PDA

View Full Version : What should soldiers roll in?


FreeManDan
10-28-2005, 01:13 PM
A) I think is made in America, its basically a Mack truck LINK (http://www.forceprotection.net/models/cougar/)
http://www.forceprotection.net/models/cougar/photos/image_11.jpg

B)I donít know who makes it, but the British are buying it LINK (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/future/)
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/future/images/FCLV_2s.jpg

C) Its of German origins and design, itís a Unimog with a special designed body, I think Chrysler has a hand in making it LINK (http://www.defense-update.com/products/d/dingo-kmw.htm)
http://www.defense-update.com/images/dingoII.jpg

D) No one uses it, but the French have a similar 2 door amphibians model, I donít know who makes it but it has a lot of integrated Raytheon goodies. LINK (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/shadow/)
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/shadow/images/ShadowRSTV_6s.jpg

E) Old Schooo! Just get a better turret, diesel engine, a more roomy cab, and better armor and your bullet proof. LINK (http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net/ferret.htm)
http://www.khakicorpsimports.com/vehicles/ferret-a.jpg

F) What ever EDIT: Here pic http://www.longlostlake.com/images/pict8.jpg

Any more vehicles? And input? After all this will be a political deciton when selecting a Hummer replacement.

nicolae
10-28-2005, 01:29 PM
How about in something with no wheels .
Hover on air or some sort of thing like this?
Hovercrafts make more sens to me.

FreeManDan
10-28-2005, 02:14 PM
Way ahead of you
http://www.rotorhead.org/military/images/ch53-2small.jpg

FreeManDan
10-28-2005, 02:25 PM
I like the shadow for day to day operations and the DINGO for lagistics and strike operations requiring a large number of troops. I bet the army will like the shadow for its range and mobility. ďThe Shadow RST-V has significantly improved fuel economy and survivability and can be transported in roll on/roll off mode in a CH-53 or CH-46 helicopter, V-22 tiltrotor and C-130 transporter. Up to 21 vehicles can be carried in a C-5 Galaxy aircraft or 12 in the C-17 Globemaster.Ē
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/shadow/images/ShadowRSTV_4s.jpg
ďThe pneumatic suspension can reduce the vehicle's size for air transportation, by allowing the tires to be pulled in and the height of the vehicle to be dropped.Ē
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/shadow/images/ShadowRSTV_7s.jpg
"The RST-V prepared for transportation. Unlike the HMMWV, the RST-V can be transported internally in a V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft"

Clayton Moore
10-31-2005, 04:43 PM
its the classic "armor" vs "armor penetrator" problem

whatever you put our guys in, a determined adversary can build a big enough IED to blast it to pieces

the casspirs and the buffalos and cougars with the V-shaped hulls do great against landmines and good against bombs on the side of the road..... but are still easily punched by a RPG7

the insurgents are using improvised shaped charges in their IEDs and are defeating more and more of our uparmored vehicles - exacerbating the problem

you can bring back the 113's, or get more bradleys, but at what cost in terms of speed, cargo capacity, mpg, etc and even those can be defeated by a big enough IED

honestly - IMO arguing about what they ride in isnt gonna make much of a difference

IMO - what we need to do instead is to rethink close air support -

things would be a lot better for our guys if we had something like the old A1 Skyraider, OV1 Mohawk, O2 Skymaster (336/337), OV10 Bronco, or even a small version of the A10 warthog flying cover over our convoys (either with a pilot in the cockpit or remotely piloting the thing from some rear area)

to do this would need for the Army to get back into fixed wing aviation - because the USAF doesnt want to deal with low and slow - and the helicopters the army has suck too much fuel and dont have the loiter time needed

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/5spr91.html

FreeManDan
10-31-2005, 09:58 PM
A pocket sized IED is easier to sneak past security forces than a truck load, every little bit counts in aiding maneuverability and operability (ie not getting any vital member of the crew/convoy killed or rendered inoperable in a convoy because of some cheep shot). All these vehicles were selected by me for this poll (and for our military) because of superior maneuverability and longevity than an armored up humvee, a vehicle that was never intended to have one ounce of armor. All of these vehicles are better suited to desert warfare than a humvee, solders in Iraq and Afghanistan are spending way to much time fighting sand, they have to air blow the humvees inside and out after every patrol. It takes 2 to 3 hours, less time doing this means less solders need to be deployed. The fact of the matter is that the humve is up on the chopping block for replacement. The hummveeís engines, suspension, and other mechanicals are quitting left and right because of all that armor and the unforgiving hot sandy desert. The military is becoming more professional, they now know what matters when taking fire in todayís type of warfare. Todayís conflicts are refining our knowledge of what mechanically increases our offensive initiative AND survivability on the move and in a fight.

The army has stated many times the need for a new fighting/work horse vehicle build from the ground up. The status quo just doenst cut it, and no more add-ons can bring the humvee up to the performance per cost ratio of these vehicles

I think every one in the world should go to Barns and Nobles and pick up Imperial Grunts by Robert D Kaplan (or any thing by him!).

For the tip of the spear type of warriors the shadow is good choice, deployability, speed, survivability, independence, command/control, in that order (more or less).

For ongoing conflicts of security, witch are increasingly the norm, the characteristics should be survivability, maneuverability/speed, longevity, command/control, deployability independence, in that order (more or less).

For its weight the dingo have excellent survivability (it being lighter than the cougar H) and exceptional maneuverability (if Iím not mistaken it has 4 wheal steering, or can, I know most large and midsized unimogs have 4 wheal steering) things that are KEY to a convoy surviving an ambush! This is not a redundant concept and can not be a considered a mootpoint!

On another note, the aircraft best suited for todayís warfare (a warplane I mean) is the A10 because of the characteristics I just listed (and even the ones I didnít)

Clayton Moore
10-31-2005, 10:18 PM
[multiple edits]

unfortunately we are always gearing up to fight the last battle not the next one.

you would think the army's 8x8 strikers would be capable - and 4x4 and 6x6 variants would make sense from commonality and training standpoints - but as I said earlier, when you put more armor on your enemy reacts by building bigger bombs and so the circle continues

the striker in action
http://www.combatreform.com/strykeronfiretn.jpg

another thing - the cougar and buffalo seem to be just a little too big for co-in ops, and I betcha they suck the diesel fuel like no tomorrow

http://www.forceprotection.net/images/tn_c_video.jpg

http://www.forceprotection.net/images/tn_b_video.jpg

another thing -

if you are discussing what the soldiers are gonna ride into battle on, we all agree that we need some armor, and I think you agree with my assertion that you need CLOSE air support

maybe we also need to discuss tracks vs. tires?

we have plenty of M113's in the inventory that can be refurbished / reintroduced,
http://www.combatreform.com/strykerprogram.htm

FreeManDan
11-03-2005, 08:14 PM
You can destroy anything, but thatís not the idea behind the humve replacement. And Iím surprised your so fond of the M113, it has aluminum armor, and the hot metal slag from RPGs can really mess it up, and the rubber tracts can be taken out buy Molotov cocktails. But it is good for offensive operations needing light armor. Again you should read Imperial Grunts, most missions in Iraq and Afghanistan arenít combat at all, they are diplomatic with the threat of thugs taking popshops at troops.

FreeManDan
11-03-2005, 08:16 PM
Can people change their vote? I think some votes disappeared or something, maybe when the site crashed?

Clayton Moore
11-04-2005, 09:31 AM
Iím surprised your so fond of the M113, it has aluminum armor, and the hot metal slag from RPGs can really mess it up, and the rubber tracts can be taken out by Molotov cocktails.

