One of my Cavalry Values in Maneuver, so the reason I prefer mechanized over wheeled is for the ability to move effectively and with speed off road.Originally Posted by Ken White
Size and weight problem. Several places are working on
a repair / limp home kit. They'll figure it out sooner rather than later, I think.
One of my Cavalry Values in Maneuver, so the reason I prefer mechanized over wheeled is for the ability to move effectively and with speed off road.
On Diversity as a strength in Cavalry
Good point, friend, having it all in the kit bag would be great.
I recall when we had Tracks, PCs, 1/4 ton Trucks, 2 & 1/2 ton Trucks, 5 ton Trucks, & Heavy, Medium & Light Tanks, Half-tracks, motorcycles, horses & armored cars.
A Generation ago the Armor Officer's Basic Course taught about five weapons platforms; Stuart, Lee, Gavin, Patton, Sherman, Chafee, Walker & more inclusive. Today there's nothing between the Abrams & the HMMWV at the UMW's Basic Course & the HMMWV is only touched on. Strykers are POI'd directly to the units with great consternation, although they're slowly moving to the school house.
As a Cavalryman operating in OIF today I find myself drawing on experience with the older weapons platforms & in some instances missing them.
In the case of maneuver maybe there really is strength in diversity.
Did you really just do that? We just call it a one one three or Track around these parts
Reed
methodology and thinking of how to build a new armored vehicle
A short and insightful read. Survival Consultants Intl CEO David Woroner raises some food for thought at his website, Defense Tech and at Breach Bang Clear's Blog.
There's even a para or two on Tires vs. Track at the blog link.
Tires vs. Tread, how will they move? This would seem to be a no-brainer, but I have to add it in. ... They’ll bog down far less frequently, and they can turn and maneuver far more effectively in urban terrain than anything with wheels.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
CV90 ... about 8 psi ground pressure.
M1 Abrams ... about 15 psi.
Patria AMV (the best 8x8 in my eyes) ... about 35psi. More than a heavy truck.
8x8 should be outlawed for anything that comes in direct contact with the enemy (as long as this planet is not one huge parking lot). And for CS/CSS why not take a truck?
6x6 is something for a constabulary and para-mil units.
Bandwagon are not so good over boulders.
So far CV90 shows the way to go.
Will see what BAE/Hagglunds SEP will do. Is it still alive?
Roadwheels
Stupid idea from a guy not seriously following the discussion-
Design the vehicle roadwheels to displace adequate ground pressure and exert sufficient clearance to be towed or driven without tow on a hard-surface. Carry extra roadwheels as spaced armor ala' German tanks and Stugs in W.W.II. If the vehicle can reach a reasonable hard surface, off it goes to get the rubber band thingy replaced. Crew needs proficiency replacing a roadwheel (if lost)-not a rubberband track.
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski, a.k.a. "The Dude"
Tracked vehicles usually only need to power a single wheel per side to move forward - and that's usually not even one of those that carry the weight, but the first or last wheel - one that merely turns the track around (sorry, I don't know the English terms). That's a very simple mechanism and this simplicity is one of the tracked vehicles' advantages.
Your system would require the roadwheels to be powered (at least one per side) - that might happen with electric drive, but isn't common today (there were such convertible tire/track combos like yours in the late 1920's and 1930's, especially the Christie designs).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christie_suspension
Another feature of Christie's designs was the "convertible" drive: the ability to remove the tracks for road travel, allowing for higher speeds and better range, and saving wear and tear on the fragile caterpillar track systems of the 1930s. In order to allow this, Christie used very large rubber-rimmed road wheels, with no return rollers for the tracks. As with many track designs with center guide teeth, dual wheels were used, allowing the guide teeth to run between them. By 1939, the Soviets found that the BT tank's convertible drive was an unnecessary complication which also occupied valuable space in the tank, and the feature was dropped in the T-34.
Wow, Bullmoose, you must be older than I am...
