Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

James Bailey

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    112

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by James Bailey

    Strykers Part II

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    The SBCT's 155mm gun is a huge upgrade from the old infantry bde's 105mm. That advantage represents the most important firepower difference. Survivability is the biggest upgrade the Stryker offers over the normal infantry bde's humvee gun trucks. Overall, SBCT seems like a huge step forward for infantry forces. The key question that remains for me is deployability and logistical sustainability of these units. We have touched on both these topics briefly, but I don't think anyone has presented a conclusive answer. But then again, perhaps no one at the Pentagon even knowns!?!

    0

    Strykers Part II

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by Blackhorse:

    James,

    Going back to log, I would venture that the SBCT sustainment is between the HBCT and BCT sustainment. The HBCTs use significant amounts of CL III,CL V, and CL IX($$) while the SBCT wll use less. On the low end of the spectrum will be the BCTs.

    STRYKER-PSG :

    Do you have any comments on how the logistics of a SBCT and its 300+ ICVs compare to other BCT types? I'm sure they go thru a lot of POL during a typical deployed day...

    Thanks - great thread all around; enjoying all the comments a lot.

    0

    Strykers Part II

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by Blackhorse:

    STRYKER BCT: 6 Active/ 1 Reserve Component

    81x11-man Inf Sqds / 27x7-man WPN Sqds

    307 Strykers, including:

    127 Infantry Carrier Vehicles

    51 Recon Vehicles

    27 Mobile Gun Systems

    13 Fire Support Vehicles

    9 Engineer Support Vehicles

    9 ATGM Strykers

    18 M777 155mm Howitzers

    121 Javelin

    Mortars:

    36x120mm/12x81mm/18x60mm

    [/QB]

    Good post Chris and nice summary of the BCT TO&Es - I enjoyed reading these. I can see why the SBCTs in Iraq is in such demand. That is a lot of rolling thunder.

    Do you have any info on the logistical requirements of a deployed SBCT? How does it compare to a HBCT and IBCT?

    0

    Strykers Part II

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by JasonC:

    "What is the proper force balance?"

    Escalation dominance. Full spectrum capability, but under that as the single vital issue. ROEs move to the capability and not the reverse.

    Isn't this the exact role Stryker is built around - a meat-ier 'light force' on the escalation dominance chain? It allows our infantry to get there faster, with more punch than our previous capabilities, and survive longer against the light enemy without adding all the logistical burdens of a full heavy force.
    0

    Strykers...and Why I thank god I am not Stryker Infantry

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by Zipuli:

    The lighter than heavy seems to be the trend right now when (western) countries want to spend a lot less €$£ for their armies, yet want them to be rapidly deployable.

    ....

    The poles bought 690 of them (called Rosomak there) equiping a lot with them, so not just Af****istan. Also in many different versions. Slovenia also took some 130+ AMVs to replace their tanks (M55S and M84), bought even the new NEMO -mortar vehicles. South-Africa bought them (some 300+). Finland bought them - the uparmoured version with no airlift capability nor swim capability, but with enough armour to frontally stop 30mm APFSDS, but with .50 cal AAMG (OWS) as weapons. Also less armoured versions with twin 120mm mortars (AMOS) were bought for readiness bde's (24 pieces total). Then there's the LAVs, Piranhas, Boxers, SEPs etc. It seems like only Germany is developing new TRACKED IFVs (Puma), everyone else is converting to wheeled.

    I won't try to depate wheeled vs. tracked, just pointing out what is happening around the (western part of the) world currently.

    Zip

    If I were a LAV salesman, I would be very very happy these days and my phone would be ringing off the hook. Wheeled heavies are clearly the direction Western military powers are headed. There are just way too many advantages against the light enemy compared to the tracked heavies. Sure if China suddenly invaded India or North Korea the South, this would change. But in the Dafurs, Iraqs, Afghanistans, Lebanons, etc wheels are the only way to go. Keep the HMMWVs inside the wire, the M-1 MBTs in reserve and ride in style on 8 wheels!
    0

    Strykers...and Why I thank god I am not Stryker Infantry

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by StrykerPSG:

    I was also an advocate for at least one vehicle per platoon with a 25mm as a support by fire vehicle. But, for now, the .50 cal is mch better suited for the built up area then a 25mm ever could be, that is if we are looking to minimize collateral damage.

    Thanks for the comments StrykerPSG. Good stuff. What turned me in favor of the Stryker was conversions with senior NCOs that have fought in the damn thing and *unanimously* they all agreed it is helping us win fights and keep guys alive and as such a huge step forward.