I dont like aluminum armor either.... but its on the striker and bradley FV too.....

and those 200+ lb rubber tires w/30-90 psi air and magnesium runflats on your light armored vehicles are not going to fare well either to molotov cocktails

speaking of tires - when you uparmor a wheeled vehicle you have to increase tire pressure because of the increased weight. you soon get to the point where you cannot get off of a paved road because the ground pressure gets too high and your ride sinks in the sand dirt or mud

therefore - I say if you want armor - put it on tracks

we have plenty of 113's sitting in depos all over the place - spend a hundred thousand to upgrade each one of those and send em to the boys

another thought - IMO our M1Abrams replacement should be designed a bit like the Israeli Merkava with room for 6-12 combat troops

instead of having a infantry fighting vehicle to support the MBT, put the infantry in the MBT and buy twice as many tanks

getting rid of the turbine engine and sacrificing some top end speed to get more range / fuel economy would be nice too

FreeManDan
11-11-2005, 08:18 PM
Bump, more people vote.
I should also tell you that the unimog and the ferret scout have proved themselves in desert/extremely sandy environments in many African conflicts. The unimog has many applications already available that the military could benefit from such as PTO powered generators, water pumps, and any kind of machinery. And is also exceptional at off road driving even when loaded down, it was engineered to be an off-road hauler. All of these vehicles were selected because I reasoned that they all had SOME aspect or quality that out preformed the HUMWVE. If I was an Army Mechanic I would be honored and thrilled to work on any one of these vehicles.

Clayton Moore
11-12-2005, 09:24 AM
not to keep on the tracks vs treads thing because that's not your original intent of this thread

but I was surfing www.Glocktalk.com & found a thread
http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=413061&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=1
w a bunch afganistan pics and saw these of the weasel

dang I like that thing

http://img279.imageshack.us/img279/1605/459310342vp.th.jpg (http://img279.imageshack.us/my.php?image=459310342vp.jpg)

not big enough to transport troops - but a nice small mobile fighting platform

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v606/hhorror/Wiesel2033.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v606/hhorror/140-4065_IMG.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v606/hhorror/Wiesel2031.jpg
http://www.glocktalk.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=4638546
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v606/hhorror/45931034.jpg


although there is a ambulance version and a APC variant too that can hold 7 troops
http://www.bellum.nu/armoury/PWiesel-Ambulance.jpg
http://www.bellum.nu/armoury/PWiesel.html


PS - heres a couple pics of the fennek - a 4x4 wheeled apc that I thought you might like
http://img279.imageshack.us/img279/1288/bwfennekwstentarn022rd0yw.th.jpg (http://img279.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bwfennekwstentarn022rd0yw.jpg)

http://www.hrvatski-vojnik.hr/hrvatski-vojnik/892002/89_bpictures/HV-89=Fennek=1_2.jpg

FreeManDan
11-12-2005, 01:26 PM
The Germans know how itís done, though that last one looks like a ferret scout car had sex with a bathtub and gave birth to that! :MM :D And those tanks are defiantly worth something in todayís world of military conflicts. Originally they were designed as defense, hide one in the bushes on the border and just pounce on an invading USSR tank! But because you can fit 2 in a Chinook, a pare of them make a great quick deploy force for peace keeping; witch is a good way to make your country popular diplomatically. Though I wouldnít consider it a work horse vehicle, effective at warfare yes, but operations arenít all action pact and bloody as people thing, or the media would have us believe.
LINK Here is the what I preach LINK CLICK ME (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200510/kaplan-us-special-forces)

panzermk2
11-30-2005, 11:38 PM
Originally Posted by FreeManDan
Iím surprised your so fond of the M113, it has aluminum armor, and the hot metal slag from RPGs can really mess it up, and the rubber tracts can be taken out by Molotov cocktails.

As an X Cav tanker I served with Cav scouts used the 113 "pepsi can"
I also cross trained on it and added another MOS
It was .....

A fast! AND had rubber track blocks that bolted into STEEL TRACKS smaller then the M60A3's but same idea NO ALUMINUM or ALL RUBBER TRACK

B very reliable

C good gas mpg 4 cylinder 2 stroke suppercharged diesel

D design nicely updated (vulcan armed, tow anti-tankarmed, como, med versions)

E we have a crapload of them, But congressmen don't get money from defense contractors to upgrade them, but to buy new toys.

