Re: [GZG] Small thought re: Orbital Assault

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l 
In a message dated 11/24/05 12:29:24 PM Central Standard Time,	
maserati@speakeasy.net writes:

Oerjan	Ariander wrote:

> You were talking about ARMOURED support above.  Generally speaking, 
> trucks and helos aren't considered to be  "armoured support" -
although 
> I've noticed that the US Army now calls  a platoon of 4xM1114 armoured

> HumVees a "motorized tank platoon", so  maybe the requirements to
count 
> as "armoured" are being softened  nowadays <g>

A "motorized tank platoon" ? Now I've heard  everything.Well, if adding 
HumVees to a leg unit makes them motorized then  I suppose using them in

an armor role makes the tank platoon motorized	too.

But if they can stand up to heavy MG fire, then against anything  but 
real tanks they can do the armor job. It makes my brain hurt, but I  
think this is actually pretty clever.

--  
<snip>

Correct me if I'm wrong but pre-1939 were the use of organic  (Integral
not 
bio-creations) trucks enough to qualify the units as  'motorized'?  Ands
the 
original purpose of WW1 tanks was that they were  designed to overcome
the MG's 
and barbed wire delaying the advance of infantry  over rough terrain
(when 
some genius turned field artillery on tanks there was a  moment when the
tank 
designers went, "Oh Shit" but that's another  thread).
 
Any chopper support is appreciated by the infantry although a Huey 
makes a 
less lasting support vehicle then a Cobra (and yada-yada-yada as to 
gunship 
types and derivations).
 
Gracias,

Glenn  "warbeads"