    Why was the 25mm SBF idea not pursued? That turret has wide range of fire options - 5.56mm pin, 7.62mm coax, and the 25mm ass-kicker. I get the 50cal as a good compromise but I don't understand why a compromise was necessary. I did talk to many Canadians in Afghanistan, and they loved that turret and thought us mad for dropping it. EAs are huge and Co-Lat damage restrictions less in Afghanistan compared to Iraq, so some caveats must be mentioned here.

    Finally, thanks for your service.

    0

    Strykers...and Why I thank god I am not Stryker Infantry

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by JonS:

    Hi James smile.gif

    I may be wrong here, but it seems that some people - at least - class the LAVIII as a different fish than the Stryker. For example JasonC has, in this thread and others, spoken approvingly of the USMC LAV25 etc. I guess it's the additional firepower that makes the difference. Or sumfink.

    Hey Jon, good to see you around again.

    Yeah, you might have hit the nail on the head with that question. Why didn't we just use the LAVIII design?

    LAV designs have clear advantages over the HMMWV, which, even with all the bells and whistle, is not really a combat platform. LAV designs also have a clear advantage over tracked heavier platforms by reducing the logistical footprint w/o losing lethality or survivability against a light enemy.

    So LAVIII vs Stryker: Can one of you experts fill us in on why USA choose to reinvent the wheel?

    0

    Strykers...and Why I thank god I am not Stryker Infantry

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    BigDuke-

    You oppose the war, that is fine. But that doesn't mean you should be throwing our soldiers away, which is what you do if we don't have the Stryker. The reality is that there are hundreds of soldiers breathing today thanks to the Stryker. There are thousands who still have their arms and legs all attached thanks to the Stryker. These are facts, not theories.

    It has moved the light force away from being light on survivability (the Humvee is not a combat platform - we learned that in Somalia and that hasn't changed after adding a few tons of steel).

    My only regret on the Stryker is that we (1) don't have more of them, and (2)didn't have them sooner. We could have cut the KIA rate in half and the WIA rate in 1/3d if we had. I personally know two KIAs in Afghanistan that would have been with us today if they had been in a Stryker.

    Also, it is not just the US Army that is benefitting. Talk to some Canadians. They do things with their LAV-III bn in Afghanistan that the US light bns can't dream of doing in our Humvee gun trucks. The Canadians are damn fine infantryman, and their LAV-III has been a huge combat multipler on their light-fighting skills.

    (BTW - great thread. Really enjoying reading all the different view points. Kudos!)

    0

    Strykers...and Why I thank god I am not Stryker Infantry

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Question-

    Did anyone take the time to read all of JasonC's 35 points? Reminds me of Martin Luther.

    Being an old light fighter myself, I orginially thought the Stryker was an overpriced piece of sh*t. However after several years of talking to the guys that know - primarily NCOs on the front lines - I have taken a 180 degrees turn on the thing. The school-bus painted drab can take hits and keep its cargo "Charle Miking" it. Survivability is the key point here - forget all those other shortcomings.

    Chris - glad to hear of your retirement! Are you Ready Reserve? Thinking about the Guard?

    0

    Bring it down!

    in CMSF Strategy and Tactics Forum

    Posted

    Originally posted by Splinty:

    Yup, I'm 210th, 46th MP CO as a matter of fact. We're in Baghdad right now. And don't get too carried away there Boomer, I was Infantry for 11 years on active and this is my 3rd tour in this S@#$hole.

    Yep, the 210th MP has got a great rep. I'm 3-116th.

    Thanks for your service. Go ANG!

    0

    Bring it down!

    in CMSF Strategy and Tactics Forum

    Posted

    Originally posted by B00M$LANG:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by James Bailey:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Splinty:

    I find the whole assmonkey (or arsemonkey) thing hilarious. My squad's unofficial nnickname is "The Assmonkies"!!!!

    210th MP Bn? </font>
    0

    Bring it down!

    in CMSF Strategy and Tactics Forum

    Posted

    Originally posted by Hev:

    Ps Considering peoples reaction in another thread about the "celebrating of fellow human beings death's" i find SGT_56M's post and James Bailey's response UN-****ING-BELIEVABLE!!!!

    Yes i swore, but if anyone finds _THAT_ offensive id like you to consider they are taking pleasure in the grusome death of two PEOPLE, and how ever grievous thier crimes, to take pleasure in thier death has already been decided as INCREADABLY BAD TASTE. ( by people on THIS forum i may add )

    Hev-

    Apologies if I offended you. You can be pissed, that is fine. Sorry to step on any toes there.

