Re: Future of Tanks

Airborne! wrote:

Andrew, I tend to agree with you more then not, but you have forwarded
some common myths relating to armored vehicles that I feel I should
respond too.  Wheeled vehicles being cheaper is based upon the
assumption of using commercial drivetrains.  The current crop of
wheeled armor using complex 6x6 and 8x8 drivetrains actually tend to be

Yes. Commercial trucks do not use 6x6 drivetrains. Made to measure is expensive.

The centre wheels on a 6 wheeled combat taxi are basically spares to handle loss of a front or back wheel. Do they need either steering or traction?

far more expensive then tracked LAV's.  Look at the cost of the Styrker
compared to simalier air-transportable tracked armor.  The 113, 113
improved variants, Weisel etc. are all signifigantly cheaper then the
Stryker and far easier to upgrade.  The Dingo 2, that has nearly
identical primary capabilities as the Stryker except that it carries a
team of 8 instead of twelve (this is actually an advantage if you study
the history of armor used in the scenarios that the Styker is meant
for) is about 1/6 the cost of the stryker becouse it relies on mostly
commercial 4x4 technology.  The other myth forwarded is that armor is
not benificial for anti-insurgency work. Combined arms helps in major
theatre war, limited objective war, insurgency, and stabily and
sustainment operations. Period. Proper force structure and doctrine

Use an elephant gun against elephants, a bear gun against bears and RPGs against US troops.

For anti-insurgency work the armour needs to be able to handle volleys of RPGs and any other man portable anti-tank weapon.

allow you to have overmatch against all kinds of opposition and
considering the US's very low strategic defeat threshold, this is a
must.  Historical analasis will show that armor in complex terrain must
be survivable againt AT systems, particurly in the frontal arc.  This
means non-supported LAVs are NOT ideal for MOUT operations.  The answer
is primarly in force structure and doctrine, not in technology. Hope
this helps,
SPC Reed Dyer, OANG

True. It is a man that goes into the building to capture the insurgent. Hopefully with colleges around the sides and back to prevent escapes.

Andrew Swallow

Andrew Swallow wrote:

Paul J. Adam wrote:


In message <dpkmro$eqc$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew
Swallow <am.swallow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes


[snip]


Does anti-insurgency work need a tank or an armoured car? 


Depends on the insurgency. If they're mostly just using small-arms, then
a light armoured vehicle is quite adequate, even preferable.

If they've got ready access to RPGs and IEDs (ranging from simple
remote-detonated artillery shells, to explosively-formed projectiles
triggered by passive infrared) then you want something heavier and more
survivable.


Since IEDs can be home made and the whole world has seen their
effectiveness on tv we can assume that they will be normal insurgency
weapons from now on.

There may be logistical advantages in using the same components, such as
engines, in trucks and infantry support vehicles.  Hopefully armoured
wheeled vehicles will be a lot cheaper than tanks.

Andrew Swallow 


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nat. Guard (air and army) short of equipment
    ... Now they are just stripping the equipment from the Guard, ... > |> reason that so many units lack the armor as it is being taken off vehicles then ... > |> Guard leave their vehicles in Iraq. ... it is what is happening to states across the country as they redeploy units ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: Future of Tanks
    ... Andrew, I tend to agree with you more then not, but you have forwarded ... some common myths relating to armored vehicles that I feel I should ... Wheeled vehicles being cheaper is based upon the ... compared to simalier air-transportable tracked armor. ...
    (sci.military.moderated)
  • Re: DoD backs away from .45 pistol.
    ... which didn't have armor either. ... # up-armored vehicles are subject to excessive wear and failure of the ... Your defense boy, Rumsfeld, has stated that WHATEVER vehicles needed more ... armor (and it doesn't matter which because Rumsfeld never lies), ...
    (rec.guns)
  • Re: DoD backs away from .45 pistol.
    ... ## up-armored vehicles are subject to excessive wear and failure of the ... #armor (and it doesn't matter which because Rumsfeld never lies), ... Strawman alert. ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Propane and propane accessories
    ... easier / cheaper to liquify. ... What I know is that methane is extremely combustible - dangerous to ... cheaper, but not as easily accessable as I recall.... ... occupied by delivery vehicles. ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)