Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Works of fiction/Waltering/Dreaming/"We need hovertanks!"

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    There'd still be the issue of tracked APC's and weapons carriers to keep up with them, I can't see anyone wanting to use Piranha's in a Warrior's role.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

    Comment


    • #17
      No, they'ld be used as fire support vehicles, rather in the way the USMC uses the Abrams. If the defence forces were to have fighter jets, there is no reason why it shouldn't have tanks.

      Comment


      • #18
        The way'd I'd look at it these vehicles wouldn't be used for large scale armoured warfare. Ireland is not going to be mounting a Barbarossa style invasion of Russia any time soon.

        As paul g says, they would make superior fire support vehicles on peace enforcement missions. As the Germans discovered in former Yugoslavia (in the 1990s not the 1940s!), a big dirty MBT can make people think twice about arguing with you.

        Comment


        • #19
          I remember reading an article in RAIDS magazine, that when the French first went into Yugoslavia, their most valuable asset was their..... Leclercs.

          When one consider the use the French make of light, wheeled armour, you could probably say they are the pioneers of this concept, and even with their 105mm armed AMX10s, they still appreciate the additional impact that an MBT makes in a peace enforcement role.

          As Farel' says "No its not a bad joke... "

          IAS

          Comment


          • #20
            Alright so what sort of force construction would these MBTs be in?
            "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

            Comment


            • #21
              They'd be used like the scorpions of the armoured cav squadron, which have never been deployed overseas; they are retained because they are such a valuable training tool, and potentially MBT could be utilised the same way, as training tools, with the ability to deploy in especially high risk overseas missions. Tracked vehicles are already in service meaning that some of the expertise needed to operate MBT is already in place, officers and men are trained in tank tactics, there are track mechanics. If MBT were acquired second hand, or surplus, the capital costs would be lower then brand new vehicles like the Centauro. Assuming that there would essentially be a force for training and only deployed on certain missions, then you could have a Regiment, something like the following.

              1 regiment HQ with 2 Leopard 2A4

              2 Squadrons with 12 Leopard 2 A4 MBT, 1 ARRV, 1 AVLB. (1 Command troop, 3 tank troops each with 3 and 1 Service troop) and support units.

              This unit would be essentially a cadre/training unit, from which sub units, either an individual troop of 4 or a squadon of 14 MBT would deploy as part of a battlegroup . Basically you could have one of the squadrons as a PDF unit, rather like the Air defence regiment, using those vehicles for training, rotation etc, while the other squadron could be an RDF unit. Given that the army will potentially never have more than a battalion of mechanised infantry overseas at any time, that gives the ability to field a squadron if necessary on missions like kosovo in the early stages. As for cost, yep, fielding 30 MBTwould be expensive, but they offers immense capability in training and undertaking potentially high risk missions, and lets face it, fielding only 14 scorpions, especially as its a bit dated, is also pretty expensive(the british got rid of their 76mm gun ones years ago, belgium is planning a replacement, while the Leopard 2 will be in service till 2030,) , MBT offer more capability. Support and training areas, well tank transporters are essentisally very big trucks, and have a lonmg shelf life, 12 would be nedded, but even then, given that the tanks would operate either relatively close to the curragh or as part of a combined arms battalion sized battlegroup, then there wouldn't really be the need for add that much to the logistics element of a battlegroup, which would already have DROPS, etc. The Piranha, well the South African army used the Ratel and the Oliphant combination in Angola to great effect, the Olpihant tipping the balance for the SADF, and despite having the Rooikat in service, the SANDF are looking at acquirieng new MBT. And are the french not planning a wheeled replacement for their AMX-10P to work with the leclerc?

              Training areas would be a problem, a 120mm round can travel for over 150kms if it misses its target, but this situation could be easily rectified by the use of modern technology, and there are training schools in Canada etc. for gunnery practice. However, keeping tanks in Poland or overseas defeats the pioint of getting them, since they would be such a good training tool for the entire army. Weight, yes MBT are heavy, but the centauro is over 30 tonnes.
              Last edited by paul g; 5 June 2003, 22:44.

              Comment


              • #22
                Alright I'm fairly convinced, the role you outline is certainly similar to what I'd envisaged for the Centauro type vehicles.
                "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                Comment


                • #23
                  but would the GOC honeslty give any of the new prescious MBTs to the RDF?

                  -Y
                  Meh.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Who says any of the Tank crews would be RDF, there's plentiful other roles in the proposed unit.
                    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Great, that decided then, we get those Leopards and Challenger I's.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I suppose we better CC the memo on to the COS out of courtesy.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Come-quickly
                          Who says any of the Tank crews would be RDF, there's plentiful other roles in the proposed unit.

                          Originally posted by paul g
                          while the other squadron could be an RDF unit.
                          To me this implies the crews.
                          Meh.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Yep, I meant reservist crews, given that integrated reservists will form a third of a PDF infantry battalion and artillery regiment and 60% of the air defence regiment in the future, if they're acquired then why not train reservists n the use of tanks?


                            I don't think that MBT will appear, but I do believe that they have their place if the army is going to developing a meaningful combat capability, and that they're not entirely out of the question. I was just throwing out some ideas about this and the future of the cavalry corps, so less of the sarcasm about CC to the COS

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by paul g
                              , so less of the sarcasm about CC to the COS
                              Apologies for attempting humour, I'll try not to let it happen again. :D

                              Anyway, I'm all for this plan, but in the end of the day can't see this happening in the current climate.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by yellowjacket
                                Apologies for attempting humour, I'll try not to let it happen again. :D

                                Anyway, I'm all for this plan, but in the end of the day can't see this happening in the current climate.
                                Can you see anything happening in the current climate? Me either. It's good to throw out ideas.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X