Jump to content

Mislovrit

Members
  • Posts

    467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mislovrit

  1. Thats exactly my point, embedded UCAVs have the potential of opening up this question, particularly if they come down in price. Such assets (commanded at the Battalion or Company level) makes it alot more difficult for the Air Force to argue that such capability should be their domain, when the army can legitimately say that its more efficient if they control things on the ground rather than a command link to Nevada like it is now.
    U.S. Army doesn't care where where the UCAV controllers are, as long as they're theirs.. Moving the UCAV control like was you said runs into the likely problem of micromanagement.
  2. stick to the oribinal Shirow Manga... I never understand why they just don't use shirow's designs... The only one that ever got it right was the Black Magic M-66 OVA.
    Black Magic M-66 OVA and GitS: SAC worked well given Shirow himself was involved in their production, moreso with M-66.
  3. You know, with the zillion F-4/14/15/16's in the boneyard--couldn't we win just about any aerial situation through sheer numbers of reactivated planes? It seems the F-22 etc are always needed for some "ultimate showdown with a large, advanced enemy"---but frankly nobody has the sheer numbers we have available. I'd gladly send a thousand old F-4's against the largest Flanker fleet in the world, and expect to win.
    David in an "ultimate showdown with a large, advanced enemy" those planes just as well don't exist as time, industrial capability to get them up to nuff, and warm bodies to fly them just isn't there.
  4. or the 60+ ton Crusader SP Artillery... which would have been useless against the insurgents.
    Revised version was 40 tons before the program was canceled, and would have been the most advanced SPG in service in the world. Artillery is deadly effective against the insurgents.
  5. If you ever see an FSU tank in person, their small size will amaze. They're tiny compared to the Abrams.
    What tank, I keep getting web pages for Florida State Uni instead of the tank.

    The 60 is nice and roomy on the inside but that thin armor and high profile make me very uncomfy.
    The M60 did have nice ergonomics thanks to the large size, in addition to higher vantage point, wider range with the gun elevation and depression. M60 did have moderately thick armor especially when compare to the Leopard I, only the British Chieftain made them look thin.

    Some of the old schoolers (the Marines kept the M60s all the way through Desert Storm so many of the top staff NCO/officers are still biased) still swear by those things, amazingly enough.
    I heard the same thing which may have been true in the mid 80ies to maybe ODS, but afterward, even they rather be in a M1A1 instead of a M60A1/3.

    but that multi piece ammo sounds like a major PITA, especially when things get chaotic in a fire fight....
    to single piece users it may look like it is PITA but for two piece users it nothing.
  6. So much for the 60s being dumped in the Gulf of Mexico. Michael Bay has them.
    The U.S. sold a butt load of M48s and M60s before Clinton got elected and even some more before he wrote the order to dump the majority of the remainder into the Gulf. Most of the Pattons seen in movies for the past couple of decade unless otherwise noted are usually someone else's than Uncle Sam's.
  7. We need an M1 based recovery vehicle far more than a flame tank (I was actually envisioning using M60 or tuna boat chassis myself.
    Already got an M1 based recovery vehicle the Grizzly, whether or not the Army actually bother to ask for any and got them is another story.

    The flechette-filled beehive round would be second to none for massed concentrations of troops, though. Git'r Done!
    Have to made do with tungsten ball-bearings in the canister round.
  8. An M1 Flamethrower tank variant? ^_^
    No point as thermobaric weapons made them redundant.

    Heck, there's still tons of M60A3's laying about.
    At the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.

    Maybe those could be converted?
    Got to find some first and even when you do nobody in the U.S. Armed Forces wants them other than range targets. More prudent to use a Brad chassis instead.

    But yeah, the US used to be a firm believer in fire.
    Not so much after the M202A1 FLASH debacle.
  9. One thing that would be useful is to bring back the beehive round. That and flame tanks, maybe... but neither are considered very humane these days. Which makes me all the more for them. :D
    The Abrams already got the canister rounds through the Pentagon and/or Congress have been screwing with the procurement of it and the most of the ones that do bought tend to get stolen by the REMFs once in theater.

    Flamethrowers are still technically legal, but they're discontinue were they're genuinely unhealthy for the users.

  10. Replace the main gun with MGs??
    No point to doing that when 1 or 2 plus ammo can easily be mounted on top of the gun mantle ala like what the Israelis do with their Merkeva tanks. Trying to add more MG to inside the turret while removing the 120mm would almost require a completely new turret design to accommodate the change.

    Nuh uh.. I`m sure a 120mm comes in plenty handy to take out buildings and bunkers being used as fighting positions.
    Moreso with HE rounds if the Pentagon would ever bother to buy some as well as more canister rounds
  11. There is a chance that combat-ready test models were in the field but their numbers were probably very very very very very small (I would think no more more than 10 units).
    It is not too unusual for prototypes even incomplete ones to enter combat through usually it is when hostile forces are literally on the factory's doorstep to force such an action. Another would be one Govt, cheaper to give away then to scrape, simply hands them off to another Govt. who is desperate for any working hardware.
  12. Judging from the footage, looks more like an M1 turret. It could be a hybrid of both since the silhouette of the turret is too tall for M1 but too short for M60 and angles are different from either. I am sure whoever designed these tried their best to make them look original, making it far more difficult to scratch build them. B))
    That is an Abrams, badly drawn one at that.
  13. The big ole tank in the GITS movie was pimp.
    It was pimp but WTF with giving that tank practice ammo, as the Major would have been dead to rights had it had API/HEI ammunition instead,.

    There was also the similar one in Stand Alone Complex episode 2.
    Purely a COIN operation type as that stub barrel wouldn't give the projectiles the MV or the range to slug it with other tanks or AFVs.
×
×
  • Create New...