F Bradley aluminum BAD thats why at first guys were flipping up the steel track
skirts for more protection until the linebacker came out with Sherman tank style armor plates welded on. And bradley sink instead of swimming killing the deltas who could not get out

G 113's have alot more steel armor the aluminum. the drop door was made of Al but the sides and frontal were steel, except of course of the "surf board" water plane that was wood and extended when swimming to keep the delta's hatch from flooding out the PC

all together a nice package

Panzer

panzermk2
11-30-2005, 11:43 PM
FORGOT besides Germany I ran all over the desert when 3rd CAV was stationed at Ft Bliss TX 113's had no problem at all with sand
Panzer

FreeManDan
12-08-2005, 05:05 PM
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/graphics/gator.bmp
I found THIS (LINK) (http://usmilitary.about.com/od/armyweapons/a/gator.htm) and I hope its not something that would really be widely issued. I mean really the water boy at the local university drives one of these! They call it the green machine and it does say gator on the side. Go mean green!

Clayton Moore
12-08-2005, 07:19 PM
Last edited by DmL5 : Today at 06:03 PM. Reason: Resized two of the pics to prevent page-stretching

DML 5 - thank you - how does one resize pics?

DmL5
12-08-2005, 08:18 PM
Clayton,

I re-hosted those two pics over on Imageshack (see HERE (http://www.imageshack.us/)) which allows you to display pictures at full size or tiny and clickable like those ones. It's easy to use and doesn't require any registration.



-DmL

Clayton Moore
12-11-2005, 10:28 AM
freeman - another pic for you

a 113 side by side with a striker

http://www.geocities.com/abncivilaffairs/tracksbywheels.jpg

panzermk2
12-11-2005, 10:14 PM
Man, Strikers are after my time. Looks like allot more room for the 11B's in the striker, but it's at least 2 ft higher. armor on armor condition that 2 feet would make for a heck of a target. And I still am not hot on the all wheels. I know its lower main. and cheaper to make. I just like the ability to neutral steer the hell out of trouble but for what they do and are I guess wheels are ok. But man what a target for an RPG or a T80 series they are out there. That thing would be a b**** to keep in a hull down position
Panzer

Paratrooper117
12-12-2005, 04:42 AM
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/graphics/gator.bmp
I found THIS (LINK) (http://usmilitary.about.com/od/armyweapons/a/gator.htm) and I hope its not something that would really be widely issued. I mean really the water boy at the local university drives one of these! They call it the green machine and it does say gator on the side. Go mean green!
These are just used for on base travel, I have never seen any of these outside the wire.

FreeManDan
12-12-2005, 01:37 PM
Paratrooper: I figured as much after I posted that, but I didnít think the bases would be really big. Come to think of it, if you put ALL the logistics in one secure aria I bet it would be that big, and that it would take 2 or 3 hours to walk from one end to another, and the green zone is big too from what I hear. You would have a better idea of that then me.

Panzer: Actually I read a solder of fortune article that said the M113 was a cheaper vehicle and much lighter. Reason is that each one of the wheals on the striker has to have its own drive shaft witch is connected to a transmission and a drive train that runs the length of the vehicle. The striker is all drive train, thatís why the ground clearance (a pro and a con) and the price of the vehicle.
I think the use of the striker in Iraq has proven that it isnít so hot, the armor had to be thin to be light enough to be flown. IMO the Army is like a despite housewife that got soled on a yellow SUV that is now the enemy.
But wheals actually are better than traces in some ways, better at rocky terrain, I think they might last longer, and with tracks if you loose one link or that rubber band they some times use snaps or is burned out then your sitting there taking fire tell its fixed. With tires you can still propel the vehicle if the front half it blown up and the front tires taken out. Mud however is not something the striker can fair well in. All pros and cons really, but witch one do I like? I like wheals, but not on a tank, or on ice.We had a real bad ice storm here in Texas, my 4x4 Isuzu slid right of the road and 10ft from it onto a golf courseÖbackwards!
http://photobucket.com/albums/v81/freemandan/th_Isuzuingwithblue.jpg
Ahhh! :eek:

