the last of the ferrets were off loaded after Gulf War One ..please put some context on to comments...but then again a realistic replacement has never been found
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Scorpion replacment?
Collapse
X
-
I think the upgraded Ferrets on that site were to be used in an internal security role only, in which case they would have been more than adequate. Murph is the new Iveco MLV not the spiritual successor to the Ferret? As it was used as a general run around vehicle towards it's later years.Prior preparation prevents piss poor performance.
Comment
-
Eh..no.The M1 is the spiritual successor as it is the primary tank of the Army, succeeding the M60 and all the Pershings/Pattons, all of which evolved from the M4 as the primary tank of the US Army/Marines.The M26 was developed to beat the tanks the M4 couldn't cope with(Panther/Tiger) and it's successors were evolved to beat the Russian equipment(t-34/85, T-55, T-62 and so on.Read Belton Y Coopers' book "Death traps" on the M4 and it shortcomings and the evolution of the M26.Lessons learned from the later Pattons came into being in the M1(such as crew protection against fire/ammunition protection against fire/suspension and roadwheel design).There is, IMHO, a clear lineage between the M4 and the M1.
Also, BYC's opinion was that the M4 was a compromise between the demands of the infantry, the artillery and the armoured and ended up as a weak compromise.
regards
GttC
Comment
-
The Sherman was a big improvement on British tanks of WWII. Whatever its faults - the Germans called them 'Tommy cookers' because their tendency to burn when hit; the British nickname was 'Ronsons', after the cigarette lighter - the Shermans and their Grant predecessors were the only tanks that could take on the German panzers in the North Africa campaign.
WWII showed that the British pre-war concept of having separate cruiser (cavalry) tanks and infantry support tanks, didn't work: the former were underarmoured and undergunned, the latter too slow. So the postwar fashion became Main Battle Tanks. But now it looks like tanks are going the way of battleships and bombers: the last big tank battles were 35 years ago, during the Yom Kippur War.
Comment
-
The U.S. Grant* was not suitable for taking on German Armour in the Desert and it was quickly replaced by the Sherman.
Sherman Units found out very quickly they would have to expend 3 Sherman's out of 4 to take out one Panther or Tiger.
The U.S Factories were able to turn Sherman's out in far greater numbers to replace combat losses, whereas the Germans could not compete, the industry base being in ruins from the bombing and their panther - Tiger needing far more man-hours per vehicle than Allied or Soviet tanks.
* The Grant did find favour in the Burma Campaign operating against Japanese Armour and Bunkers, but in all reality it was a stop-gap weapon.
Connaught Stranger
Comment
-
Hi there
The Grant, whilst it was a poor excuse for a real tank, did cause the Germans concern as it allowed the Allies to fire at equal ranges instead of having to get within deadly range of the panzers and it could outshoot the 50mm of the Pz III and the short 75 of the Pz IV.It was certainly better, in terms of gun power, speed, servicability, ease of use and stowage capacity than anything the British had.Unfortunately, it was vulnerable to even 20mm rounds and could burn as readily as a Sherman.Still, it was better than nothing.
regards
GttC
Comment
-
i think the 90mm is the way to go,don't think we should bother with the atwg if we get the 90mm gun,
but having just read "dusty warriors" a book about the PWRR in Iraq it seems that 90% of there firepower came from the 7.62mm co-ax in the warrior IFV, and also they mention commanders taking alot of fire from small arms and RGP while manning the hatch,even resorting to using minimi's from the roof on occasion,sounds pretty dangerous to me
why not mount a 7.62 or 40mm GL in a remote weapons station in the turret,with the commander using it's sensors for recon aswell,this combined with the coax it would turn it into an excellent firesupport platform in the kind of guerrilla fighting we're seeing more and more of these days,combined with a 90mm gun it could certainly give us more "teeth"
Comment
-
Originally posted by warthog View Postbut having just read "dusty warriors" a book about the PWRR in Iraq it seems that 90% of there firepower came from the 7.62mm co-ax in the warrior IFV, and also they mention commanders taking alot of fire from small arms and RGP while manning the hatch,even resorting to using minimi's from the roof on occasion,sounds pretty dangerous to me
Comment
Comment