    Two points-

    (1) the end of those two monsters was the end of their horrible policy of dead and hopelessness. What impact their deaths had on the situation in Iraq is unclear (and unknowable), but what is clear is that their deaths were victories for the side that is trying to bring about a better day there. That victory, however brief and sparing, was what I was toasting.

    and

    (2) I'm in the National Guard and deployed to Afghanistan. As part of the intel section of a infantry battalion, I had the unfortunate job of having to see what thermobaric and MAC Hellfires do to humans in caves and other enclosed fighting positions. Trust me, there is no glory in this. Only small victories against evil.

    Again, sorry if I was too political or appear to glorify death.

    0

    LOS / LOF problems

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by Pandur:

    i buy it too, but i currently have problems to hide guys in higher ground between 200 and 600 meters away in desert/rocky terrain.

    i mean its not like they should stand and look, they hide and when there is earth/stones between the thermal sensor and the heatwell there is no signature...

    its not like a brick wall or so, we talk about at least some meters material.

    it would be ok if a guy wich keeps poping his head up maybe gives a way a "?" counter at that position. but right now you have a full spot, in elite mode, and can engage the guys without problems. thats a bit off i think.

    I was only commenting on the situation presented in that video clip from the good MAJ. That was, in my opinion, a realistic firefight.

    Pandur-

    I would tend to agree with your assessment of the situations you suggest, where enemy is hidden behind several meters of earth - although the 200 to 600 meters you cite is not a long ways for the optics on the Stryker. 1km is as close as 100 meters with its electro-optic site/screen. As such, identification of stationary enemy infantry is be possible out to ranges 1km, with detection (the in-game "question mark") out to maybe 2.5km.

    As far as 40mm Mk19 HEDPs, yes, they should tear apart walls, and pretty quickly. As I mentioned, I don't own CMSF and can't comment on its modeling of that ammunition.

    Curt-

    I have been swamped at work and therefore had ZERO time for wargaming. Hopefully I will get back into it once the weather turns cooler.

    0

    LOS / LOF problems

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Originally posted by Major_Jerkov:

    I had no spotters, all infantry were in strykers. or at setup area. Wanted to clarify that.

    MAJ-

    I don't own CMSF so I can't comment on what is modeled in game. I can tell you that the Stryker has a VERY good thermal imager - most of its capabilities are classified - making it realistic for a Stryker commander to see that target before enemy engaged. Also, a .50 round has no problem penetrating the concrete blocks used in construction of most mid east buildings. As such, I think the firefight in your videa was realistic.

    0

    CMMC.. While you wait for CMC..

    in Combat Mission Campaigns

    Posted

    Hey all - first time I have logged on to this forum in years.

    Its good to see there are some folks out there who either remember playing or are still playing CMMC! It was interesting to read all the above comments, even the folks who didn't enjoy the campaign. I know CMMC2v2 has been an uphill struggle so its amazing to see the concept still has legs. If nothing more, CMMC is (was) a great way to meet a bunch of very nice people.

    My best regards to all CMMC'ers, past, present and future!

    -James Bailey

    CMMC1 Head GM (emeritus)

    0

    CM Meta Campaign 2 – Now accepting senior staff applications

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    To:

    Anyone interested in serious ‘Ostfront’ campaigning,

    The folks over at CMMC are accepting applications for senior ‘staff’ positions (senior as in division, corps and army commanders). This is NOT a call for general ‘CM player’ positions (lower chain of command positions), as this call-up will take place only after a senior command staff is in place.

    CMMC2 scenario is historic-based Soviet offensive against Rzhev salient, Nov ’42 (infamously known as ‘Operation MARS’).

    If you are interested in experiencing command and control duties in the ‘Great Patriotic War’, I would encourage you to consider this unique opportunity. Only requirement is serious motivation and commitment to operational level wargaming utilizing CMBB – don’t worry if you were not involved in the CPX or CMMC1!

    General details can be found at:

    http://www.cmmc2.org/

    Specific details on the call-up and CMMC2 scenario are found at:

    http://www.cmmc2.org/SeniorPlayerSignup.asp

    Best regards,

    James Bailey

    OIC, CMMC1

    Player, CMMC2

    0

    Buying a DVI flat panel ???

    in Combat Mission - Tech Support

    Posted

    Swift and Jiggles,

    Thanks for the replies. Think I will go with the digital Flat Panel so no analog gets mixed up in there.

    I haven't looked at the high-end Samsung's -- looks like they have some nice stuff from their website. I'm primarily looking at the Viewsonic's and NEC's as I have seen both and they do a nice job.

    Best regards,

    James Bailey

    0
×
×
  • Create New...