Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: Plant Pleads To Stay Afloat, But Army Says 'No Tanks'

  1. #1
    Senior Contributor Stitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Nov 06
    Location
    Patterson, CA
    Posts
    3,080

    Plant Pleads To Stay Afloat, But Army Says 'No Tanks'

    Another interesting segment from NPR:

    Plant Pleads To Stay Afloat, But Army Says 'No Tanks' : NPR

    Go here for the audio feed.

    What happened to the plan to sell a bunch of refurbished M1A1's to Iraq? Did they already get them?
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  2. #2
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,795
    Shut it down. We have how many M1A2s? We have more state of the art MBTs than the next 5 powers combined. We need to invest in more lighter armored cars like the French AMX-10RC or the Stryker MGS, if we want to do security missions. MBTs are great at wrecking stuff. But they are too expensive to operate in a security role.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  3. #3
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Shut it down. We have how many M1A2s? We have more state of the art MBTs than the next 5 powers combined. We need to invest in more lighter armored cars like the French AMX-10RC or the Stryker MGS, if we want to do security missions. MBTs are great at wrecking stuff. But they are too expensive to operate in a security role.
    In Iraq the Abrams proved to be the safest vehicle by far. Lighter vehicles trade lower operating costs for higher human costs if the vehicle gets hit and reduced combat capabilities. It takes a VBIED or VBEFP to knock out an Abrams. That Abrams brings state of the art FLIR systems allowing it to bring to bear 2 heavy and 2 medium machine guns plus its 120mm cannon. It has state of the art battle management systems, is climate controlled and it scares the bejeezus out of enemies.

    Just as importantly is the Abrams modular construction and the availability of off the shelf hardware means the tank is just as current as anything fielded by anyone else.

  4. #4
    Senior Contributor Stitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Nov 06
    Location
    Patterson, CA
    Posts
    3,080
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Just as importantly is the Abrams modular construction and the availability of off the shelf hardware means the tank is just as current as anything fielded by anyone else.
    Example being the old M1A1's being rebuilt as M1A2 SEP V2's with a completely upgraded digital infrastructure and selected components of the TUSK upgrade.
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  5. #5
    tankie Military Professional tankie's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Nov 06
    Location
    Darlington UK
    Posts
    14,646
    . Lighter
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    In Iraq the Abrams proved to be the safest vehicle by farvehicles trade lower operating costs for higher human costs if the vehicle gets hit and reduced combat capabilities. It takes a VBIED or VBEFP to knock out an Abrams. That Abrams brings state of the art FLIR systems allowing it to bring to bear 2 heavy and 2 medium machine guns plus its 120mm cannon. It has state of the art battle management systems, is climate controlled and it scares the bejeezus out of enemies.

    Just as importantly is the Abrams modular construction and the availability of off the shelf hardware means the tank is just as current as anything fielded by anyone else.
    Very patriotic , the chally 2 is as good if not better , but that debates been done
    Last edited by tankie; 26 Jul 12, at 18:31.


    Trust gets you killed, love gets you hurt, and being REAL gets you hated.

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,252
    Penny wise and pound foolish. They need to keep it running if only at a bare minimum of production and refit work.
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  7. #7
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,795
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    In Iraq the Abrams proved to be the safest vehicle by far. Lighter vehicles trade lower operating costs for higher human costs if the vehicle gets hit and reduced combat capabilities. It takes a VBIED or VBEFP to knock out an Abrams. That Abrams brings state of the art FLIR systems allowing it to bring to bear 2 heavy and 2 medium machine guns plus its 120mm cannon. It has state of the art battle management systems, is climate controlled and it scares the bejeezus out of enemies.

    Just as importantly is the Abrams modular construction and the availability of off the shelf hardware means the tank is just as current as anything fielded by anyone else.
    Then why do we have the Stryker brigades?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  8. #8
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,252
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Then why do we have the Stryker brigades?
    Because armored vehicles aren't one-size-fits-all?
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  9. #9
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,795
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post
    Because armored vehicles aren't one-size-fits-all?
    There you go. We have more MBTs than the next 5 powers combined. We don't need more. We need to spend money wisely. Spend it on Stryker MGS if we want to do more low intensity missions. Spend it on the Humvee replacement, or updating existing Humvees, or a more coherent MRAP program.

    How many MBT is enough? Even the Army said it doesn't need more MBTs.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  10. #10
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,252
    The point is, Lima needs to be kept open instead of being shuttered.
    The industrial base and knowledge has to be kept preserved.

    No question that the US has more than enough tanks.
    Like I said, slow down the workload to a bare minimum, not because we need the tanks but ensure the industrial capability for the future.
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  11. #11
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote Originally Posted by tankie View Post
    . Lighter

    Very patriotic , the chally 2 is as good if not better , but that debates been done
    I was referring to US vehicles. Not dissing on the Chally at all.

  12. #12
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    There you go. We have more MBTs than the next 5 powers combined. We don't need more. We need to spend money wisely. Spend it on Stryker MGS if we want to do more low intensity missions. Spend it on the Humvee replacement, or updating existing Humvees, or a more coherent MRAP program.

    How many MBT is enough? Even the Army said it doesn't need more MBTs.
    Not all of our tanks are the latest version. Slow rate upgrade keeps the line open and the technology current. The US has about 7000 Abrams hulls but only a fraction of them are in service, some more are in stocks and the rest are hulks waiting in line for a rebuild to zero mile condition for issue to line units as they turn in tanks that are worn out. In Iraq we had Abrams using up their entire life cycle in a single year. Shuttering Lima means when a units Abrams tank reaches its lifetime maximum of miles ther eis no zero mile tank to replace it and maintenance costs will go through the roof.

    Oh BTW we don't have the largest tank fleet, we have the 3rd largest tank fleet overall and are even lower in the number of tanks in line units. Russia, China, Egypt, India, Pakistan and possibly North Korea all have larger fleets in service that are as large or larger than ours.

  13. #13
    New Member
    Join Date
    14 Jul 12
    Location
    Ny
    Posts
    22
    tanks are grate and all but the now war will be fought with drones, hackers and small strict forces not to mention air and sea. tank are going to be only part of a war. They are use less if you don not have air control. So why so many i agree with TopHater only the bare.

  14. #14
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,252
    *sigh*
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  15. #15
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    16,252
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Shuttering Lima means when a units Abrams tank reaches its lifetime maximum of miles ther eis no zero mile tank to replace it and maintenance costs will go through the roof.
    The zero-mile rebuild work is also done at Anniston Army Depot
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Chinese Bloggers Say, 'Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish, North Korea!'
    By xinhui in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23 Dec 11,, 05:11
  2. Pakistani Army Pleads for Respect .
    By Parihaka in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10 Jun 11,, 10:03
  3. Unmanned army tanks
    By felakuti in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 29 Jun 09,, 01:12
  4. New German tanks for Canadian Army in Afghanistan
    By Tarek Morgen in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 27 Feb 07,, 15:52
  5. Indian army tanks:
    By DalerMehndi in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30 Aug 05,, 20:05

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •