[Cannoneer No. 4]

Stryker Brigade Combat Team Tactical Studies Group (Chairborne)

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping

[Darksheare]

"(Crusader) is a legacy of industrial age warfare born to satisfy the Army's indirect fire requirements in a strategic context that no longer exists,"

What?!
This guy sounds like a complete moron to me!
Artillery's missin honestly will never be extinct, ever.
Indirect fire requirements that no longer exist?!
He's out of his frigging mind!
He OBVIOUSLY never needed fire support NOW and couldn't get any!
Yet.
Egads, where are some of these guys coming from?

[A Simple Soldier]

The USS Cole was hardly made of steel in the way this article claims. We do not armor up our surface ships akin to the way our battleships were armored in years past for a variety of good reasons, except when the hull comes into contact with a focused chemical or kinetic energy event. Then all those good reasons don't seem so good anymore.

The Abrams tank weighs about 70 tons. The Bradley weighs in at 35 tons.

The SBCT is probably going through some desert acclimation both for men and material as part of their RSOI and will move north to replace the "Soup De Jour" cavalry regiment next year, which is now only 32 days away.

[Darksheare]

"Instead of more steel, the director said, timely reconnaissance is crucial for safeguarding fighting units."

I like this line.
The Cole would STILL have had a hole blown into it regardless of how much recon they did, or how many UAV's they had flying around.
The only way they would have prevented it, would be to violate ROE and blow the rubber dinghy up before it came alongside.
And they had no reason to think there was a threat.
Sounds like someone is passing the buck and making excuses to fund a pet project rather than lay blame where it goes and change operating procedure.
Like bringing back fast fleet oilers rather than have us go into port to fuel vessels like the Cole.

[Darksheare]

This article is just FULL of stupid nonsense!!
"Though the tanks proved effective in protecting their crews from artillery or missile fire, for the transformation director, the new high-tech vehicles give troops better awareness of where the enemy is located so that troops can avoid danger - or speed out of harm's way.
"Anyone that doesn't like speed, or says that speed isn't required, has never been shot at," he said. "

Let me get this straight, they'll see incoming artilery and be able to speed away from it, right?
*NOT!*
Being able to know that there's a guy taking a dump behind a tree 300 meters in front of you doesn't provide better protection from artillery and tank rounds.
And having better awareness is not necessarily bettter than a vehicle with survivability.

[sauropod]

"Network-centric warfare"

Nobody knows what this is. This is so much OSD cerebral onanism.

[sauropod]

"The Transformation director and other Pentagon reformers are especially critical of the time it takes to produce weapons systems. Defense programs development cycles must be brought in line with those of commercial industry, Cebrowski said, which are typically measured in months and years - not decades."

Spoken like a perfumed prince that has no idea how complex military systems are, nor how the particular acquisition program gets delayed by too much meddling from Congress, OSD, or potshots from the other services.

"The U.S. Army's Crusader artillery program was an early casualty of the transformation initiative. The $11 billion program was cancelled last year. According to Cebrowski, any weapons program is expendable if it doesn't meet the new transformation criteria.

"(Crusader) is a legacy of industrial age warfare born to satisfy the Army's indirect fire requirements in a strategic context that no longer exists," he said. In other words, Crusader is a relic of the Cold War: too heavy, too expensive and too long in development." So the solution is to stick the Army with a 50+ year old chassis (Paladin)? This bozo doesn't know WTF he is talking about.

"The main Crusader tracked vehicle, equipped with a 150 mm howitzer [I think they mean 155mm - Cannoneer][correct - Sauropod], requires a companion vehicle to supply it with ammunition. The two vehicles weigh in at a whopping 81 tons - a lot of hardware to haul to a battle front."

This is so much used food. What would Cebrwski suggest - piles of ammunition along the side of the road for the howitzers to use?

[sauropod]

"But even armor has limits. In some situations armor is necessary; in other cases it isn't, Cebrowski said.

"(Steel) didn't help 17 dead sailors on board (U.S.S.) Cole, for example," he said. "This is a steel ship. And so you don't see the Navy talking about adding more steel to its destroyers (ships)."

I don't think i can stop laughing!!!

[R. Scott]

While Cebrowski doesn't want to eliminate tanks altogether, he clearly believes Stryker is the centerpiece of the military's future, giving the forces necessary nimbleness and speed in urban areas such as Baghdad.

Once again we hear that tanks are obsolete?

[mark502inf]

What's Imperative for an Information Age fighting force, according to Adm. Arthur Cebrowski, Ret., director of the Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation, is being connected to the military's Tactical Internet and wowing the enemy. "We want our enemies, current and future, to look at us and say, 'Wow, how do they do that?'" He told an audience at the Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington recently.

Cebrowski is dangerous. He is a technophile with absolutely zero ground combat experience or knowledge who has Rumsfield's ear. His programs are designed to ensure we are even more successful the next time we fight the Republican Guard, but are next to useless against Iraqi guerillas, Taliban hold-outs, Somali militia, or any enemy that uses non-conventional organizations and tactics. Which, of course, is how most will fight us knowing that they have no chance against our force as it exists even now.

[blanknoone]

In a recent conversation I mentioned "Idiots who forget that after all of the situational awareness, we still have to go and kill bad guys." This is one of those idiots...no tanks, no SP artillery...he is going to cause a lot of casualities that are avoidable.

[servantoftheservant]

While Cebrowski doesn't want to eliminate tanks altogether, he clearly believes Stryker is the centerpiece of the military's future, giving the forces necessary nimbleness and speed in urban areas such as Baghdad.

Hmmm...The 8 wheel Stryker will have a hard time turning around in a city, while a tracked vehicle can pivot on it's own axis. The remote fifty-cal is reliant on a clear view from the commander, which he generally won't have in a city.

Though the tanks proved effective in protecting their crews from artillery or missile fire, for the transformation director, the new high-tech vehicles give troops better awareness of where the enemy is located so that troops can avoid danger - or speed out of harm's way.

How is the Styker high-tech? Because of the stupid non-stabilized remote 50 cal? And the Styker's big advantage is that it can run away from the enemy faster?? I even question that...give me a Bradley or M1 anyday over cross country.

"Anyone that doesn't like speed, or says that speed isn't required, has never been shot at," he said.

Anyone who doesn't like ARMOR or says that ARMOR isn't required, has never been shot at, you f-in idiot.

[hosepipe]

After Pastsy Schroder another re-invention of the armed services could be very destructive.. course if she were hanged for sedition as a start and then humilated, it might work, that is a de-volution...