"Consensus That US Needs New Tank For Pacific" Topic
51 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 use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.
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 Profile Article
Featured Movie Review
|
Pages: 1 2
Legion 4 | 17 Nov 2023 9:59 a.m. PST |
They do, mate, but they're big, though. Still, they're a fighting vehicle, not a battle taxi like the old tracks. Yep, I think more & more the APC has been or will supersede the APC. In many armies as time goes on … But as usual it comes down $ … As we see with the IDF as it is still using M113s in many units. I was Airborne infantry we had no vehicles after we dropped and had to hump all our gear. When I was with the 101 Air Assault[formerly Airborne] Div. We had a few vehicles but primarily once on the ground we walked … and walked, etc. The 101 became an Air Assault Div, taken off jump status some time after Vietnam. But many of us had two sets of wings, Airborne and Air Assault. Either way you did a lot of walking. I was a Plt Ldr then Bn Air Ops Officer. But eventually after I rotated out of the 101, I commanded an M113 Mech Co. Spent a whole lot of time "catering to those Iron Monsters" … However even as a Mech Inf Cdr after my experiences in the 101. We did some dismounted missions too. However, yep … why walk when you can ride …? |
Pages: 1 2
|