Delta Charlie 228 Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Huh? http://www.armytimes.com/stories/army15.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dirkd1976 Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 thats weird....not what i would have guessed...... ------------------ Never mistake motion for action - Ernest Hemingway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 I think the article was saying that overall there was not a compelling reason to choose one over the other, not that there were no differences. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Notnowjohn Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Well, of course, everybody knows that! There is also very little difference in performance between the $1000 and $10 toilet seat models. Or between the $550 and $2 screw-drivers for that matter. I wonder what sort of "wheels" they're talking about here...certainly not the rubberized, air-holding thingies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Germans did found a difference during advance on Moscow. Tracked vehicles got stack much less in the mud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Fauster Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Having done both, I personally would rather change a wheel or tire than a track in the field any day of the week. Additionally, I remember seeing HummV's go places I NEVER would have taken my M113 (steep, rocky slopes always made me nervous. Toss a track on one of those and you're in for a real bad day and probably a late night too). Just my 2 cents. Back in the day: 4th Infantry Division (Mech) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 This sounds a lot like the squabble over whether to buy tracked Bradley IFV/CFVs or the (much cheaper) wheeled LAV. The Army chose Bradleys, the Marines chose LAVs. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. One of the more compelling reasons for wheeled AFVs is cost, both initial outlay and for maintenance. With modern suspensions, there really isn't much difference in off-road performance or survivability. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Jeff and Intel are correct. This debate has been going on for some time now. The costs associated with building, using, transporting, and maintaining tracked vehicles (especially heavily armored ones) vs. wheeled ones makes it clear that wheeled is the way to go. As Intel said the modern day wheeled suspension and drive systems can do amazing things, many better than tracked vehicles. And since the survivability of heavily armored vehicles is, long term, getting worse... the choice appears to be pretty strongly in favor of going with all wheeled vehicles. The Army is also, from what I hear, going to start using civilian based trucks once again in favor of Hummers. This would be for basic services, since a good pickup or "SUV" style truck can do a better and cheaper job than can the big expensive Hummers. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: The Army is also, from what I hear, going to start using civilian based trucks once again in favor of Hummers. This would be for basic services, since a good pickup or "SUV" style truck can do a better and cheaper job than can the big expensive Hummers. Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I remember that one of the biggest plusses of our AN/TRQ-32 (radio intercept/DF system mounted on a Chevy pickup) over our jammers mounted on Hummers (AN/TLQ-17) was IT KEPT YOU DRY WHEN IT RAINS! With the later addition of dual rear wheels, these (seriously overloaded) trucks had suprising off-road agility. The biggest problem was the tires would slick up when muddy. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 IntelWeenie wrote: IT KEPT YOU DRY WHEN IT RAINS! Exactly the same reason why I prefer the old weather sounding equipment for the new and improved one. In addition to keeping me dry, it also allowed me to listen radio and make coffee, though doing both at the same time woud cause circuits to pop. Damn, we had to make difficult choices back then. (For some strange reason my pals who were in regular infantry don't want to hear about my military service). Also, it took some skill to get radio to work inside an EMP-protected compartment when it was too cold to hold the door open. - Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tss: IntelWeenie wrote: Also, it took some skill to get radio to work inside an EMP-protected compartment when it was too cold to hold the door open. - Tommi<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Man, sounds like you had a really rough life in the army. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripod Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 Hi I saw a TV show last spring(on a pbs like french channel in Quebec) about a little competition with: 1 humvy(older model) 1 humvy(newer model in fact I think it was the 2000 model) 1 little jeep (the jeep the canadian army was using) 1 mercedes truck(old but they said it was used before by the suisse army) Well all that to said that the humvy was not that impressive, in fact the older humvy was having problem keeping up with all the other vehicle. The commentators where all impress with the jeep that for a fraction of the cost (humvy) was getting through the obstacle(river, mountain and mud) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patboivin Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 new is not necessarily better. Just look at the Volkswagen bug! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 Germanboy wrote: Man, sounds like you had a really rough life in the army. Yup. Being a coastal artillery weatherman is a tough job, but somebody had to do it. - Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaffertape Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 Ah yes, the Kubelwagen. Stock VWs are surprisingly good in bad terrain due to the decent suspension and the tail-end weight provided by the engine. GAFF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 This wheeled thing is an attempt to overcome the strategic deployability problems of heavy divisions. We had a fetish for "Light" divisions in the 80's and they are all gone except the "special" ones, Air Assault, Airborne and Mountain. SO now we will play with some medium brigades that can get around the globe a lot easier but won't pack the same punch when they get there. One downside is the ease of deployment may encourage the twits we elect to office to send them more stupid places because it will be easier. Easier to get into trouble that could be too much for them to handle. In any case I think your average CM player can see for himself why a panther is nicer to have than a Puma in most cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RMC: In any case I think your average CM player can see for himself why a panther is nicer to have than a Puma in most cases. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> IMHO, that's comparing (big) apples to oranges... Compare the Bradley and LAV. Basically, the LAV lacks the TOW mount and has somewhat thinner armor. The gun is exactly the same. Is more armor better? In many cases yes, but the addition of some light applique armor can go a long way without doubling the weight of the vehicle (look at any Israeli APC in the last 20 years). I think there is merit enough in the idea to at least take a look. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>One downside is the ease of deployment may encourage the twits we elect to office to send them more stupid places because it will be easier.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A most excellent point and one well worth considering this fall for all us U.S. citizens out there. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 OK, the Panther/Puma thing was not a fair comparison. The gist of the article seems to be that of the systems being tested they did not find any notable differences between the tracked and wheeled systems. But they're only comparing the light systems for APC, Mortar Carrier and similar roles. This is not a definitive study on the two mobility systems. I don't think a Abrams-comparable system could be built on wheels. I'd also be interested to see what kind of survivability testing will be done, if any. Tracks are a little more resistant to gun fire and fragmentation than wheels. [This message has been edited by RMC (edited 07-20-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 From this snippet <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All the vehicles in the competition have enough room to accommodate at least the required 11 soldiers, Schenk said.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am thinking they are looking for a vehicle to fulfill the roles lately filled by variants of the M113 and M2 Bradley families. The only exception might be this "mobile gun system" thing. Not sure if it's arty or a light tank like the Stingray (I think it got type classified as the M9?). No way anything like an MBT could be wheeled; anything over 20-25t is just too heavy for anything but tracks. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts