move under their own power very much. Tanks and Brads get the cake, everything else gets the crumbs. Mortar tracks and ambulances were at least pacing items, and would get a little love. The infantry and armor 1SGs' g-rides? Not so much, as they didn't normally like them or use them. We would damn near have to fund support vehicle parts under the cover of darkness. Because it apparently it takes a genius to realize that if you focus solely on combat power and ignore your broken M88s before railing everything across the country for an NTC rotation...well, that's not good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 11:18:17 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So replace a 113 series vehicle with an upgraded 113? lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 11:21:18 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There's a lot of stuff that needs to be moved when an armoured unit advances, and that stuff needs to keep up with the tanks up front. Look at this like an armoured, tracked truck, which you can be used as an ambulance, command post, battle taxi, or whatever. It's multipurpose because it would be retarded to use different vehicles for all of that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The word "multipurpose" makes me cringe a bit when used to describe military equipment. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be moved when an armoured unit advances, and that stuff needs to keep up with the tanks up front. Look at this like an armoured, tracked truck, which you can be used as an ambulance, command post, battle taxi, or whatever. It's multipurpose because it would be retarded to use different vehicles for all of that. Fewer parts, less training for the mechanics, and then the inevitable line of broken vehicles at a major training event as all parts go towards combat power, not taxis or command posts. Army Aviation is also good at this, as I've seen an Air Traffic Control shelter stay broke for months while the part needed to fix it was on hand. But because a helicopter might need it later, it was left to wait on a backordered part |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 11:59:34 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There's a lot of stuff that needs to be moved when an armoured unit advances, and that stuff needs to keep up with the tanks up front. Look at this like an armoured, tracked truck, which you can be used as an ambulance, command post, battle taxi, or whatever. It's multipurpose because it would be retarded to use different vehicles for all of that. Absolutely, though I would prefer if they would buy AMOS turrets for Bradleys for the mortar tracks instead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:12:19 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm guessing one of those is cyber attacks. What are others? I mentioned them before, EW, IW, UAS, ADA/SHORAD...to start. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:17:00 PM EDT
[#35]
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-announces-serial-production-of-new-advanced-eitan-apc/
 We co-developed with Israel, just buy these. I don't see the point of tracked vehicles for carrying personnel for the cost/maneuverability when the Bradleys and Abrams are your front. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:26:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is basically the M113 variant (MLTV) that the Army didn't choose back when they went with the Stryker Yeah, I thought the Striker WAS the replacement? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:27:31 PM EDT
[#37]
I thought the Bradley replaced the M113.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:28:16 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We put 22 people in a M113 once. It wasn't fun. Clown car version of AFV? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:29:14 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I used to drive a 113. Oh, the memories... Broke down every other day. Izz that why you went neolithic? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:29:27 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, I thought the Striker WAS the replacement? The Stryker was a way to give light units morr mobility without costing what a Armored unit does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:39:52 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is basically the M113 variant (MLTV) that the Army didn't choose back when they went with the Stryker  Attached FileNo, not at all... Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:43:34 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This won’t be defeating any armor formations with that 50cal. That’s what the tanks are for. Brads for other vehicles and troops. This is certainly an upgrade to the M113 but let’s not pretend this is a giant leap into 2050 conflicts. This is the army dragging its bloated corpse into an alternate universes 1995. Now if you wanted to convince me that we’re going to streamline the idea of Stryker units, Armored Calvary, mechanized infantry all the other ridiculous hybrid units the army has into ABCTs and that was that, I’d be onboard. This reeks of more maneuver officers thinking they’ll be fighting the Russians or Chinese on the steppe or Eastern Europe. When in actuality they’ll be losing guys to contracted snipers block by block in some megacity, getting a vehicle swallowed up by collapsing sewers from IEDs, taking 15 daisy chained EFPs to one vehicle and having drones swarms drop into their COP at night. Same as it ever was. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Talk to me about a V shaped hull, EFPs and drone vulnerability. Or are we still pretending it’s the Cold War? Mobility is survivability. Or are we sill pretending there aren't armored formations out there that we still need to be ready to defeat on the field of battle if necessary? What's an EFP if not a poor man's tank gun? V-shaped hulls are a design compromise that is necessary in a static situation with a pervasive low intensity threat. It is not a design for front line combat forces facing other front line combat forces. There's not much related to modern warfare that doesn't factor in drones. It's an exciting new world for SHORAD. This won’t be defeating any armor formations with that 50cal. That’s what the tanks are for. Brads for other vehicles and troops. This is certainly an upgrade to the M113 but let’s not pretend this is a giant leap into 2050 conflicts. This is the army dragging its bloated corpse into an alternate universes 1995. Now if you wanted to convince me that we’re going to streamline the idea of Stryker units, Armored Calvary, mechanized infantry all the other ridiculous hybrid units the army has into ABCTs and that was that, I’d be onboard. This reeks of more maneuver officers thinking they’ll be fighting the Russians or Chinese on the steppe or Eastern Europe. When in actuality they’ll be losing guys to contracted snipers block by block in some megacity, getting a vehicle swallowed up by collapsing sewers from IEDs, taking 15 daisy chained EFPs to one vehicle and having drones swarms drop into their COP at night. Same as it ever was. Army Capability Manager job openings are posted on usajobs.gov  Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:45:32 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Still not a Gavin. I hope you're joking.  Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:52:01 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I mentioned them before, EW, IW, UAS, ADA/SHORAD Have we given up completely on EW, I recall early in my career we used to have some of those capabilities? ETA: N/M That's where the 17 series MOS comes into play. Now I remember. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:58:19 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Found this on wikipedia. Looks like the new vehicle is a lot chunkier than the m113. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/US_Army_AMPV_compared_to_the_M113.png Damn, that’s a big bitch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:58:24 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/108155/mil-armored-multi-purpose-vehicle-1800_j-1577371.JPGProduction of the first new armored vehicle that will replace the Army Vietnam Era M113 armored personnel carrier is now complete, manufacturer BAE Systems announced today. The first Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, or AMPV, rolled off BAE's production line as part of a 2018 low-rate initial contract to deliver up to 450 of the vehicles to the Army, according to a BAE news release. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/09/02/army-set-receive-first-armored-vehicles-replace-vietnam-era-m113.html?ESRC=eb_200903.nl I remember when they said that when the Bradleys started started getting fielded... back in 1984.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 12:59:04 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-announces-serial-production-of-new-advanced-eitan-apc/ https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2020/02/1-e1581249635659-640x400.jpeg We co-developed with Israel, just buy these. I don't see the point of tracked vehicles for carrying personnel for the cost/maneuverability when the Bradleys and Abrams are your front. That doesn't look like it uses the same engine, transmission, final drives, track, rollers, etc etc etc as the Bradley does. The point of using a Brad derivative to replace the 113 is for the supply chain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 1:01:04 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I hope you're joking. Kharn Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Still not a Gavin. I hope you're joking. Kharn I don't have the mad modelling skills to hang with the Gavin advocates. Also, I don't have the courage to see if that fellow still has a web page. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 1:04:41 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm glad it's not just me thinking that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2020 1:08:01 PM EDT
[#50]
Looks like a Bradley if you got rid of the turret.
 Pentagon Wars - Bradley Fighting Vehicle Evolution |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
