Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rifleman
Are you familiar with the US Army Vehicle guide?
|
Intimately.
Does it matter how far away an army base is if it's a non-military, government agency tracking them down? :s
Am I misunderstanding things here? Are we talking about just one vehicle in a depot waiting for conversion to lawn ornament, or closer to the impression I'm getting from reading this thread, a collection of a dozen or so plus miscellaneous equipment abandoned/cast off/declared obsolete and surplus pre war? If the latter, then these depots represent a significant resource which should not be overlooked.
We also
know that the military/government is able and willing to requisition equipment and supplies during wartime - they've done it before and will do it again. Therefore, the "paper" ownership of these items is a completely moot point. Take for example the notes for B2: Cadillac Gage Stingray.
Quote:
|
...in early 1997 the Stingrays were requisitioned. (The vehicle in this plate still retains markings on it's rear superstructure showing it was requisitioned in February 1997 by Field Materials Headquarters Company 12.)
|
So, are we saying bandits and the like were already making life difficult and operating without the authorities doing anything about it as early as 2 months after the US entering the war, before many units had even assembled and climbed aboard a plane?
If Stingrays, a vehicle which the US military didn't even have on it's books beforehand were being requisitioned and sent to the front, why would the "surplus" M1s, M60's, M48's, etc, etc, etc be ignored? It might well take a while to track them down, but records surely exist somewhere regarding disposal of these items? How hard would it be pre-nuke to carry out a simple computer search and find where they are supposed to be, then send out a couple of men in cars to confirm it?
Would these vehicles have necessarily been sent to the front? I doubt it.
BUT, as training vehicles, both for crew members and technicians (who could pull apart one of these recovered vehicles without fear of breaking something that was actually NEEDED on the front lines) they would be invaluable (take for example the Sentinel tank in WWII which although combat worthy never saw combat, but was used for training).
Once these vehicles were found, civilian contractors could be engaged to transport them to these training areas - a logging contractor for example with a low loader may find themselves shifting an M60 instead of the usual bull dozer. Use of these contractors will not have a significant negative impact on the overall troop mobilisation - they're outside the usual logistical network already operating overtime to shift tens, hundreds of thousands of troops to the docks and airports.
So in conclusion, efforts
were clearly made to round up anything useful to the war effort. In wartime, the Federal government comes first, superseding any claims State or Local organisations have (although I'm sure there'd have to be payments, or promises of payments made). Not every vehicle/equipment would be rounded up, but it's
very unlikely there'd be any relatively modern MBTs floating about for the State Guard/militia to lay their hands on.
As a side note, in WWII, all shrapnel from German bombs dropped on England was considered to be government property and was to be handed in for recycling immediately (although many kids illegally kept what they found as souvenirs). Numerous drives were made to collect scrap metal and just about anything else which could aid the war effort. In WWIII, would an M60A2 elude a similar round up if mere scrap in WWII was valued so highly?