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

To: Vn_survivor_67-68; Travis McGee; archy; river rat; SLB

Ping


9 posted on 02/15/2008 8:14:54 PM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. ©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Squantos
being an ordnance guy, couldnt you 'build a better mousetrap' quicker and cheaper to destroy what we can field in slower/heavier equipment ??? adding more powder and technique???...

We could supply every troop an Abrams and theyd be 'safe'???...

LFOD...

18 posted on 02/16/2008 5:26:33 AM PST by Gilbo_3 (Vote for Principle to inspire Conservatives to service...LFOD...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Squantos
An urgent February 2005 request for MRAPs got lost in bureaucracy. It was signed by then-Brig. Gen. Dennis Hejlik, who asked for 1,169 of the vehicles. The Marines could not continue to take "serious and grave casualties" caused by IEDs when a solution was commercially available, wrote Hejlik, who was a commander in western Iraq from June 2004 to February 2005.

In the early 1990s, we had around 7,340 M60A3 TTS upgraded Patton tanks, just refitted with thermal sights and night vision equipment, essentially the USMC version that were the leading edge of the attack that rolled into Kuwait City during Operation Desert Storm in February 1991. The're far less maintenance-intensive than the M1 Abrams series, and would have required little other than a short driver's course to have made them the standard US military vehicle in Iraq rather then the mine and small arms-vulknerable HUMVEE. And Explosive Reactive Armor designed for use on M60 tanks has a lot better chance of defeating the latest EFP antiarmor IEDs.

Yes, tanks use more fuel. LOTS more. In that region, that should not have been much of a consideration. And if nothing else, the *other people* would have had a lot more work to put together an IED that would kill an M60- I once saw a very similar M48A3 that had been straddling a 750-pound aircraft bomb turned into a command-detonated mine when it was exploded- destroying the tank and seperating the engine/transmission powerpack and turret from the chassis- but all the crew inside survived, though with injuries. But they were a lot better off than if they'd been in a HUMVEE or other 5/4 ton truck....

Not to mention that the tank's 7.62mm co-ax MG, .50 M2 in the commander's cupe, the two flex MGs on the roof and the 105mm main gun with a 105mm APERS round up the spout could be real handy for US troops chasing down insurgents within binocular range of any command-detonated Iraqi IEDs, as well as the night vision and thermal viewers aboard, not limited by battery life like the man-portable infantry versions. and if the 4-man crew is too small for stabilization force duties, just pull the turret of every third vehicle, like the Canadians did by pulling turrets off Sherman tanks during WWII- it takes about a day at a depot facility set up for it.

VIETNAM STUDIES, MOUNTED COMBAT IN VIETNAM, Chapter IX

M48A3 TANK EXPLODES A 750-POUND BOMB SET UP AS A MINE. Turret was hurled from tank, which was blown out of its tracks.

54 posted on 02/18/2008 7:37:10 AM PST by archy (Et Thybrim multo spumantem sanguine cerno. [from Virgil's *Aeneid*.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | 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