TheForwardObserver
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by TheForwardObserver
-
-
Which leads us to how this relates to fire support; http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4174519.stm
-
Agreed. Bio/chem weapons are creepy. Have always felt that way.
-
Maybe there should be an in-game mechanism where you can jam your opponent's access to facebook and twitter, penalizing morale of course.
-
Sure could @kinophile. I know I'd use cyber to disorient or delay decisive action in the short term, and create an atmosphere of discomfort and diminished productivity amongst my opponent's population over the long term. Obviously there are passive and active sides to cyber but I assume we're talking about active measures.
-
Absolutely cyber brings the war to the homefront in it's own way. I will say this, if a belligerent stakes it all on a Cyber-Attack they'd better hope they don't miss.
-
That's certainly a viewpoint held by many smart people. If the arguments revolving around Cyber drop people into two camps; Cybermageddon and Cyber Pearl Harbor, I'm in the Cyber Pearl Harbor camp. I can see cyber kicking off a big one and doing plenty of damage to a population and it's critical infrastructure but I'm not yet ready to pronounce it as the nail in the coffin of large scale kinetics.
-
If the theatre of operations is narrow we could probably do the job with our current numbers, despite 3 to 1 favor going to the Russians-- we wouldn't be able to do it though without changing our policies on ICM/DPICM and integrating other types of munitions (thermobaric for example) and guidance systems.
-
Be a real shame to get outgunned in the early days and find our artillery unable to meet ground commanders' expectations in the subsequent weeks beyond that. Unfortunately those concerns are constantly shot down by confidence in air, despite glimpses of the future being provided microcosmically elsewhere. Mark me down as being in the 'skeptical of glaringly obvious over-reliance on fickle air power' camp. ISW does some good conflict mapping work and it's been pretty wild watching them chart RU and CN anti-access/area denial hubs blossoming over time. Clearly attention is being given to countering American air capabilities.
-
You do what's right by you, and I'll do what's right by me.
-
I can't imagine talking to people the way some of you folks talk to John. Just absolutely thoughtless.
-
"The United States needs to get serious about Artillery again."
http://warontherocks.com/2016/10/the-united-states-needs-to-get-serious-about-artillery-again/ -
They've added 7 inches of head-room, but say nothing about butt-room. That's a good metaphor for how the Army operates. Reminds me of the time we asked for a new deadlier rifle to replace the M-16A2 and the Army was all like "did somebody ask for shrunken M-16s?"
-
3 hours ago, PanzerMike said:
Somebody has been eating the wrong kind of mushrooms and this time it's not Emrys...
The multiplying villainies of nature do swarm upon him. Sancho Panzer dear-- admirable that a lowly squire such as yourself should break from tilting at windmills and re-fitting your corset to ride to the aid of your Lord Emrys. It will be a shame to fell you second.
-
14 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:
Y'know, talking to yourself is often the first sign of a feeble mind.
Michael
Then we shall consider it an act of mercy that I respond to your overtures. You strike quickly for a mousquetaire of your graduated age, but with the force of a Blefuscian arrow.
-
22 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:
Here's another one that got hit on the head too many times and shouldn't be smoking those funny cigarettes.
Michael
“To become taronyu—hunter—you must choose your own Ikran And he must choose you”
On guard.
-
Here's another clip of AUSA including a segment about the Bradley tech demonstrator. Haven't yet found a pic of the interior of the troop bay but @6:50 min mark the dude mentions some changes in passing.
-
Page 1-6 of ATTP 3-21.71 more accurately depicts modern mech infantry platoon/bradley suggested configurations.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/attp/attp3-21-71.pdf -
@VladimirTarasov They do. I think the stated reason for operating at that capacity in-game is to avoid cross-loading dances. With that said the above pictured seats have since been replaced by bench seats so you can more easily squeeze dismounts inside and 9 isn't unheard of-- certainly not normal but not unheard of. If you're packed too tightly inside you just end up falling asleep anyways so doesn't really matter how cramped it is.
-
-
2 hours ago, Oleg said:
Still manned turret?
Manned or womanned but yes.
-
45 minutes ago, Splinty said:
You must be talking about the M2A3s with the bench seating. Try spending most of the Desert Storm ground war stuffed into the old M2A2 seating arraignment. Talk about sardines in a can!
We did actually have the horrible old seating. The ridiculous folding seat consoles. I think we removed a fair number of them at the time to save space and preserve sanity.
-
21 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:
I thank god that in all my limited Bradley time, I was only obligated to actually get in the back all of once, and I was by myself. I think this is common with all APC/IFV designs, but all the same, you'd think there was at least a way to do it less worst.
Alone is the best way to ride in the back. Splay out some rucksacks and pusspads on the floor for bedding, add a little ambiance with some glow-stick lighting, open up some MRE boxes and get to pilfering.
-
I see you're familiar with the PULP system Kinoson. Sadly, even PULP is insufficient to achieve an acceptable comfort quotient during extended periods of operation.
-
They've got plenty more good years in them. The seats though. There have been some brilliant advances in seat cushion technology since the Bradley's introduction and more could be done to leverage these advances.
FOs Conduct of Fires Net
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Lol