Out of Mothballs: Antiquated Weaponry on the T2k Battlefield

[bash]

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by bash

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

This... A Hilux with a PK - even spawned the name of the 86-87 conflict between Chad and Libya - The Great Toyota War.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by bash

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

You would be amazed at how many spare parts there are still out there for older vehicles to keep them running - the Littlefield Collection for one. And lots of very serious collectors as well besides him.

I grew up in a town with a gentleman who lived nearby who had a Sherman tank with a live barrel and a nice collection of thirty plus live rounds for it (including high explosive and armor piercing and one cannister round)and a whole garage full of spare parts. Definitely someone who was still alive in the timeline who would have put that old tank to very good use. He showed it in parades until well into the 90's.

Also not every outdated vehicle has a turret -there are tons of old Ferrets out there for instance - they run well and once you add the machine gun they are basically one hundred percent back to being a military vehicle - and would take a Ferret any day over an old pick up truck.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Olefin

You would be amazed at how many spare parts there are still out there for older vehicles to keep them running - the Littlefield Collection for one. And lots of very serious collectors as well besides him.

I grew up in a town with a gentleman who lived nearby who had a Sherman tank with a live barrel and a nice collection of thirty plus live rounds for it (including high explosive and armor piercing and one cannister round)and a whole garage full of spare parts. Definitely someone who was still alive in the timeline who would have put that old tank to very good use. He showed it in parades until well into the 90's.

Also not every outdated vehicle has a turret -there are tons of old Ferrets out there for instance - they run well and once you add the machine gun they are basically one hundred percent back to being a military vehicle - and would take a Ferret any day over an old pick up truck.

I dunno. Technicals (i e. Hilux with machine gun) do have their uses. Chad figured out that if they drove them over 100km/hr they could drive right through Libyan minefields without setting them off... That and it's very easy to procure them with aid grants from western nations when sanctions prevent military imports. The only way I see museum pieces being viable is in portions of the former USSR or in western nations. In the ME, Africa, SW Asia, they're too valuable as scrap to become pieces or they are too costly to do anything but abandon (like multiple African nation's airports currently hosting mouldering aircraft husks).

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by 3catcircus

I dunno. Technicals (i e. Hilux with machine gun) do have their uses. Chad figured out that if they drove them over 100km/hr they could drive right through Libyan minefields without setting them off... That and it's very easy to procure them with aid grants from western nations when sanctions prevent military imports. The only way I see museum pieces being viable is in portions of the former USSR or in western nations. In the ME, Africa, SW Asia, they're too valuable as scrap to become pieces or they are too costly to do anything but abandon (like multiple African nation's airports currently hosting mouldering aircraft husks).

Keep in mind that in the 90's Africa, Southeast Asia and the Middle East were loaded with still very active "museum pieces" - the list of armies that still operated old WWII and early Cold War tanks and armored cars would be very extensive indeed - the last 20 years have seen many of them retired but in 1995 you have a lot of that equipment still in use. So dont count them out.

Also keep in mind just in Italy there are literally hundreds of old M47 tanks with plenty of spares in storage that were leased from the US Army.

And if you are looking at V1 there would be even more of such tanks and armored vehicles still around and still in running shape - i.e. the era of the US and Soviets sending stuff like that to countries like Kenya, Tanzania, Israel, Syria, etc. would still be very much in action

I also think that even a "Potemkin" tank has a lot of value - i.e. how many marauders are going to see a tank and decide that they want to take it on - not knowing that its basically immobile and may not have a working fire control system. Its one thing if its somewhere that has anti-tank weapons - its another if you are talking a bunch of guys with shotguns and hunting rifles seeing a tank and have nothing but some dynamite or a flaming bottle of gas to try to take it out with. Most would give it a wide berth.

[Raellus]

For discussion of the plausibility and/or utility of using museum pieces in modern warfare, please use the following thread:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4600

This thread is about obsolescent (not yet obsolete) weapons, which were in national militaries' reserve stockpiles, that would see front-line action at some point in the Twilight War.

-

[Olefin]

The question is what would be a museum piece - that would depend on the country. The Soviets and Russians were still using T-34 tanks for driver training well into the 1990's - whereas in the US the comparable tank, the Sherman, by then was 100% a museum piece.

In Mexico and Paraguay they were still using Stuart tanks into the period of the timeline - here those are museum pieces. There they were active duty tanks.

So it may have to be something you would look at on a country to country basis as to what would be a museum piece. Keep in mind there are active duty T-34's still in several country's armies and that in the 90's you could encounter M-47 tanks in service in Turkey, Iran, Croatia, Pakistan and South Korea and in reserve storage in Italy.

And Austria has a lot of old tank turrets being used for bunkers - so while you wont run into the tank you could very easily run into the still very operational turret and its armament

Perfect example is the Ferret APC - its still in use in a lot of countries - so while some would call it a museum piece others would call it very much obsolescent but still operational.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Olefin

The question is what would be a museum piece - that would depend on the country.

Yes, but as you pointed out, if it a vehicle is in a military's reserve stock, for the purposes of this thread, it is not a museum piece (yet).

If a particular vehicle is actually on display at a museum, it is a museum piece.

Feel free to discuss the former here; please discuss the latter in the previously referenced and linked Littlefield Collection thread.

-

[Trooper]

Originally Posted by bash

I'm no expert but it seems like the time and resource investment restoring mothballed vehicles would be better spent upgrading non-combat military vehicles or civilian vehicles for combat use.

If you've got a couple one-off oddball vehicles you're not likely to have any part donors or spare parts in general. When they break down or are damaged all the work you've put in will probably be wasted. The question of ammo is also really important.

Without spare treads your museum tank is just an armored gun emplacement. Without main gun ammo it's just an HMG emplacement. A bunch of sand bags could do the same job with fewer resources.

Turning some 6x6s into gun trucks or welding some pintle mounts to the rollbars on some Hiluxes seems like more bang for the buck. Parts are likely easier to find, the endurance is better, and for the same investment of resources you could get several vehicles outfitted.

Taking tank from museum and trying use it in battle is not good idea. Tanks and other combat vehicles need a lot of spare parts. Usually, museums don’t have lot of spare parts and they have to hunt parts to get museum tank in order and I don’t mean anything resembling combat use. Museum staff and retired tank mechanics usually need several years to get tank in running order. And in that case, they drive tank couple miles per year in shows.

Finnish armed force doesn’t have mothballed equipment or weapons. All equipment and vehicles are in use, storage for war time use or under repair. In 1990 planned war time strength of Finnish Armed forces was something like 580 000 men in full mobilization. Modern weapons and equipment for everybody? Keep on dreaming…

Only 10 Jaeger brigades and two Armor brigades were using modern weapons and vehicles. Rest of the army should have used artillery, small arms and other equipment from 1930as to 1960s. Infantry brigades, local defense units, air force and navy didn’t even get military trucks, they would have to use civilian trucks and farm tractors.

That all come to end after cold war. Finnish army bought huge amount of former East German equipment from Germany. One former officer told me that if all that equipment was loaded to single train that train would have been 40 kilometers long. All those much loved and hated M-39s, Stens and Suomi-SMGs were finally sold or scrapped, because all troops could be armed with Finnish, Soviet, East-German and Chinese Kalashnikovs.

Anyway, in Twilight 2000 world cold war didn’t end and in 2000 AD men meet their fate in cold dark forests using the same weapons that their grandfathers used nearly 60 years earlier.