TechieZero
Senior member
- Mar 21, 2000
- 241
- 0
- 0
Andrew: It is well known that the Army has less Esperit de Corps, unfortunately.
I don't see the Military getting rid of MBTs, but I do see them using a lot of these newer, lighter, faster vehicles. One thing an MBT has is a NICE BIG GUN. I have a friend who was a tanker in the Gulf war and the one thing they did was to have the whole company sit and pick off the Soviet Armor Saddam had by simply out ranging them. Plain and simple. Our MBT's rule, end of story. Unfortunately as Dabone has pointed out, times are a changing, or have changed, and we need a more agile force.
Somewhere I remember seeing a picture in the late 70's about a prototype Army fast attack land vehicle, that looked like a Dune Buggy w/ an AT gun.
BTW -- The Tiger II was made to go against the T34/85. The T34/85 really saw more service in Korea than in WWII.
I don't see the Military getting rid of MBTs, but I do see them using a lot of these newer, lighter, faster vehicles. One thing an MBT has is a NICE BIG GUN. I have a friend who was a tanker in the Gulf war and the one thing they did was to have the whole company sit and pick off the Soviet Armor Saddam had by simply out ranging them. Plain and simple. Our MBT's rule, end of story. Unfortunately as Dabone has pointed out, times are a changing, or have changed, and we need a more agile force.
Somewhere I remember seeing a picture in the late 70's about a prototype Army fast attack land vehicle, that looked like a Dune Buggy w/ an AT gun.
BTW -- The Tiger II was made to go against the T34/85. The T34/85 really saw more service in Korea than in WWII.