"Marines Have a 'Tank' Problem" Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench ArticleAdam8472 takes inspiration from Doctor Who.
Featured Profile Article
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Editor in Chief Bill | 07 Sep 2021 7:02 p.m. PST |
The Marine Corps on Friday halted waterborne operations for its new amphibious vehicle that resembles an armored seafaring tank after identifying a problem with its towing mechanism… Military: link |
Thresher01 | 07 Sep 2021 8:36 p.m. PST |
So, they have to be tow-trucks too now, and that feature isn't working? I'm not sure the AAVs hatches not opening when submerged underwater is a "design defect". Seems to me it is more like just basic physics. Of course, perhaps they can design the hatches so that the troops can get out if the vehicle sinks, though if that occurs in anything other than very shallow water, the issue WILL be moot anyway in most cases. Amphibious landings and war are a dangerous business. |
arealdeadone | 07 Sep 2021 10:05 p.m. PST |
I (and other people more clever than me) still haven't figured out how this contraption fits in with the new doctrine of small groups of marines lobbing anti ship missiles from islands. It appears to be a left over from when the Marines were still hypothetically doing contested landings. Those landings are much harder to do now due to: 1. Loss of tanks 2. Loss of engineering capabilities 3. Reduction in battalion sizes with far fewer infantry. 4. Considerable reductions in number of attack and transport helos. 5. Loss of conventional artillery once the landing force establishes a beach head. and, 6. Yet to be specified reductions in USMC tactical airpower (under review) |
Legion 4 | 08 Sep 2021 10:47 a.m. PST |
Those landings are much harder to do now due to:1. Loss of tanks 2. Loss of engineering capabilities 3. Reduction in battalion sizes with far fewer infantry. 4. Considerable reductions in number of attack and transport helos. 5. Loss of conventional artillery once the landing force establishes a beach head. Yes on this we can agree. But the US ARMY has all those capabilities. As we have done before, the ARMY may have to attach those assets to the USMC. We had USMC attached to us in the ROK. They were pretty good troops. They didn't have their own transport after they landed in CH-53s(?). So we put'm on the back of the M60 Tanks we got from the Tank Bn. |
Zephyr1 | 08 Sep 2021 9:10 p.m. PST |
"(…) its new amphibious vehicle that resembles an armored seafaring tank after identifying a problem with its towing mechanism…" There's something wrong with the design if it needs to be towed into action… [/sarcasm off] |
Thresher01 | 09 Sep 2021 10:12 a.m. PST |
Actually, I don't see this as a REAL problem, given their new shift to a smaller, lighter "footprint" for their forces. With that, they REALLY don't need or want tanks I suspect (at least the leadership doesn't – grunts may still), since that would just load and slow them down, and make them a higher priority target for the enemy. With a smaller, lighter footprint, I see the US Marines now as a light-weight, raiding force, simmilar to our light infantry, and other units. They'll be better at inserting without being detected, avoiding direct conflict with heavier forces, and using assymmetrical power to take on their opponents. If they can control, and/or guide long-range, over the horizon missiles, and other weaponry, they'll still help our military pack a mighty punch, for little cost. Hopefully, they'll be one of the first forces to get those small, agile, VTOL jetbikes that are being developed for our troops and armed forces. |
Legion 4 | 10 Sep 2021 5:57 p.m. PST |
I see your point, so now the Corps is more like the WWII UK Commandos. We'll have to see how this works out. The Army has a number of Light Infantry units already too. |
Thresher01 | 12 Sep 2021 4:00 a.m. PST |
That's the way it seems to me. US Army Rangers, and/or LRRPs seems to be the model they're going after. Small, powerful, agile, elite force multipliers seems to be the new paradigm they are going for, from what little I've read, and ALL the budget and equipment cuts they're making and have made. |
Legion 4 | 12 Sep 2021 10:18 a.m. PST |
Yes, it seems so … this light raider approach is cheaper of course. But yes the USMC will be more like the RANGERs with this concept. So we will have to see … Let's hope it does not cost us … Oh wait, the war in A'stan is over. What was I thinking ? |
|