Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmySGT.
Iraqi Freedom isn't on par with a national mobilization like WW2. Not even with the mobilization for Desert Storm.
For comparison, look at the ages and occupations of Seabees in WW2.
None of those is any comparison for the conditions in the U.S. after the canon nuclear exchange, famines, and plagues. Those do not discriminate.
Back to older but, survivable systems that make sense to resurrect in T2k.
M113 production.... Strykers and LAVs are working, but are considerable more complex..... maybe some M113 IFV conversions? M901s?
|
None of these make sense to me.
By the time things get bad enough for a a national production board to consider such a reconfiguration (post TDM), the ability to coordinate and execute the creation of a brand new production line for this simpler product (and that's what it would be; M113 production lines are long gone by 1997) is gone.
Promulgating simpler weapon designs that could be produced at a workshop level (such as the Sten or M3 Grease Gun) is one thing; an M113 is quite another.
Remember that the production line for an M113 or a cannon is NOT one workshop or even one factory. For the M113, the engine is built and assembled elsewhere; the shipped for inclusion in the M113; the transmission another; track components are forged in one (or more) locations; assembled in another; then shipped to the M113 assembly point; armor panels are assembled elsewhere.
I think post TDM things are falling apart too fast. The new (old) component assembly lines would never have completed. That's 6 months to a year of time when they are being built, producing nothing.
Rather than trying to coordinate retooling several factories in the face of growing chaos, I'd suggest a better plan would be to simplify the existing designs, such as cheaper electronic components (targeting, radio,radar, etc) - though I think these too would slow and break down due to failures in the transportation network.
Uncle Ted