Clayton Moore: you got what you wanted, you made me do it, tracks vs. wheals :D

FreeManDan
12-12-2005, 02:42 PM
I originally excluded my self from voting, but I broke down and voted for the Dingo. The nature of the Army (IMO, but what do I know?) is logistics mostly, just read that PDW article that stats 70% of troops is noncombat personnel. So in my mind the Dingo seems like a good work horse war fighting vehicle. And it would seem that what is old becomes new again, war seems to me so neoclassical.
http://www.diggerhistory.info/images/tanks/canadian-scout-car_small.jpg
This was based on the Unimog
http://www.diggerhistory.info/images/tanks/tracks-dismount.jpg
http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net/Ferret_with_ENTAC.jpg
http://www.bellum.nu/armoury/PWiesel-TOW.jpg

Clayton Moore
12-12-2005, 10:32 PM
I think the use of the striker in Iraq has proven that it isnít so hot, the armor had to be thin to be light enough to be flown.

Clayton Moore: you got what you wanted, you made me do it, tracks vs. wheals :D

I knew if I stayed on message it would resonate with the voters.


I dont think there's an offroad condition out there (mud sand snow mountains) where a tracked vehicle would not be running circles around a wheeled vehicle of comparable weight and/or size

another advantage in favor of tracks is that for a given payload - the tracked vehicle is gonna be MUCH smaller and lighter

another thing - I want amphibious capability - built in !!- easier to do with tracks

panzermk2
12-12-2005, 11:43 PM
FreeManDan

Track donít mean jack on ice! Physics takes over. I watched an M60 in Germany slide down a snow covered hill compressing the snow into ice and smacking this piss out of the platoon leaders Pepsi Can. OK I watched it from my delta hatch since it was me when I was a newbie there on REFORGER from Bliss..
Your ice fun reminded me of the first time El Paso had snow in 80years I was a Ft Bliss and a bunch of us Yankee Cav tankers and scouts drove down to Dyer street by the base entrance with a couple of cases of lonestar (I know but I was an E-2) and watched all the sliding fun. After a while they didnít even try to clear the wrecks

Panzer

panzermk2
12-13-2005, 12:32 AM
We got lots of wheels! road wheels anyway

FreeManDan
12-28-2005, 02:44 PM
This I believe is the vehicle the dingo will be replacing
http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/6140/deletmeg9wq.th.jpg

And here is another combat unimog, it's smaller, older, and I think Austrian (or Slovakian, or what ever they call the country these days).
http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/4744/deletmeau2bz.th.jpg

See the background, war machines are very logistical, but I think others would know more than me.
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/4394/deletmeau24ew.th.jpg

And another Pro to tires is you donít mess up roads as bad with front and rear wheal steering (IMO an important courtesy when peace keeping, and not to destroy what little good will towards America there is in the world) though I donít think the striker has front and rear wheal steering :confused: derr, so whatís the point to wheals on the striker? Are new roads and new tires cheaper than 4 wheal steering on a 6x6?
http://img447.imageshack.us/img447/8370/delettank6hd.th.jpg












Me and my die hard thread deserve a monkey :MM

EDIT: shrunk pics to make DmL5 a happy mod.

The Deviant
12-28-2005, 04:59 PM
And here is another combat unimog, it's smaller, older, and I think Austrian (or Slovakian, or what ever they call the country these days).
http://www.bmlv.gv.at/images_skaliert/07_dispute_03_768x555_1134570404.jpg


That's no Unimog, it's a Pinzgauer. They *are* made by Styer though... :)

I have a soft spot for Unimogs and Pinzgauers, so I figured I'd clarify. *ME=car nerd

Cold war surplus in CO had one I had my eye on at one point in time... Ahh the memories... *Tear

FreeManDan
12-28-2005, 07:20 PM
You say potato; I say itís some kind of fruit in the dirt! :D Dirt fruit I call it. :MM Just kidding, you have given me something to Google and come up with Canadian beef first than the actual car! Thanks Deviant, but would you say that they are more or less the same mechanically? This is burning my brain with curiosity, I want to get under the hood and slide under one of both to check out the drivetrain.

