Praxus

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...le.cfm?Id=1196

Anon

I been saying this all along...

"Senior Marine officials, however, may be reevaluating the rationale for the MEFFV, as feedback from operations in Iraq indicates that heavy armor still rules the battlefield."

"During an April meeting of Marine general officers, the consensus was that if the Corps had been fighting in Iraq with a MEFFV-like force, “we probably would not have won,” Beal said at a Washington, D.C. conference, sponsored by the Institute for Defense and Government Advancement."

"Survival based on “overwhelming net-fires and a lot of indirect stuff” is an iffy proposition, Beal said. Lighter vehicles simply don’t have the firepower needed to take over cities, for example."

"Any tank replacement would have to be at least as survivable as the M1, Beal suggested. Reports from the field indicated that many of the Marine M1 tanks came back with lots of pockmarks from rocket-propelled grenade shots and some friendly-fire hits, but the crews survived."

No kidding, really?

Stinger

Well Snipe they could use Stryker, after all they already have the Hornet, and are going to get Osprey's. :twisted:

__________________
Your look more lost than a bastard child on fathers day.

Anon

LOL, what a disaster of a force structure that would be...

bigross86

Wow. Snipe isn't siezuring. I thought you learned your lesson last time Stinger?

__________________
You're a naughty girl, go to my room!

Horrido

If the twits wanted a real C-130 air-mobile vehicle with a real gun, they'd go for the M8 Bufford with either ERA or the forcefield system the Brits are developing. Military procurement has obviously been taken over by former CEOs (pronounced "dumbasses") of the Big-Three auto-industry...

__________________
The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out.

I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.

Praxus

What could the M8 do that an Unmanned Vehicle such as the AA version of the MULE could do. The Mule will have the "Common Missile" which is spoose to replace the Hellfire and Maverick, leading me to believe that it has a range of at least 8km(probley around 5km from the ground). It will also have a 30mm Chain Gun. You bring in say 500 of them as an early entry force, you secure the area for the entrance of heavy manned forced. Of course these vehicles would be working a long with Airborne troops.

From the render I saw on the Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control website it will have 4 missiles and one 30mm cannon. The other varients of the mule would carry extra ammo that the Airborne troops could load on the vehicle when it runs out.

Also they are only a 5 ton vehicle and really cheap compared to something like the M8. So you could fit up to 4 of them in a C-130 if you stacked them on top of each other.

Also if they get shot there are no people that can be killed and the computer that controls it is a lot smaller then 3 humans in an big cockpit type deal.

Is there a flaw in my idea that I am missing?

Horrido

Where is "mule" mentioned in that article as well as any statements about being unmanned? Not saying it isn't a good idea, but it would still be nice to have a real cannon rather than just a few expensive missiles. Also, the M8 statement was in response to the Stryker comment and other poorly considered aquisitions.

Praxus

My post was in response to rapidly deployed Gun System.

I don't think the missiles will cost that much, just a couple thousand dollars. I think the money that it has to spend on fancy rockets would be saved in the small cost of the platform and the fact that you don't have to pay hazard pay for people driving the tanks. These things could be rapidly deployed, far quicker then anything else.

Anon

"I don't think the missiles will cost that much, just a couple thousand dollars."

Take a wild guess how much a small manport ATGM like javelin costs.

I'll give you a hint.

It starts with a 4, is followed by a 5, and the number is 5 digits to the left of the decimal point.

LOL, couple thousand dollars....

Anon

I like Horrido prefer the M-8 over stryker or ANY unmanned system.

Unmanned, anyone else but me seen terminator?

Officer of Engineers

Sorry, gents,

The M8 will NOT do (the others are a given that they would fail). Study after study has been done that tank killers cannot and will not replace tanks.

A latest study

Leopards in Kosovo,
The Solution For An Armoured Combat Vehicle,
by Capt Dan Seft, Royal Canadian Dragoons,
The [Canadian] Army Doctrine & Training Bulletin,
Volume 3, Number 1 - Spring 2000

__________________
Chimo

Anon

"Sorry, gents,

The M8 will NOT do (the others are a given that they would fail). Study after study has been done that tank killers cannot and will not replace tanks.

A latest study "

I'm not saying it should, or is even capable, i'm simply saying it's better than the other options since we seem insistent on this light bde stupidity.

I view all armored vehicles as little more than rolling coffins anyway, truth be told.

bigross86

Yeah, Snipe convinced me not to go into Armor when I join the IDF. He said that I'd be better off having two legs to escape.

Praxus

I know the Javalin is expensive but that includes the launcher and the IR sensor and such in the launcher.

The Common Missile is spoose to be laser beam ridder and should be a lot cheaper then the Javalin unless I am mistaken.