Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/20/2014 3:29:05 AM PST by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: iowamark
The General Dynamics Land Systems plant in Lima, the only U.S. manufacturer of tanks, is in the district of Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio...

And that is the heart of the matter. Pork and buyoff. Establishment Republicanism doesn't want to stop Democrats; they only wish to replace them and be better Democrats.

2 posted on 12/20/2014 3:32:15 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

Between the tank plant in Lima and all the fun and games that goes on at Wright-Patterson (USAF research and development) there has got to be a lot of that going on in Ohio.

CC


3 posted on 12/20/2014 3:37:39 AM PST by Celtic Conservative (Tagline Constructon zone- low humor ahead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

They could use a couple on the set of The Walking Dead - that old tank they use keeps turning up everywhere.


4 posted on 12/20/2014 3:39:53 AM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

The Army forgets, until they are beaten over the head with the event, that the best time to have a tank is when the other guy does not. The Stryker fiasco is not a tank and will not defeat tanks. When we decided we did not need tanks, the Soviets/Russians were not a threat. They are back on the play bill now and they have tanks and lots of them. As Lima, Ohio is the ONLY source of our tank supply, we better not let it lapse and be the ones without a tank.


5 posted on 12/20/2014 3:45:09 AM PST by Lion Den Dan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

Obama wants them. I wonder who they will be used against?


6 posted on 12/20/2014 3:45:51 AM PST by Candor7 (Obama fascism article:(http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

We need more community outreach centers not tanks. Get with the program people.


9 posted on 12/20/2014 3:56:03 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

The Army not wanting tanks is like the Navy not wanting destroyers, it doesn’t add up.


10 posted on 12/20/2014 3:56:50 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

I figure smart bombs a cheaper than tanks, so that about does away with tank battles.


11 posted on 12/20/2014 4:23:07 AM PST by Trteamer ( (Eat Meat, Wear Fur, Own Guns, FReep Leftists, Drive an SUV, Drill A.N.W.R., Drill the Gulf, Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

I think we should have an Abrams in every driveway. Not only would that assure national security, it would guarantee that rioters really will stay off the lawn.


12 posted on 12/20/2014 4:27:45 AM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

No the Army and Marines do not any more M1xx’s

Best Tank in the world, can kill anything on the battle field. But.....

1) They are very heavy, road/bridge weight limit constraints, Channelizes deployment. This compromises Mobility thus limits -Fire and Maneuver. (Bad)

(BTW the marines are still trying to figure out how to get them ashore).

2) The fully burdened fuel cost for the things at OPtempo is about $2100/hr.

3) All the electronic gizmos require electrical power so powering them with the engine off “silent watch” is a big problem.

We need a lighter more fuel efficient tank. Stryker was a step in the right direction but poorly executed.


17 posted on 12/20/2014 4:59:27 AM PST by Ocoeeman (Reformed Rocked Scientist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark
A lot better use of my tax dollars than buying food stamps for Obama voter race rioters!
19 posted on 12/20/2014 5:07:05 AM PST by texican01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

The problem with the tank is that other systems delivering the same death potential (RPV’s and bombers) have a significantly lower logistics cost. It is difficult and slow to get the tank to where you need it and the cost of keeping it fightable (fuel and maintenance) is exorbitant. Many of the places where you would use the tank are not suitable for maneuver, so the tanks get bogged down or restricted to a few easily attacked routes. The Army would like to forgo the high fixed cost and low utility of the tank for more modern methods.


22 posted on 12/20/2014 5:25:05 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

Army brass: "Tanks but No Tanks!"


25 posted on 12/20/2014 5:48:45 AM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

Stupid.

What we REALLY NEED is a whole bunch of new MEDIUM TANKS. These jerks are buying HEAVY/SUPERHEAVY tanks.

They would most likely be cheaper, too.


26 posted on 12/20/2014 5:50:06 AM PST by Flintlock (Our soap box is finished, the ballot box didn't work--now all that's left is the BULLET box.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

Getting ready to fight WWII all over again!


27 posted on 12/20/2014 5:51:11 AM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

$120M? What does that buy? 1 Tank and 5 barrels and a compass and this thing that tells time?


29 posted on 12/20/2014 5:56:52 AM PST by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

I’ll take one if the Army doesn’t want it.... We have a small ranch in S.E. Oklahoma. A tank would make a nice bug out vehicle down there....


33 posted on 12/20/2014 6:09:08 AM PST by kjam22 (my music video "If My People" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74b20RjILy4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

The Army should ask Congress to buy them A-10s.


44 posted on 12/20/2014 6:49:10 AM PST by Sirius Lee (All that is required for evil to advance is for government to do "something")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

Oddly enough, while the current edition of the Abrams Main Battle Tank is superb as a MBT, there is a need to “think outside the box” for future tanks.

To show how diverse this can be, the Russians designed heavy armored helicopters that were sometimes called “flying tanks”. And carrying light tanks with a detachable robotic helicopter engine is not unreasonable, for instance landing a group of light tanks on a mountain top to provide extensive fire support for an area.

Other tanks, especially for use by the USMC, could be designed to be fully amphibious, something difficult to achieve. While some have been made, they have never been entirely satisfactory.

There is also the need for a Medium tank designed for urban combat. It needs to be very fireproof.

But this is why DARPA gets the big bucks.


53 posted on 12/20/2014 7:11:25 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: iowamark

I’m biased....because I was once an M1A1 Tanker.

But we need a tank. And its a strange situation - after the first Gulf War, it is hard to imagine another nation challenging the US in tank warfare....so our tanks may not be used anymore. But to not have them is an invitation to be challenged by another nation.

As far as complaints abouts its size, range, capabities go....more and more other tanks of the world are becoming like the M1. Iow it is not completely outdated yet....and frankly any improvement to a lighter vehicle is not financially in the cards. That wood take billions to develop. This $120 million....more will be spent on Barry’s vacations next year.


55 posted on 12/20/2014 7:55:25 AM PST by lacrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson