CEO Posted April 8, 2000 Share Posted April 8, 2000 http://192.41.43.237/man/dod-101/sys/land/fcs.htm Never hurts to ask Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted April 8, 2000 Share Posted April 8, 2000 FAS is a great site, full of useful info on all sorts of equipment. It also has a section dealing with the wars the US has been involved in - including obviously WW2 - and has links to some fascinating documents from teh conflicts concerned. Jon ------------------ Ubique Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L4Pilot Posted April 8, 2000 Share Posted April 8, 2000 Lifted directly from the site above: "Critical issues to be addressed are the acceptance of two crew vehicle operation, leap ahead mobility, non traditional survivability (replacing ballistic protection with signature management, countermeasures, and active protection), and indefensible lethality (both direct and indirect fire).Critical issues to be addressed are the acceptance of two–crew–vehicle operation, leap–ahead mobility (60 mph cross country), nontraditional survivability (replacing ballistic protection with signature management, countermeasures, and active protection), and indefensible lethality (both direct and indirect fire). " Our systems never screw up...screw up...screw up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEF BUNGIS Posted April 8, 2000 Share Posted April 8, 2000 Forget about it. Tanks are quickly becomming a thing of the past. Expensive to maintain, to much fuel consumption, slow strategic deployment, just not enough bang for the buck. We are transforming 2 brigades at FT Lewis right now, that will be the future combat maneuver team. It does not include any tanks. At leat in the traditional form. We will however possibly use a 90mm or 105mm main gun mounted on a wheeled chasis. They are looking closely at the LAVIII chasis. But the "TANK" is gone forever in the future of the US Army. ------------------ Better to make the wrong decision than be the sorry son of a bitch to scared to make one at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted April 11, 2000 Share Posted April 11, 2000 It's about time! With the prevalence of cheap man-portable AT weapons, and low-siloutte AT vehicles, and just sneaky-ass AT choppers, armor is the last combat arms field I'd want to serve in! The traditional "Tank" has been dead for years, just nobody with four stars on his eppaulettes wants to admit it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest R Cunningham Posted April 11, 2000 Share Posted April 11, 2000 People have been singing the death song of tanks for decades and they are still a dominant force on the battlefield. The last great "the tank is dead" bruhaha was based on the advent of ATGMs. The idea was jeeps with TOWs are cheaper than tanks and they're so quick..blah blah blah. We even put a gun/launcher on the M60A2 because HEAT rounds were supposed to be the best way to kill tanks. Then came chobham and reactive armor and the KE penetrator is king again. The first time one of these high-speed wheeled brigades gets mauled by Light Anti-Armor Weapons we'll have another rethink. The US Army goes through these periodic fads about the next great thing. In 86 Light Divisions were all the rage. Now we have 3 left and two are special purpose (Airborne and Air Assault). The big selling point was strategic mobility. The problem is these divisions are largely immobile (relative to mech units) once they've deployed. So then you start adding non-divisional trans assets to the mix and you increase the airlift requirements again. The 82nd Airborne is famous for being "deployable worldwide in 18 hours." I always ask the question: And then what? Remember when we dropped them into the desert to stop saddam? Remember the jokes about them being just a speedbump on the way to Riyadh? Right now were stuck with two extremes. We've got the too-light-to-fight guys on one end and the too-heavy-to-deploy guys on the other end. Adding a couple of medium brigades will not solve all of our problems. They will be an interesting experiment until we get a new Chief of Staff in a couple of years and then well have a new concept. Soldiers in powered armor with jump packs! Who needs vehicles at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEF BUNGIS Posted April 11, 2000 Share Posted April 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by R Cunningham: The first time one of these high-speed wheeled brigades gets mauled by Light Anti-Armor Weapons we'll have another rethink. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehe...I got 6 yeras left before retirement. Then they can do all the experimenting they want. Hopefully it's me thats taking another rethink. ------------------ Better to make the wrong decision than be the sorry son of a bitch to scared to make one at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts