Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: "Arved Sandstrom" <asandstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 03:48:12 GMT
"Fred J. McCall" <fmccall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2mbpd39bs7g574iakas7k97q4iuqb6m46c@xxxxxxxxxx
"Arved Sandstrom" <asandstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:"Fred J. McCall" <fmccall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
:news:3s1nd3lfutiso14tnbmv484519ier4olje@xxxxxxxxxx
:> Henry Cobb <hcobb@xxxxxx> wrote:
:>
:> :Fred J. McCall wrote:
:> :> Henry Cobb <hcobb@xxxxxx> wrote:
:> :> :The EFVs are slower than LCACs and because of their one trick lack
the
:> :> :armor to deal with the weapons that are killing Marines today.
:> :>
:> :> Cite?
:> :
:> :http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcac-specs.htm
:> :40 plus knots with payload, sea state 2
:> :
:> :http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/aaav-specs.htm
:> :Water, High Speed: 25 Knots
:> :
:>
:> Since they don't have the same mission, small surprise that they are
:> different.
:>
:> And now we get to the part I was questioning above.
:> :
:> :http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2007/06/marine_efv_070630/
:> :The EFV's flat bottom - a necessity for getting the vehicle up on
plane
:> :for high-speed water maneuvering - is not ideal for armoring against
:> :roadside bombs, Gardner explained.
:> :
:>
:> Real selective reading there, Mr Cobb. It's a long way from "not
:> ideal" to "lack the armor to deal with the weapons that are killing
:> Marines today". Since the purpose of the thing is NOT patrolling
:> roads, why would you stupidly want it optimized for that?
:
:Why is that so stupid, Fred? Everyone who ever rode in a M113 or LVTP-7
knew
:that they were death traps. Last I checked, when I was in, the USMC had
:things like RPG magnets (AAVs), trucks, and shitty tanks (M-60s).
:
And, as you've so eloquently made clear elsewhere, you certainly don't
want them to have anything different.
Hint: The "shitty tanks" were the same as everyone else at the time.
The Corps now has M-1s, just like everyone else.
Hint: The EFV is supposed to replace the AAVs because the latter are
too slow and too easy to take out.
:
:Why would
:you *not* want a vehicle good at patrolling roads?
You obviously don't read any better than Mr Cobb. Where did I make
the statement that you do "*not* want a vehicle good at patrolling
roads". I simply think you ought to use the vehicle intended for that
purpose when performing that mission.
You, apparently, think EVERY vehicle MUST be built for one and only
one mission - patrolling roads in Iraq.
:
:I know you are impressed
:with the generals and civilian "experts", but in fact you do have to
patrol
:roads. The people that do that actually know the situation.
I know you are a lying idiot, but this is going some even for you.
:
:If the EFV is crap when it comes to IEDs and mines, what's the use of it
:once it's ashore?
You obviously don't read any better than Mr Cobb. Where did ANYONE
make the statement that "the EFV is crap when it comes to IEDs and
mines"?
You're impressed with it. A lot of people with high paygrades aren't.
:> Oh, and did you bother to read the next sentence of your own cite?
:>
:> "However, the side protection of the vehicle does provide the kind of
:> force protection we're seeing with vehicles today," he said.
:>
:
:Interpreted in normal English, that translates to it gets blown up just
as
:easily as most vehicles.
I don't think that's 'normal English' to most people, Arved.
You think? Considering that there are serious concerns about the
survivability of the EFV wrt IEDs, at a level much higher than mine, maybe
my English is OK.
AHS
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- References:
- Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Robert11
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Andrew Chaplin
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Andrew Chaplin
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Arved Sandstrom
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Henry Cobb
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Henry Cobb
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Arved Sandstrom
- Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- Prev by Date: Re: Submarine de los Locos (Going Under)
- Next by Date: Re: Taiwan US Tension
- Previous by thread: Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- Next by thread: Re: Marine Corp EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|