Your five weapons platforms are the M5 Light series (1941-46); the M3 Medium series (1940-1943); the M113 series -- which was NEVER named the Gavin other than by Mike Sparks and is a name not used by anyone in the Armed Forces that I've heard or read -- (1959-to date); the M26, M47, M48, M60 Medium series (1949-1991); the M4 Medium series (1942-52); the M24 Light series (1943-1953) and the M41 Light series (1951-1969). Surprising to think AOBC taught all those at the same time. That looks like three generations to me. The tracks of a generation ago would seem to be the M60 and the M113 series only. In fact, since I was an AOBC instructor a generation ago, I distinctly remember those were the vehicles used...
More notable is your comment that you recall Halftracks, Horses and Armored Cars. All those pre date me; I can recall them, of course, but am too young to have operated with them -- and I'm over 75. Yet, you're a Cavalryman operating in OIF today. Amazing.
I saw also your comment that:Good for you. Then this appeared:"As long as I still get to wear my stetson I can abide the ASU."Infantry and not Cavalry? That sort of confused me. So did the use of the word zone."Worked closely in zone with an ESFS that was assigned to my Infantry Battalion in OIF. That ESFS conducted itself very well essentially carrying out a textbook COIN Operation in the area."
However, I'm old and do get confused often. For example, this statement boggled my little mind:Read it four times and still have no idea what it says..."Very useful graphics. You've given me some infights on what to brief in an upcoming OPD here in OIF. I see much related to yours & COL Mansoor's work that applies to the upcoming PH IV of this op.
Then I saw this from you:You are indeed a man of many parts..."As a business leader myself I take the lesson that a corporation, like a man, can be good or evil."
Oh crap, don't tell me Mike Sparks has recruited some disciples to espouse his "Gospel of Gavin"...I felt much safer when I thought that he was isolated and alone.
When I die, I want my last words to have been "Hold my beer and watch this."
OK I won't tell you......but try to google military reform ,or heck, even military and see how many Sparky pages come up. My introduction to military forum communication was el' Sparky and still have some poor communication skills I learned there. Nearly as bad are the news groups. In fact there are alot of high noise to content "military" forums out there. Praise the moderators and your co-contributers for the sane wonderfulness that is SWJ.Oh crap, don't tell me Mike Sparks has recruited some disciples to espouse his "Gospel of Gavin"...
Reed
The Internet is a good thing, but mostly it is a bad thing, as the Sparks thing demonstrates.
He cloaked himself in a veil of impenetrable terminology.
The internet is pretty much a neutral thing that can be used for either good or evil. We lean more toward the good here, and leave the other for the Sparkies of the world. But it does allow those sad and alone types to find other sads and alones and form bonds of a sort that we'd best not explore too deeply....
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Heh, while we are off-topic, I have to thank you for that quote, Steve (and JKM_101_FSO).
I end up using it on at least a twice-weekly basis - it's just so... accurate...
off topic but response follows:
Thanks for your commentary & insights from your personal experience.
The 5 weapons platforms are the ones that a former Squadron Commander of mine told me he trained on at AOB, c. mid sixties. I expect some variableness in models and individual experience. Do you agree with my point as to our loss of diversity in platform application ?
In reply to my present Infantry Affiliation, it sort of confuses us on a daily basis too so you're not alone in that. Our Troop presently works for an Infantry Batallion, apparently common in a Task Force scheme. So does a USAF ESFS in our case so we're quite diverse; AF Blue, INF Blue & CAV yellow......puke green ?
On my somewhat controversial usage of the name Gavin/Zelda & others for the M113, its an evolution of my desire and the great human instinct to name things that are dear to them instead of numbering them. That track is so dear to me that it would be like calling a child by their social security number. So you understand my desire to name it just like other vehicles are named. This is just my own preference my own style & I do not request anyone else conform. Isn't freedom of thought great.
In my experience Troopers name a great deal of things a great deal of names, weapons, vehicles, platforms...mostly after Indian tribes, battles, heroes & such things, although I agree that everyone's experience is different.
