[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Now that I am no longer distracted, I can return to this concept. At any rate yes, mission and all does play a role, but a large focus should be on the conditions where they will be used. In essence away from the normal supply chain as they will be spending a lot of time away from the established lines. To me, that means minimal complexity. The fewest possible different makes and models of everything. Right now, in a normal Heavy ACR's average squadron, just the ammo supply situation is a clear example of that, 155 how, 120 Gun, 120 Mortar, Jav, TOW, AT4, Stinger, 40mm HV, 40mm GL, 25mm, .50, 7.62, 5.56, 9mm, 12G. And that's not counting aviation and the fact that all of that save the Stinger and 155 can be found in a single troop.

Never said it would be easy. Trying to get the Army to get rid of a weapons system is sort of like pulling teeth...with a pair of pliers...and no pain-killer.

There are basically two styles of "cavalry"; the divisional cavalry squadron is not going to be in a postion where it is cut off from established LOC, their mission is primarily short range in other words. So the ammo/parts mix is not going to be quite as bad a problem.

The second style is that of the ACRs...Desert Storm perhaps shows the intended role of an ACR in the best light. 2ACR screened the advance of VII Corps often ranging as much as 75 miles in front. While technically on its own, it controlled the ground to such an extent that fuel/ammo convoys were sent forward with minimal escort, so again, not cut off from established LOC.

And then of course parts supply has to be a PITA.

If I had to equip and man a cavalry unit, that would be the first thing I would address. Yes, I can see why having a totaly different weapons mix than the regular army would be a issue, but in the context, it would be worth the hassle at the corps and divisional level.

The first thing I would address would be the small arms. I would standardize on two: A pistol round, and a rifle round. Just for S&G's it would be the .45 for the pistol, and for reasons other than the argument over the 5.56, the 6.8spc. Why the 6.8? Because it makes a better machine gun round than the 5.56, and finding a reliable compact light 7.62N weapon is non-trivial. Now the exact weapon is a little up in the air. I would prefer a design that can be used as a ultra short carbine, a reasonable AR, and a machine gun. I can get all that, well, most of all that with the AUG. And with the bonus that the weapons would be much more compact. The LMG version would also make for a decent DMR, so bonus there. MG wise, have to use something else. The M249 MInimi comes to mind, and it can be used for commanders weapons and coaxial mounts as well. With the Minimi being designed to fire a 7.62 round in the first place, upping it from 5.56 to 6.8 shouldn't be a problem. For vehicles I would do the same winnowing, even when it comes to unarmoured vehicles in all the flavours they come in. In this case, I'd base all trucks, wreckers, van bodies, anything larger than a HMMWV on the MAN series of trucks. Be it 3 tonnes, or 10, there is a size for that, and they are all based on the same parts, be it tyres, engines, whathave you. In the light vehicle category, yes, I'll stick with the humvee family. I have a soft spot for the things. Combat vehicles would follow the same format. A base chassis from which Gun, scout, mortar, air defense, command, apc, and recovery can be based off of. All cannons, be they scout or air defense would be the same size, and the gun would be probably be a 105. Anything less just wouldn't cut it in an anti tank role. My personal preference would be the CV90 series, in 40mm. With a small 4 man scout section, plenty of room to stow equipment. I would go tracks over wheels for durability, but note that there is no arty. This is the once place where having organic artillery is nice, but not essential, especially since I would (Using the ACR as a model) double the mortar section in each troop to four vehicles, all mounting the Patria doublebarreled automort. This way, we have fewer types of ammo to supply, fewer types of parts to supply, and can keep things simple. But, if wheels was needed, whatever wheeled vehicle I would have, would be either based off of the MAN trucks for parts commonality, or vice versa.

In an ideal military, everyone would be in battlesuits and equipped with 5MW pulse cannons...but I do agree with you, if nothing else Iraq and Afghanistan simply confirm what was known since the Vietnam War...the 5.56mm round sucks. The 6.8mm looks like the best mix between the punch of a 7.62 and the light weight of the ole 5.56. I would like to see a AR/SAW/GPMG using this caliber...will I live to see that, doubtful, too many careers are tied up with 5.56mm.

105mm for an air defense cannon....hmmmmmm it would take out the attacker with one shot, but the rate of fire is going to suck! I think an autocannon in the 25-40mm range would be the best bet, but you are still going to need something to knock tanks out with, so thats a cannon in the 90mm-120mm range. I don't think that the various calibers are going to be culled down as far as you want to go....