Link To Car (http://www.swissarmyvehicles.com/vehicles.php)

Link To BEEF Ha Ha Ha! (http://www.pinzgauer.ca/history.html)

The Deviant
12-28-2005, 08:08 PM
You say potato; I say itís some kind of fruit in the dirt! :D Dirt fruit I call it. Thanks Deviant, but would you say that they are more or less the same mechanically? This is burning my brain with curiosity, I want to get under the hood and slide under one of both to check out the drivetrain.


Exactly... :)

They are both good IMHO. I know the Pinzgauer I looked at had adjustable regulators for all of the tire pressures, but I don't know if that was an 'add on' or not. I liked the Unimog better, but they make so dang many configurations that I couldn't say for the others. Either way though, the Unimog and Pinzgauers are my vote(s). :)

N.Franklin
12-28-2005, 09:06 PM
Man, Strikers are after my time. Looks like allot more room for the 11B's in the striker, but it's at least 2 ft higher. armor on armor condition that 2 feet would make for a heck of a target. And I still am not hot on the all wheels. I know its lower main. and cheaper to make. I just like the ability to neutral steer the hell out of trouble but for what they do and are I guess wheels are ok. But man what a target for an RPG or a T80 series they are out there. That thing would be a b**** to keep in a hull down position
Panzer

I wish I stil had the pics, when the Stryker was first brought to Iraq by 2nd ID's SBCT to Balad, they had bolted/welded on a cage around the vehicle that would keep the RPG's blast 2 feet or so from the body of the vehicle, neutralizing it. A RPG can be stopped by a chainlink fence, although what they had installed would work more than once. My Humvee was ugly, it wasnt until the trip back down from Tikrit to Kuwait that we actually drove it with doors on. It was a tan 4 door soft top that we had later acquired a fiberglass shell for the roof that was green with shiney steel tool box/BII doors on the rear sides and the rear flipped up like the window on a pickup topper, only it was also shiney steel. Besides the sandbags that were required on the floor, we had cut up a kevlar blanket made for the cargo LMTV trucks so that it would hang inside and outside of the soft doors through the window, and was sandwiched on between two pieces of plywood and painted black. We had 4x4s going down the length of the truck in the center with a Hemmet seat ratchet strapped in between the rear seats and a hole cut in the roof for our 249 guy. If you saw it you would instantly think mad maxx, but thats how it was in 03'/04' for the first OIF rotation. Most of our trucks had either the soft doors with 1/4 steel plate hanging outside on hangers made by our welders, or the hard doors with the steel plates bolted through the doors, nothing painted, most of this steel was orange with surface rust. We had people strapping SAPI plates next to their heads hoping it would help. That drive was the most boring 2 days Ive ever spent on a convoy, but thats good. When we got to Kuwait, all that stuff got tossed when we drove through Camp Victory and then went to a Kuwaiti Natl Guard post to hit the washracks and turn in our vehicles for the Navy to ship, then we came home to Ft Hood.

panzermk2
12-29-2005, 12:37 AM
FYI Modern tracks don't tear up roads at all. The hard rubber road blocks see to that. That's why tankers are always changing them.
Just the weight of the tracked vehicle results in the damage.
About the only way with modern tracks is to do a non-stop nuetral steer in the same spot and have it be sub-standard road bed or just the weight that breaks it down

FreeManDan
03-03-2006, 10:28 PM
Here is a pic of an odd looking vehicle currently in use with Army combat engineers in Iraq
http://myspace-464.vo.llnwd.net/00518/46/41/518621464_l.jpg
If you are wondering where I got this pic, I got it from, THE FUTURE; on one of my many visits there.

