Re: The new US Army APC the "Stinger" (Stryker)

--- Scott Siebold <gamers@ameritech.net> wrote:

BTW, in the future, if you're going to respond to my
last 2 paragraphs and ignore the first 12 paras, then
snip what you're not responding to.

> Lets see, the light divisions were formed as a fast
> reaction force that 
> could
> be transported in about 2/3 of the airlift as the
> airborne / airmoble 
> divisions.

IMHO, light divisions are a symptom of testosterone
poisoning on the part of infantry officers.

Light infantry divisions suck ass for anything besides
jungles and maybe mountains.

Finally, with the IBCT, there's a prospect of
motorizing the last of our non-airborne divisions.

> The only problem was that without APC's the light
> divisions are not good
> for mobile war where artillery becomes extremely
> dangerous.

They're no good for any kind of conventional war.

> light division and flesh it out for a mobile war. As
> a side light the 
> Tiger brigade
> (Ft Knox training cadre?) was attached to the
> Marines to give them more
> firepower in the Gulf war.

Guess those LAVs weren't enough.

> >Blackhawks (You may not have heard of them, I'm not
> >
> The only problem with the Blackhawk or the UH-1 is
> that if you do not 
> control
> the air then they get to play a new game "duck or
> die" 

Welcome to the United States.

We own the air over any piece of the planet we choose.
 Maybe, just maybe if we took on the Israelis we might
have disputed air superiority until they ran out of
US-manufactured spares for their F-16s.  No other Air
Force on the planet is capable of matching quality of
planes, quantity of planes, and level of pilot
training.

(The quote is 
> from one
> of my wargame friends who was  flying a recon copter
> at Fort Sill and I
> suspect he was at the Gulf war). The estimates I
> heard at the time was 
> that Sadam
> could contest the air over his forces for at least 2
> to 3 weeks after he 
> invaded
> Kuwait.

Reality check:	Saddamn couldn't contest the air over
his own country for 6 hours.

> >sure if they were in inventory by '81.  Replaced
> >UH-1s).  Since the LAV can't be pushed out the back
> of
> >a C-130 with a parachute, the 82nd wouldn't have
> had
> >'em.  They aren't anywhere on the list to recieve
> >
> So the M551 Sheridan	can be pushed out of a C130. I

Yes.  They have been and were repeatedly.

> The armored bn. was supposed to receive the "light
> tank" but the program
> went to the same way as the  Army LAV. I guess they
> solved the problem
> by removing the armored bn. from the division.

Actually, the M-8 AGS (NOT a light tank) was cancelled
to pay for Bosnia because it was ordered by the Pres
and Congress refused to appropriate to fund it.

Your point re: 2 LAVs per squad is fine, but the Army
doesn't have the manning levels to man infantry
platoons to 100% as it is.  Double the size of
platoons (3-man crew, 8 vehicles, and 30 dismounts,
and you're talking over 50 men per platoon) and
they'll never man them.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free