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

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

19 posted on 03/30/2006 12:43:43 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Our enemies act on ecstatic revelations from their god. We act on the advice of lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Cannoneer No. 4

This issue tears me up. We can probably all agree that general transport in combat zones should be able to protect our guys from small arms fire.

We might even be able to agree that all such combat vehicles have V-hulls so that they can better survive mines/IEDs.

But some of those vehicles above are entirely inappropriate for running logistics and errands.

Don't get me wrong, scout and recon vehicles should be better armored (but even so they've got to be fast and quiet in order to sneak around)...

...and our armored personnel carriers should be improved...

...but the HMMWV is designed for what 4 to 6 people? This is the vehicle that you get in to go from one part of the base to another...something that doing all day in an M1A1 would probably strike all of us as inappropriate.

You need a general purpose vehicle for rear echelon logistics. Take the HMMWV, change its flat underbody to a V-hull with just enough armor to withstand running over a small ex-Soviet mortar, bullet-proof the sides and glass...and use that for non-combat purposes in the rear of war zones (e.g. bases, single-person transport, etc.).

Then use an armored vehicle like those shown above for recon and combat patrols. That's something that a general purpose vehicle isn't designed for.

20 posted on 03/30/2006 1:03:42 AM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

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