This thread will never die! :MM

panzermk2
03-04-2006, 12:11 AM
looks like a struck out striker on the back to

FATBOY
03-04-2006, 02:01 AM
I was a Combat Engineer (12B) and we had to carry ALOT of stuff. I drove both wheeled and tracked. (wheeled was a 5ton from the 50's) The M113 carried our stuff and soldiers way better. I drove in Korea and Fort Hood TX, so I had all kinds of surfaces. On ice the 113 is a 13ton sled. I know I slid about 75 meters down a hill, scary but cool. I would say the platform for what I did tracks worked great. I never threw a track. It's a big refrigerator in the winter though. haha

panzermk2
03-04-2006, 01:16 PM
I was a Combat Engineer (12B) and we had to carry ALOT of stuff. I drove both wheeled and tracked. (wheeled was a 5ton from the 50's) The M113 carried our stuff and soldiers way better. I drove in Korea and Fort Hood TX, so I had all kinds of surfaces. On ice the 113 is a 13ton sled. I know I slid about 75 meters down a hill, scary but cool. I would say the platform for what I did tracks worked great. I never threw a track. It's a big refrigerator in the winter though. haha


Me to although I was 3rd CAV at Ft. Bliss before the moved.
11th CAV Germany so I have seen 62ton ice sleds to :D

And yes I am of the mind that the PepsiCan is way better then the striker. They could have put the electronics in it, but like I said before congress don't make money from contractors upgrading a current paid for system as much as they get for new ones

Got piercing?
03-13-2006, 01:56 AM
I have very scientific reasons for voting for the Dingo on this one.

A) It's based on the Unimog and Germans know how to make stuff. I know, Germans made me.

2) The guy I bought my FiveseveN from sold it because he needed new tires for his Unimog.

Gamma) It looks really really cool! So much cooler then a hummer.

So there you have it! Obvious choice. I hope my reasoning doesn't go over anybodies heads. :D

FreeManDan
03-20-2006, 09:27 PM
Who wants to change their vote to a Mardi Gras vehicle? :MM

http://www.armychic256bde.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/float3.jpg
http://www.armychic256bde.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/hummerdecorated.jpg
http://www.armychic256bde.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/float19.jpg
http://www.armychic256bde.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/float20.jpg

:D :D :D

EDIT: I was hasty to post, this needs its own thread

panzermk2
03-20-2006, 10:46 PM
works for me and soldiers are rolling in them

FreeManDan
03-23-2006, 07:53 PM
http://myspace-854.vo.llnwd.net/00388/45/88/388648854_l.jpg

I have no idea what it is, just that it's big and cool looking

panzermk2
03-24-2006, 12:19 AM
South African MFG, mine resistant personal carrier? I do believe its a Casspir Mine Protected Armoured Personnel Carrier

SilentType
03-24-2006, 02:53 PM
They shouldn't have to roll in anything all that often. A vehicle version of the UAV should be in place where support vehicles carrying supplies could deliver items without human drivers. They already have had cars driven by computers with aid of GPS complete 12 miles without any human assistance. That would seriously cut down the number of IED deaths by limiting human exposure. Not saying that an entire convoy could be automated but you could automate half the vehicles in it leaving the humans in the most armored vehicles such as Strikers.

FreeManDan
03-25-2006, 10:35 PM
I donít by it, not for a second! Some unmanned delivery truck will never replace a seabee or combat engineer. And every one should know, if the media will be so kind as to let them, that IEDs are only 10% of the casualties in Iraq. Data was only a cool caricature in STAR TREK! And I saw that DARPA junk, some of those androids drove worse than my grandma! I would put a first sergeant in the driverís seat before I put in popular sciences latest cover peace.

http://www.darpa.mil/grandchallenge05/grandchallengephotos/gcpics100805/dsc_4567.jpg

Tangent time! Russian pilots admire American fighter jets, but think of them as a joke. They donít think they are rugged enough for dirty environments that total war brings. I had a friend in high school who wanted to work on military jets, he got what he wanted; now he hates it. Walking up and down the runway for hours, keeping it surgically sterile of any debris.
Any ways, I wouldnít let the latest Samsung phone drive my jeep in a war zone, and when the military finally does have that technology, we will be fighting aliens :SS

FreeManDan
03-25-2006, 10:48 PM
http://www.androidworld.com/index.htm

This guys wife does my taxesÖÖ.I still donít buy into some of the military theories for android aplications.










The horse is dead, but my thread isnít! :horse:

I love these new icons