Prev: Re: Attack vs. MultiRole Next: OT: was GMS Air

Re: Attack vs. MultiRole

From: "Imre A. Szabo" <ias@s...>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 12:53:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Attack vs. MultiRole



"Bell, Brian K" wrote:

> I would think that shooting at something would tend to draw its
attention.
> And having drawn its attention, would draw its fire.
> And having drawn its fire, would make the primary mission of landing
> troops/cargo MUCH harder.
>
> It seems to me single mission is the way to go.
>

The US Army had some problems with this when they introduced the M2 and
M3
Bradely's.  In the early training exercises the "more survivable" M2/3's
died
faster and more often then the M113's they replaced.  Why?  Because the
crews
were picking fights with MBT's...  I'm not sure how or if the US Army
resolved
this situation.

IAS

Prev: Re: Attack vs. MultiRole Next: OT: was GMS Air