Re: Humvee as a infantry fighting vehicle?

John Schilling <schillin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Well of course. They are *infantry* fighting vehicles; if the
> infantry isn't going to dismount, you shouldn't have brought them.
> Fighting from inside armored vehicles is why we have tanks, which are
> much better at it than any IFV ever was. And which, incidentally,
> have all-aspect small arms coverage, in our case using the rather
> impressive .50-caliber definition of "small arms".

Can the .50cal on the Abrams be controlled from inside? ISTR several
countries were working on tanks with remote-controlled AA machineguns,
as the "all aspect small arms coverage" really isn't worth much if your
tank commander receives a head shot and blocks up the hatch when he
tries to man the .50 ;-)

> In close urban areas, though, there is no substitute for the
> dismounts, and any column of vehicles unsupported by dismounts is
> going to be vulnerable to mines, RPGs, and the like.

Not only in Urban areas, but also in forests or jungle - just about
everywhere where there is enough cover to get closer than a few meters
to the tank without being seen.

Juergen Nieveler
--
Sex is like air: no big thing, unless you aren't getting any
.

Loading