"Very useful graphics. You've given me some infights on what to brief in an upcoming OPD here in OIF. I see much related to yours & COL Mansoor's work that applies to the upcoming PH IV of this op."
What I mean here is that I would be using the graphic for a brief, with proper citation & credit given of course...
For the sake of staying on topic I personally would appreciate it if you addressed "dead-agentism" or source impeachment questions that are off topic via messaging to my account. Then I could respond without opening myself up to "being off topic".
The thread topics here are areally good and deserved to be respected.
Zelda is the official IDF name. Unlike Gavin. Zelda rolls off the tongue better than "Mem-Achad, Achad, Shalosh" in Hebrew. All IDF vehicles have names as opposed to numbers. ...some of them very odd names at that!
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
This is on topic...
Not really, excess diversity creates massive logistic burdens.I wasn't confused so much as I thought you were trying to 'embellish' your persona. Still do.In reply to my present Infantry Affiliation, it sort of confuses us on a daily basis too so you're not alone in that.Yes to your question; foolishness with respect to calling the M113 a 'Gavin.' However, I suspect you and Mike would agree on other things as well.On my somewhat controversial usage of the name Gavin/Zelda & others for the M113...Isn't freedom of thought great.I have absolutely no desire to have any personal contact with you. This is a public board and while I generally ignore most inane items, I may feel the urge to comment on occasion.For the sake of staying on topic I personally would appreciate it if you addressed "dead-agentism" or source impeachment questions that are off topic via messaging to my account. Then I could respond without opening myself up to "being off topic".We can agree on that. They are worthwhile and might I suggest that you can aid in keeping them that way by making an attempt to stay factual, avoid religious discussion and stop dredging up old and dead threads to make obscure points just so you can write something. All those transgressions are, of course, in my opinion...The thread topics here are areally good and deserved to be respected.
Ken you are correct about the diversity of platforms. It does create certain logistical issues. We, my unit that is, presently have no less than four models of MRAPs each with their own planning considerations. I find the RG33 the best suited all around although I would like a rear gunner position.
I've heard
the RG33 has some minor maintenance problems but is otherwise great.
In any event, while I can from a distance appreciate the benefit of all MRAPs for the troops, I think we've got another case of rushing something into production in response to media pressure and thus not getting a good product much less the optimum solution due to the haste. One of our recurring national shortfalls...
It also annoys me that many other nations started working on MRAP-like solutions a number of years before we did. We did not do so due to the desire to avoid situations where such vehicles would be of use. Unfortunately, the Armed forces don't get to pick where or how to fight...
Very true...the RG33 has some minor maintenance problems but is otherwise great.
In any event, while I can from a distance appreciate the benefit of all MRAPs for the troops, I think we've got another case of rushing something into production in response to media pressure and thus not getting a good product much less the optimum solution due to the haste. One of our recurring national shortfalls...
It also annoys me that many other nations started working on MRAP-like solutions a number of years before we did. We did not do so due to the desire to avoid situations where such vehicles would be of use. Unfortunately, the Armed forces don't get to pick where or how to fight...
These effects have placed us in the interesteing scenario of postulating as to whether we'll be concluding OIF with an outstanding fleet of excellent new vehicles or a fleet of niched overweight pillboxes on wheels which are sickeningly inbuilt with obsalescence since they by their very nature recommend new tactics to enemy actors.
I personally see many future applications for them as security, logistics, DV and diplomacy vehicles in theatres such as the Balkans and Africa.
I like that about our Israeli friends.
Americans, I personally feel, also prefer names for everything over numbers which is why we have so many unofficial names; Hummer, Huey, Fat Albert, DRUT, Lead Sled, Zipper, Missile With A Man, Sled, Widowmaker & others. Some are almost universally misused; i.e. Huey, some less so i.e. Gavin, both equally incorrect technical names: UH-1"Iroquois" & M113.
Nicknames are a neat little part of our national propensity for endearment.
Last edited by Jedburgh; 01-21-2009 at 08:20 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks