Retired General Slams Army For Failure To Release Armored Gun System
Combat Casuals, High Speed Low Drag Embroidery
Support the community!
Paratrooper.net Commo Room
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On
Welcome Guest ( Login | Register )
        


««12

Retired General Slams Army For Failure To Release Armored... Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted 9/9/2004 7:17 AM


Stare Master

Stare Master

Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 3:20 PM
Posts: 9,889, Visits: 54,093
I think that in the 82nd, 101st, 10th Mountain and 25th ID(as well as smaller size light units) the Army needs to add another company, E Company for each battalion. This company would be similar to Delta Troop, 1-509th. There would be one platoon of M-8 AGS or similar light armor.

There would also be three platoons of M-113A3 Gavins. However, the company would not have any internal scouts or grunts. The Gavins would be used to transport elements of the line companies as needed. This would give each battalion internal armor support and mobility for at least part of the battalion.

For missions requiring one or more battalions to be used the divisions would be able to call upon Easy company from each of the brigades battalions, or from more than one brigade, to move quickly over the ground. Additional troops could be transported in a follow on convoy of HUMVEES, air assaulted by division aviation assets and/or by leather transport.


Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American GI.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

"History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over." COLONEL BULL SIMONS

Post #140014
Posted 9/9/2004 8:24 AM


Seasoned Vet

Seasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned Vet

Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/7/2005 7:22 PM
Posts: 6,666, Visits: 289

Roger that Barry.  That's a concept I have been pushing for the 82nd now for the past 3 years.

That concept came close to happening in the early 70's to the 1st CAV Division when they returned from RVN.  They were going to have a Bde on jump status with Sheridans and M-113s.  However this was dropped in favor of the short lived 'Tri-Cap' concept in 1974.

Post #140029
Posted 9/9/2004 6:23 PM


Seasoned Vet

Seasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned VetSeasoned Vet

Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 6/10/2006 7:52 AM
Posts: 4,296, Visits: 382
you can never have enough Sheridans in any unit!

Make The Voices Stop!
Post #140185
Posted 9/10/2004 12:20 AM


Detachment Sergeant

Detachment SergeantDetachment SergeantDetachment SergeantDetachment SergeantDetachment SergeantDetachment SergeantDetachment SergeantDetachment Sergeant

Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 8/7/2008 5:06 PM
Posts: 3,684, Visits: 680
If only there were a Sheridan in my unit!  Perhaps things wouldn't be so dull. 

   ALWAYS OUT FRONT
Post #140218
Posted 9/11/2004 5:21 PM


Hard Charger

Hard Charger

Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:53 PM
Posts: 1,701, Visits: 1,334

Gen.Grange is my kind of officer,he is one bad MUTHER FU*KER AND HE TELLS IT LIKE IT IS

 

 



MIKE LANSAW        

 

Post #140458
Posted 9/12/2004 2:53 AM


Air Force Liaison/P.Net Original Cast of Characters

Air Force Liaison/P.Net Original Cast of Characters

Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 1:26 AM
Posts: 3,426, Visits: 9,099

"Grange suggested that Stryker variants are not practical for airdrop and rapid deployment missions if they can only be delivered by C-17. "The [C-]130 is intra-theater," he said. "C-17s are great, if you have enough of them. But as you know, there's a finite number of them. And they are more inter-theater instead of intratheater."

Well hell, there are a finite number of C-130 too. You can't get anymore intra-theater than sitting on an Al Udied rotation for three weeks hauling trash around the AOR, like I have done several times.

The C-17 is not here to replace the C-130, but to fill in the gaps that the C-130 cannot cover, two cases in point, the personnel airdrop over Northern Iraq and the forced Air Assualts into Objective Rhino. The C-130 could not go point to point due to its limited range and cargo capacity.

We are just as capable if not more so to land on rough airfields and/or dirt airstrips. Ask the Joes who we airland onto Holland DZ or Bicycle Lake or other points of interest.

The C-17 can carry more cargo weight on its RAMP than the entire four fan trash can can carry in its guts.

As for the limited number, we all know the numbers have been ramped up. In a few years the C-17 will be as common as the C-130s.

Nothing gives Joe a better warm fuzzy than when they are sitting on a ramp somewhere and a C-17 comes in on a SAAF, then stops in less than 1500 feet, three point turns around on a 90 foot wide runway, back taxis, then shits out two M-2s ready to rock and roll, then takes off in less than 1000 feet.

Who did that???

ME!!!!!!! In Triana, Albania during that little Kosovo thingy.

Did the C-130s play?? Not until they could move their birds in closer.

Okay, rant over. Carry on.

 



Big Al!

LOAD CLEAR! LOAD CLEAR!

Your Job is my Hobby!

 

Post #140471
Posted 9/12/2004 10:39 PM


Seasoned Vet

Seasoned Vet

Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 12/27/2008 9:05 AM
Posts: 3,382, Visits: 1,313
Say Al, you know what would impress me about a C-17? Sexy loadmasters in tightfitting low necked ramp rompers handing out peanuts and cold drinks from a beverage cart while I watch an in-flight movie. Of course a decent crapper instead of an uncomfort pallet would be welcomed as well. Please pass my suggestions on up the Chain to whoever is responsible for such things. Hope to be back in the land of the jumping soon.

Stand in the door! 

                                     

                                                                                          

Post #140568
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

««12